Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050412221722.055e2eb0@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 01:08:45 +0200
To: "Peter Constable" <petercon@microsoft.com>,
	"IETF Languages Discussion" <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
In-Reply-To: <F8ACB1B494D9734783AAB114D0CE68FE05A0C8E1@RED-MSG-52.redmon
	d.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <F8ACB1B494D9734783AAB114D0CE68FE05A0C8E1@RED-MSG-52.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: 
Subject: RE: recently-approved tags
Precedence: list
Sender: ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no
Errors-To: ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no

Dear Peter,
I do not think this threat is of real interest as it takes words out of 
their obvious (or at least intended) context. I DO hope that everyone 
agrees with me that everywhere, in every time, peace is mostly threaten by 
"sorcerer's apprentices". I did not expect that anyone - but those who want 
we have 200 European, Asian, African students to register this list and the 
WG-ltru - would feel concerned. Except as threaten and incitated at being 
careful at not calling them in.

Now, I take you for someone serious and honnest (you are, and you know it, 
the most respected one among us). I propose you an experience. Please read 
the IESG WG-ltru Charter, read your texts. And ask yourself why you puzzle 
a French thinking centric mailing list, with people from all over the world 
(AFRAC is a France based test project with projected independent national 
copies).

To help you I will try to list and prioritize the criteria I am dayly 
confronted to:

- to be clever, realistic, honnest and to consider the real world and 
technology as it is - as a consistent challenging and funny continuity.
- to smartly respect the detail of the rules even if they are known to 
change, and therefore to have no problem considering their orderly change.
- to deeply care and respect people for who they are, for their rights, for 
their personal development, for their final decision.
- to comment on reading and understanding - never on feeling (worst error 
:-)  - trying to kindly make understand those who don't
- no to trust (more American), not to distrust (more Asian) people and 
ideas, to look at every proposition and judging by its a to z elegance.

You may feel how an "IETF list" aproximation for 
"ietf-languages@alvestrand.no" sounds to us so unprofessional, or "American 
plot" biaised :-), while you do not even see a problem.
All the best.
jfc











At 21:40 12/04/2005, Peter Constable wrote:
> > From: ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> > bounces@alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
>
>
> > >I received your mail on the IETF language tags list and I responded
>to it
> > >there. Perhaps you could just refrain from posting here at all.
> >
> > I am afraid you have to chose. Either this list is a private list,
>which
> > might justify your suggestion. Either it is a IANA list and your
>suggestion
> > is innapropriate. Or it is an IETF list (but to my knowledge no one
>ever
> > suggested it) and your suggestion is a violation of the IETF rules.
>
>We all know it is a public list, but it *is* an IETF list, and subject
>to IETF rules. AFAICT, it does not violate any IETF rule to suggest that
>someone refrain from posting to the list. In fact, we well know that
>there are IETF procedures by which someone can be kept from posting to
>the list. Michael isn't always the most tactful in email interchanges,
>but I don't think I've seen him step beyond the degree to which he has
>been provoked.
>
>Michael complained about a remark you made on this list (in English).
>Your decidedly unhelpful and response was
>
><quote>
>Michael, my mail was copied to the AFRAC list. This remark (in French)
>concerned some members of the AFRAC mailing list we call this way. But
>if you think it applies to others ... after all, some of us who have
>done some work in some areas would certainly hate contradicting you.
></quote>
>
>It is no defence to contend that your comment was intended for members
>of some other list which you blindly copied -- for anyone on *this*
>list, every appearance was that you were referring to activity on *this*
>list, hence making your remarks about members of *this* list.
>
>
> > To my understanding however the present list has never been discussed
>as
> > being an IETF list. However considering the idea, it could be good
>one:
> > this list could be a permanent IETF WG, publishing regular (yearly)
>updates
> > as RFC maintained through regular Drafts. This could actually solve a
>lot
> > of IANA related issues, since the Drafts and RFCs are a very well
> > established system.
>
>This list has functioned reasonably and sufficiently well for many
>years, serving a particular purpose that is well defined in an IETF
>document. Your suggestion to change significantly the purpose of this
>list is unhelpful; your repeated suggestions for the same are becoming
>obstructionist.
>
>
>
>Peter Constable
>_______________________________________________
>Ietf-languages mailing list
>Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
>http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages