Brian E Carpenter writes:
The IETF standards process requires us to archive WG mailing lists.
For good reasons: open process requires a public record, and prior art
claims can be checked.
How much of an open process can there be if some input is censored?
Not true. When one receives a few hundred emails per day, the act of
ignoring, say, 75% of them takes a significant amount of time.
No, it does not. I do it. I know people like to give that impression
so that they can justify censorship, but it just doesn't take that
much time.
Even the act of maintaining one's personal filters takes a
significant amount of time.
See above.
It isn't censorship.
Whenever a third party decides to prevent one party from communicating
with another, it's censorship.
It's very specifically restricting misuse of mailing lists that
have been set up for a given purpose. That is well within bounds
for a community such as ours.
Unfortunately, there is no objective defintion of misuse, so it
resolves to highly subjective censorship, and often the grounds for
censorship are practically unrelated to real utility or a lack
thereof.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf