[tz] Please Don't Feed the Trolls (was Kyiv not Kiev)

Bill Seymour stdbill.h at pobox.com
Tue Jun 28 11:34:35 UTC 2022

It probably won't help to keep explaining the same thing over and over
again.  Maybe if we quit paying attention to them, they'll go away.

--Bill Seymour

On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 5:46 AM Ian Abbott via tz <tz at iana.org> wrote:

> On 27/06/2022 21:32, Petro Ord wrote:
> > Theory and pragmatics of the tz code and data says to "Use mainstream
> > English spelling", popular is not quite a synonym to mainstream.
> > With that being said, Kyiv became mainstream in 1991.
> You may have considered it mainstream in 1991, but the English language
> media took its time catching up.
> I think the first mention on the mailing list that Europe/Kyiv might be
> preferable (but not a request for change) was this post:
> https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2007-May/014365.html
> Then we have to wait nearly another 7 years for a post from an actual
> Ukrainian (I presume their nationality from context) requesting a name
> change:
> https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2014-April/020837.html
> There has been a steady stream of requests on the list since then, but
> the position has always been that the most prevalent spelling in the
> English language should be used.  That has been reviewed by the TZ
> Coordinator (a.k.a. the maintainer, Paul Eggert) and others several
> times over the intervening years and was finally deemed to have flipped
> over in favour of the Kyiv spelling earlier this year.  It was always
> likely to happen sometime as the Kyiv spelling gradually gained in
> popularity.
> > How can you evaluate significance of the existing zone names, if the
> > requests and messages are neglected?
> > Look at the answer I've got from Paul Eggart:
> > "The list is being moderated to suppress spam by people who are
> > repeatedly lobbying for the spelling change. I forgot that, and cc'ed
> > to the list. I should have just replied to you privately."
> > That is quite intolerable to all Ukrainians and Ukraine-related issues.
> I'm sure it saves a lot of bandwidth discussing a barrage of requests
> for a change already that was already under consideration as part of an
> ongoing review process.  I'm sure most of those posters did not take the
> time to search through the archives of the mailing list for similar
> discussions.  The ones that did, and had something new to add would have
> been let through.
> > And again, who is in charge to define the change to be important? If
> > it is one person - what is the meaning of such discussions, if it is
> > the community - then why is the "repeated' request ignored?
> The answers to "who is in charge?" and general procedure questions is in
> RFC 6557 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6557.html>.
> --
> -=( Ian Abbott <abbotti at mev.co.uk> || MEV Ltd. is a company  )=-
> -=( registered in England & Wales.  Regd. number: 02862268.  )=-
> -=( Regd. addr.: S11 & 12 Building 67, Europa Business Park, )=-
> -=( Bird Hall Lane, STOCKPORT, SK3 0XA, UK. || www.mev.co.uk )=-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/attachments/20220628/68110c8e/attachment.htm>

More information about the tz mailing list