DKIM colleagues,
You all know that the DKIM discussions have sometimes been
contentious, and some participants have gotten hot under the collar.
We note that that's been particularly true recently, and we'd like
everyone to take a step back and remind themselves of a few things:
1. The purpose of this forum is for people to get together and discuss
the development of standards, with the aim of forming consensus. That
doesn't mean that everyone will agree on everything, and consensus may
be with you on some points, and against you on others.
2. It helps neither the formation of consensus nor our individual
reputations to be impolite, abrasive, sarcastic, derisive, belittling,
or otherwise snarky. We all try to be somewhat tolerant of the
occasional bit of snark, but it should be rare -- the group should not
be expected to accept it as normal discourse.
3. We make progress when arguments give technical points for or
against an issue. We don't make progress by exaggerating,
oversimplifying, or otherwise mischaracterizing others' positions, by
name-calling, by "Is not!"/"Is so!" bickering, and so on. Messages
that are essentially content-free apart from saying, "You're wrong,"
are not useful. Messages that say, "You don't know what you're
talking about," or the like, cross the line of acceptability.
Please keep these points in mind when you participate in this -- and
in any other IETF -- working group. Every time you post, ask yourself
what your post does to further the discussion. And look at what
you're saying, and ask yourself whether you'd be annoyed if someone
said that about you. Make sure your messages are polite, respectful,
and useful, even if you feel angry or upset.
A word on the mischaracterization: If you attribute a point of view
to someone else, make sure what you say is an accurate rendering of
his position, erring on the side of caution. It's always OK to ask,
"I understand you to be advocating [X]. Is that correct?" We need to
understand each other's positions clearly.
As an example, it's fair to say, "John says that we should not publish
signing policies at all. I think he's wrong because [of these clear
arguments]." John has made his position on that clear, and it can be
addressed directly. It's not fair to say, for example, "John would
allow the phishers to rob us blind because he won't let us protect
ourselves." That's the sort of thing we mean by "mischaracterizing".
It's important, as we move the working group into its next phase,
whatever we decide that phase to be, that we all keep the discussion
reasonable. We will not be as tolerant of impoliteness as we have
been. Everyone should be aware that from this point on, unnecessarily
abrasive posts, things that violate respectful discourse, will be
subject to administrative action. That may include suspension of the
right to post to this mailing list.
Everyone here has given useful input to this working group. We would
like to see everyone continue to. Thanks for your contributions, and
for your cooperation.
Stephen and Barry, as chairs
---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html