Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey

[Dean Anderson <dean@xxxxxxx>]

The IETF left the list operational at the request of members. So it is
still run 'under the IETF', and still under the IETF rules. The IETF and
ISOC rules apply to all IETF related activities, whether at meetings, bofs
or on IETF lists.

The list is however, not part of a working group, and thus cannot approve
RFCs.

		--Dean

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004, william(at)elan.net wrote:

> 
> Dean,
> 
> Without commenting on the details of your complaint may I remind you that 
> this is no longer IETF WG mail list and so no longer operates under IETF 
> rules. If you don't like something here, you should either contact mail 
> list administrator (in private preferably) or simply unsubscribe.
> 
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2004, Dean Anderson wrote:
> 
> > 
> > First, I didn't participate in the FTC conference Mr Elvey seems to be
> > reporting on in his message, nor have I even made any comments on it, yet.  
> > Why I would be attacked in a report about an FTC conference is beyond
> > reason. Mr. Elvey is making a purely malicious attack on me in violation
> > of IETF and ISOC rules.
> > 
> > 
> > The following message by Matthew Elvey includes an inappropriate personal
> > attack in violation of the following sections of the ISOC Code of Conduct:
> > http://www.isoc.org/members/codeconduct.shtml
> > 
> > 7  Only offer or claim to offer opinions or services that lie within the
> >    member's actual knowledge or competence.
> > 
> > 8  In the case of financial or material conflict between personal and
> >    professional interests, or between two professional interests, declare
> >    this conflict to all interested parties and if appropriate in public.
> > 
> > 9  Respect the generally accepted norms of Internet etiquette for human
> >    communications, especially by avoiding communications that are false or
> >    are likely to be considered as discourteous, objectionable, malicious,
> >    unwanted, or causing unjustified loss of prestige. Avoid fraudulent or
> >    deceptive statements.
> > 
> > 11 Treat all users and colleagues fairly and on equal terms.
> > 
> > 
> > And the message violates the following sections of the IETF Guidelines for
> > Conduct RFC 3184:
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3184.txt?number=3184
> > 
> > 1. IETF participants extend respect and courtesy to their colleagues
> >       at all times.
> > 
> >       IETF participants come from diverse origins and backgrounds and
> >       are equipped with multiple capabilities and ideals.  Regardless of
> >       these individual differences, participants treat their colleagues
> >       with respect as persons--especially when it is difficult to agree
> >       with them.  Seeing from another's point of view is often
> >       revealing, even when it fails to be compelling.
> >       English is the de facto language of the IETF, but it is not the
> >       native language of many IETF participants.  Native English
> >       speakers attempt to speak clearly and a bit slowly and to limit
> >       the use of slang in order to accommodate the needs of all
> >       listeners.
> > 
> >    2. IETF participants develop and test ideas impartially, without
> >       finding fault with the colleague proposing the idea.
> > 
> >       We dispute ideas by using reasoned argument, rather than through
> >       intimidation or ad hominem attack.  Or, said in a somewhat more
> >       IETF-like way:
> > 
> >             "Reduce the heat and increase the light"
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > =========================================================================
> > Message-ID: <419EE9B5.6030704@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:52:37 -0500
> > From: Matthew Elvey <matthew@xxxxxxxxx>
> > User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913)
> > X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > To: MXCOMP <ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx>
> > Subject: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV.  
> > 3)Dean  & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity.
> > 
> > [...]
> > =-=-=-=-=-=
> > 3)Dean & FUSSP.
> > Dean Anderson of av8 seems best largely ignored,
> > given odd evidence suggesting his views are that DNSBLs are terribly, 
> > horribly, drastically, irretreivably bad and other ranting:
> > http://vesuvio.ipv6.tilab.com/pipermail/ietf_censored/2004-May/006714.html 
> > (and
> > http://vesuvio.ipv6.tilab.com/pipermail/ietf_censored/2004-June/006933.html 
> > and the results of #whois 130.105.36.66 and
> > http://moensted.dk/spam/messages/20020716-dean+av8.com.txt ); forgive me 
> > if I'm skeptical about his statements.
> > I am confident an implemented long term solution that will keep inboxes 
> > functional and nearly spam-free is in the not-so-distant future.  It's 
> > not like a perpetual motion machine: un-inventable.  Plus, Information 
> > Theory is cool and fun.  I've found it useful for pointing me in the 
> > right direction for handling this plague.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000