At 01:16 PM 7/22/2014, Pete Resnick wrote:
On 7/22/14 1:07 PM, Michael StJohns wrote:
Perhaps instead - "We're considering approaches to manage noise on the IETF
list. One possibility discussed by the IESG is providing moderators to
remonstrate with the noise producers prior to action by the sergeant-at-arms.
The IESG would like to solicit comments on this and also solicit guidance on
other possibilities prior to making any decision".
I absolutely agree, with the caveat that "remonstrate" is probably a bit
strong. I'd hope that that the moderator would be there to guide the
discussion before remonstration is necessary.
When people argue about my word choices, I tend to go back to the dictionary to
confirm I meant what I said.
In this case:
intransitive verb
: to present and urge reasons in opposition :
<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/expostulate>expostulate usually
used with with
I think this is pretty close to what I meant. Chide, correct or amend would
not be incorrect either.
If the "moderator" steps in too early, too often, the back lash will put paid
to the experiment. So I expect that there will be an element of correction from
the formal "facilitators" or silence.
Assuming of course that the IETF agrees to this.
Mike
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478