Re: [112attendees] Plenary last week -

[Joel Halpern Direct <[e-mail]>]

I would be quite distressed if the IETF leadership described the regimen 
you ask for below ("commitment to realize the inhouse-designed 
protection means, test before, test after and publicize the results.") 
as any kind of guarantee.  And knowing the folks involved, I would be 
amazed if they used such a word to describe it.

Maybe you are using the word "guarantee" differently?

Yours,
Joel

On 11/10/2021 10:04 AM, Alexandre PETRESCU wrote:
> Le 10/11/2021 à 15:37, Joel M. Halpern a écrit :
>> I find your phrasing misleading. No one can offer a guarantee of 
>> non-spread.  Ever.  We do not guarantee you will not catch the flu
>> at an IETF meeting.  Or any other communicable disease.
> 
> Yes.  But I would not simply equate covid to any kind of other
> communicable disease.
> 
> First, covid is deadly much more than (in)flu(enza), for example.
> 
> Second, covid is transmitted by simply being next to the other - breath,
> as compared to other more complex transmissions like touching, spit,
> blood exchange, reuse common objects, moustique bite, or so.
> 
> I sometimes fear that whenever one is behind some person in the street
> and feels the smell of that person, that could be a risk of
> transmission.  I smell that even while wearing a fully-qualified mask.
> 
> Third, no other illness has previously been communicated that far that 
> fast.
> 
>> Even when (I hope it is a "when") this pandemic has finally faded to 
>> low levels, there will be no guarantees.
> 
> Maybe it is a 'when' and it would be good.
> 
> But if it is not a 'when', then what would be another way (other than
> meetings with guarantees) out of it?
> 
> Live with it?  Does one fully appreciates what it means to 'live with
> it' or does one tell _others_ to 'live with it'?
> 
> Otherwise,
> 
> There can be guarantees for in-person meetings, in a best effort kind of
> way.
> 
> One would run a meeting with inhouse-designed protection means, test PCR
> the input, and test PCR the output.  If the two are equal then there is
> a 'guarantee'.
> 
> A 'claimed guarantee' would be a statement that there is a commitment to
> realize the inhouse-designed protection means, test before, test after
> and publicize the results.
> 
> The 'proven guarantee' would be only when the publicized results were
> both 0.
> 
> Wouldnt one think that could qualify as 'guarantee', 'claimed guarantee'
> and 'proven guarantee' respectively?
> 
> Alex
> 
>>
>>
>> Yours, Joel
>>
>> On 11/10/2021 9:26 AM, Alexandre PETRESCU wrote:
>>> Le 10/11/2021 à 13:56, Andrew Campling a écrit :
>>>> On 10. 11. 21 12:45, Petr Špacek wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As a second data point (obviously anecdotal): I'm heads-down
>>>>> in DNS stuff and don't follow internal IETF policies or shmoo 
>>>>> discussions, and still I had no problem finding out about Plenary 
>>>>> being a week earlier. In fact I remember seeing the information at 
>>>>> least three times - despite me ignoring plenary on purpose:
>>>>
>>>> I also saw multiple notifications of the change in the
>>>> scheduling of the plenary plus explanations of the reasons behind
>>>> the experiment. It seemed pretty well publicised to me and in
>>>> good time to allow for diary adjustments etc, noting that
>>>> attendance would not be possible for everyone and that (I hope)
>>>> the post-meeting review will reflect on the pros and cons of the 
>>>> approach.
>>>>
>>>> Separately, I trust that the plenary will take place during the week 
>>>> of the main meeting in IETF 113, assuming that there is an in-person 
>>>> element for this meeting.
>>>
>>> I think that, unless the organizers consider offering guarantees
>>> of non-spread, there could be an important point to make that we
>>> want first and foremost to not spread and hence not to meet.
>>>
>>> Of course, we could also want to meet even if we help the spread, but 
>>> in an advantageous ratio.
>>>
>>> We might also think that it is those who invite that must make
>>> sure there is no spread, or we might think that it is the 
>>> responsibility of those who come to ensure that.
>>>
>>> (this 'no spread' aspect comes to my mind personally after having 
>>> some ups and downs between optimism and pesimism about vaccines, 
>>> treatments, tests, mechanical, biological, electronic solutions)
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>