Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050317061715.03195eb0@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 07:29:54 +0100
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
Subject: call of order
Cc: "IETF Languages Discussion" <ietf-languages@iana.org>
In-Reply-To: <1efb1fe7844d0024fb5aaa1619ea2257@seng.cc>
References: <022b01c52a39$f1d1ad00$477d3009@sanjose.ibm.com>
 <p06110403be5e1bb231ed@[10.0.1.2]>
 <2f8001c52a4f$5ee3fd70$477d3009@sanjose.ibm.com>
 <6.1.2.0.2.20050317042622.02853270@mail.jefsey.com>
 <1efb1fe7844d0024fb5aaa1619ea2257@seng.cc>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Dear Harald,
I start being bored by all this.
I defend the rights of my nation and language, and of other nations and 
languages.
I also defend the interests of the users and the work of my organization 
against too ostensible competing commercial interests and political influences.

This lead me to:
- disagree with the way this list is organized which does not match RFC 3066.
- disagree with the result that a small group of persons of similar origin 
leads its debates.
- disagree with a Draft that group presented and to ask it to be presented 
in an IETF way for more exposure, what is now underway

It also happens that I disagree with the restriction of the technical 
analysis of the concerned problem, what is my right. In this I know I 
represent a point of view of large number outside the IETF community.

This obviously lead to tensions. This list not being moderated, even if I 
am patient (may be too much) it obliged me to some affirmative responses to 
rude ad-hominems. I made sure that they were correctly weighted in copying 
relays to governments of several countries. Their comments and advises have 
never objected. To the contrary I received information permitting me to 
better assess some of the technical, commercial, political and private 
interests at stake (what explains a certain change in my positions). I must 
say I understand, and I respect them in most of the cases. If mines are 
also equally considered.

I personally only regret the misunderstanding with Michael Eversom who is a 
professional I respect but who has been assigned a very difficult task. I 
object to the task, not the person.

I therefore ask you to step in for two things as the owner of this list:

1. to make standard netiquette rules respected. The disclosure of private 
mail is not an acceptable practice. Ad-hominem can only degenerate.
2. to reorganize this list in accordance with your own RFC 3066 and to get 
it the IANA conformance and exposure which will bring experts from all the 
concerned languages, countries and concerned commercial interests.

I thank you for your attention.
jfc

At 05:47 17/03/2005, James Seng wrote:
>For the record, I have no problem with Mark sending this email to the list.
>1. I did not see any reply from Jiankang to indicate he understood (or 
>otherwise) what you implied.
>2. Sorry my english isn't that good enough to know there is a difference 
>between "little to do" and "nothing to do" - in my world, those means the 
>same to me.
>Harald, as General AD, I request you initiate RFC 3683 on JFC as requested 
>by several members of the lists. And yes, I support it.
>-James Seng