Language Tag Reviewer
sah at 428cobrajet.net
Mon Feb 20 11:58:32 CET 2006
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Everson [mailto:everson at evertype.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 12:53 AM
> To: Scott Hollenbeck; 'IETF Languages Discussion'
> Cc: hardie at qualcomm.com
> Subject: RE: Language Tag Reviewer
> >I'm not going to mince words: you are out of line.
> Well, that makes two of us. I found your private e-mails to
> come completely out of the blue, and found your pressing me
> to be aggressive. I don't LIKE private messages about this matter.
> I note with irritation that I just received private e-mail
> from Morfin on this matter, though I have told him not to
> send me mail for any reason.
Sorry, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that an IESG-appointed
expert should be paying attention to the ongoing work that describes the
expert's role. Instead of flying off the handle you only had to ask if you
didn't know why the question was being asked.
Note, too, that I did send a public request for you to get in touch on the
ietf-languages list. You didn't reply to that message. The time constraint
is real, though it can be adjusted.
> >I sent you a private message because the 3066bis document
> describes the
> >role and responsibilities of the language tag reviewer. It
> is NOT the
> >same as is described in RFCs 1766 and 3066. Give those changes, and
> >the fact that the IESG has been asked to confirm the
> appointment of a
> >language tag reviewer, Ted and I wanted to be sure that you
> are willing to continue in the role.
> I am willing to continue in the role of language tag
> reviewer, that is, someone who reviews language tags, so long
> as the members of the ietf-languages list are content that I
> continue to do so.
That's what I needed to know.
> >Read the document, please, before you make unfounded
> assumptions about
> >intent. There is a time constraint, and we need to know what you're
> >interested in doing.
> I am not interested in moderating the ietf-languages list.
I need to know this, too.
> >Since you responded the way you did, though, I'll ask here: are you
> >willing to continue in the role under the terms described in
> >The document can be found here:
> >Look at section 3.2 in particular.
> Why on earth did you add list moderation to the duties of the
> language-tag reviewer without (at least) asking the encumbant
> reviewer what his opinion is?
I didn't make that change (the IETF community did), and I did ask for your
opinion when it became my obligation to do so.
More information about the Ietf-languages