Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process]

On May 16, 2013, at 1:01 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> wrote:

  http://dcrocker.net/#gender


That's what I do.  It gets a bit awkward with verb agreement and constructs 
like "themself," which elicits the dreaded red snake underline of doom.   But I 
find it more comfortable than just subverting the sexist paradigm with a 
differently sexist paradigm.

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Adrian Farrel Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Ted Lemon Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Dave Crocker RE: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Adrian Farrel Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Dave Crocker Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Ted Lemon <= Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], joel jaeggli Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Fred Baker (fred) Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Ralph Droms Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Martin Rex Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Scott Brim Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Yoav Nir Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Stephen Farrell Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Yoav Nir Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Stephen Farrell Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process], Keith Moore