Return-Path: Received: from murder ([unix socket]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Cyrus v2.2.8-Mandrake-RPM-2.2.8-4.2.101mdk) with LMTPA; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:09:23 +0200 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Received: from localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0840320095 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:09:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10273-08 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:09:17 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.4.8 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02194320091 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:09:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1E9o3Q-0006MQ-Qv; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:08:20 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1E9nWZ-000844-OH for ltru@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 13:34:24 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22603 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 13:34:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from montage.altserver.com ([63.247.74.122]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E9nXv-00071W-Jw for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 13:35:49 -0400 Received: from ver78-2-82-241-91-24.fbx.proxad.net ([82.241.91.24] helo=jfc.afrac.org) by montage.altserver.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1E9nWW-0003cB-BT; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 10:34:20 -0700 Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.2.20050829181550.04da67a0@mail.jefsey.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.3.4 Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:19:39 +0200 To: "Doug Ewell" , "LTRU Working Group" From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: STD (was: Last Call: 'Tags for Identifying Languages' to BCP) In-Reply-To: <024201c5aca9$fe47dc60$030aa8c0@DEWELL> References: <20050829052419.JNUF6870.mta1.adelphia.net@megatron.ietf.org> <01d101c5ac5c$986ee3e0$030aa8c0@DEWELL> <6.2.3.4.2.20050829090011.04dcc7f0@mail.afrac.org> <024201c5aca9$fe47dc60$030aa8c0@DEWELL> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - montage.altserver.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jefsey.com X-Scan-Signature: 39bd8f8cbb76cae18b7e23f7cf6b2b9f X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:08:19 -0400 Cc: X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: ltru-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no At 16:57 29/08/2005, Doug Ewell wrote: >r&d afrac wrote: > > > "RFC 3774 2.2.6: Members of this affinity group tend to talk more > > freely to each other and former members of the affinity group - this > > may be because the affinity group has also come to share a cultural > > outlook which matches the dominant cultural ethos of the IETF (North > > American, English speaking). Newcomers to the organization and > > others outside the affinity group are reluctant to challenge the > > apparent authority of the extended affinity group during debates and > > consequently influence remains concentrated in a relatively small > > group of people. > >Quick show of hands: How many people think M. Morfin has been hampered >by a reluctance to challenge the rest of the Working Group? Read to line below in the mail. > > This reluctance may also be exacerbated if participants come from a > > different cultural background than the dominant one." > >Which of your objections to the draft are based on your French-speaking, >French-national cultural affiliation, such that they would not be >adequately understood by North Americans or English speakers? This is the other way around. The specifics of a koine (a lingua franca, common language) make it different from other languages. >Not everything is discrimination. Consider the possibility that the >objections to your proposals have a technical basis, rather than being >ad-hominem. The ad-hominems certainly have a technical basis. The problem is to resolve them technically. Not to keep it at ad-hominem level Cheers. jfc _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru