Sorry for the double email, I just wanted to add some additional context. A few days before this poll for more “draconian” moderation, the chairs explicitly and completely refused [1] to answer reasonable questions from the European Commission’s Team Leader on Post-Quantum Cryptography [2]. I wrote about why this was a mistake [3] and asked the chairs to reconsider.
A few days later, we didn’t get any substantive response to Fabiana’s reasonable questions, but instead got this poll expressing what appears to be overwhelming support for “draconian moderation”. According to the thesaurus (I’m not a native English speaker, so you’ll have to forgive me), synonyms to draconian include “authoritarian”, and examples for the usage of the word in the Cambridge Dictionary include "He criticized the draconian measures taken by the police in controlling the demonstrators.” [3] I really would appreciate it if the chairs could (perhaps urgently) clarify in which directions they plan to take the list, especially in light of their response to Fabiana’s queries and in light of these bizarre line items in the IETF meeting minutes where there’s a vote for “draconian moderation", which also started with the line "Complaints about ML-KEM and ML-DSA drafts were denied by the chairs (and then escalated)”. The timing here is unsettling. Thank you for reading my concerns, [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/RLDcZHHbCUZRgmmWbP1j2dDQhAQ/ [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/2rbof_YfCt5pjKKUy4NUf8ZlRiE/ [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/O5tgVST_oEtwC5-PvoD-xaMEKRk/ [4] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/draconian Nadim Kobeissi Symbolic Software • https://symbolic.software > On 23 Jul 2026, at 11:48 AM, Nadim Kobeissi <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Thanks Rich for these meeting notes. > > I’m a bit alarmed at the following item in the notes: > > "Poll: Should chairs be more draconian in doing moderation? y/n/no-opinion > 65/2/7” > > The Cambridge Dictionary defines “draconian” as “goes further than what is > right or necessary”. > > Um… is “draconian” really the term that was used by the poll? And were those > really the results of the poll? Who proposed a poll where the chairs are > being asked to “go further than what is right or necessary”, and who’s > supporting this? > > This is creepy to say the least. > > Nadim Kobeissi > Symbolic Software • https://symbolic.software > >> On 23 Jul 2026, at 11:34 AM, Salz, Rich <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-126-tls >> >> There are two places where I missed the discussion “(missed)” notation. >> Please help fix that. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> TLS mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
