policy wrt politics
nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de
Sat Mar 31 18:36:21 CEST 2007
Peter Constable wrote:
> a) Reject any request with political issues to ensure this list
> avoids politics?
No. With that you'd end up without the existing "1901" + "1996".
Or you'd register it years too late (the political debate slowed
down in summer 2006 wrt "1901" and "1996", but I guess it will
only die completely when the last hardcore "1901" fundamentalists
> b) Evaluate any request solely on non-political criteria?
> (We would still need to ensure that subtags are non-offensive.)
Yes, as far as possible. We can't demand evidence that something
like "tarask" is in fact more commonly used in the Internet. If
we'd demand evidence anyway I'd have no clue how to check it.
> c) Try to judge on a case-by-case basis what is the best way to
> walk through the political minefield?
Of course, John has already identified a "politically incorrect"
term for the official orthography in the be-example. I could post
several "politically incorrect" names for both "1901" and "1996".
More information about the Ietf-languages