"Mr. Smith was in the IETF"

Yesterday I proposed to take advantage from my experience for the 
good of the IETF. I used "filibustering" as what I had been engaged 
into. This was a big Franglish confusion. I explained it and 
apologised for the inconvenience in a mail to Sam Hartmann. I asked 
help to find a correct term. I received a few supportive comments 
(and one BS but funny). I thank the formers, all the more than they 
were unexpected!
- thank you for confirming I am not "filibustering", but that Harald 
is (thanks for the examples). As someone put it "Mr. Smith was in the IETF".
- May be "smart activism" as someone else suggested is a good 
description? I do not like "e-guerillero", but sometimes .. "active 
influence" is also interesting?
- I am NOT engaged in any feud against Harald and will support NONE. 
I like this "Mr. Smith was in the IETF" quote, because Jefferson 
Smith was a dedicated person who tried, as I am sure Harald does. I 
do not oppose his analysis, but his lack of _deeper_ analysis and 
generalisation leading to layer violation and scaling inability. I 
also oppose a strategy of influence to force everyone into it. But, 
(a) his doctrine seems to root in RFC 2130 - recently confirmed by 
another IAB workshop on IDNs; (b) he was clear on his intents and got 
supported by the IESG (RFC 3935). There is NO ad hominem (at least on 
my side) but a fundamental architectural difference between 
unilaterally centralised and multilaterally distributed visions of 
the network interintelligibility. I note that in a comment Harald 
shown IMHO that we could totally agree. I accept I tease him: is that 
not the best answer to defamation and name-calling? Better than suing 
him! (The IESG/ISOC would be the one to sue for its drum justice).
- as an IETF _user_ my interest is in the quality and in the 
adequation of the IETF deliverables in my areas of interest and 
competence. I am ready to do and to accept much for good deliverables 
and for their source. I was removing myself from the IETF, now I am 
reasonably protected in my work from the RFC 3066 Bis initial 
confusion and the world is not bound to the IDNA error anymore. 
Unless an unexpected IAB positive response to my appeal, Harald's 
action is the only reason why I am still here. Those who dislike me 
can thank him!
As a general comment: from the mails I receive I am surprised that 
some IETF (often high level) participants do not dare to speak-up and 
_fear_ the IETF immanent "ruling powers" and the "community correct". 
Two want me as their "lighting rod" (first request of that kind was 
at the beginning of the RFC 3066 Bis saga), several others as a 
"fuse", even one as his "Robin Hood"! I do not think this is good. A 
PESCI priority? What is puzzling is when someone aggressively posts 
against me and then sends me a "targeted" long mail of support for 
everything and more .... or when another one mails me a broadside 
against what he wrote on the public list! The most concerning are the 
mails from low-grade-English foreign lurkers, who wishes I represent 
them ... and the quality of their online resumes. I am honored, but 
perplex at the correct solution to bring them. The ethic/user TF I 
plan will certainly be multilingual.
jfc


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf