Re: [114attendees] [114all] Consultation on COVID management for IETF 115 London

[Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>]

I agree (and hope I made that clear in an earlier email) that the 
quesiton of how the policy affects the likelihood / willingness of 
people to attend is the key quesiton.

While not central, I thought Margaret's question might help some people, 
so I took a crack at answering it.

Yours,

Joel

On 8/15/2022 6:40 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> It’s also worth noting that when I am at home, I have a great deal of 
> control over the risks I take. When I’m at IETF, I’m at the mercy of 
> the IETF’s mitigation strategy. For some, that strategy will seem like 
> more than what they do at home. For others, perhaps less.
>
> A better question might be, how many people who would attend the 
> meeting were the policy different, as compared to how many attend it 
> with the current policy.
>
> If we think in person attendance is beneficial, this is really the 
> only question that matters. If we don’t think it’s important, we 
> should go back to online-only.
>
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 18:35 Joel Halpern <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>     That comparison seems a reasonable question.
>
>     I am not a statistician or an epidemiologist, so I may have gotten
>     the comparatives wrong.
>
>     Looking at the data for Pennsylvania as reported by the New York
>     Times, they report for a week 25 cases per 100,000 people.  The
>     highest County reports 60 cases per 100,000.  Rounding our rate to
>     2.5 percent, and our attendance to 500 just to keep things simple,
>     our experience would be a rate of 500 cases per 100,000 people per
>     week.  So yes, attending the IETF meeting does seem to be related
>     to a significant increase in risk even with the rules we had in place.
>
>     If I have misunderstood the data, I hope  someone who knows more
>     will correct me.
>
>     Yours,
>
>     Joel
>
>     On 8/15/2022 3:39 PM, Margaret Cullen wrote:
>>
>>     Do we have any idea how the percentage of IETF attendees infected
>>     with COVID during the IETF week compares to the percentage who
>>     would have been infected if they stayed home?
>>
>>     Margaret
>>
>>
>>>     On Aug 12, 2022, at 6:07 PM, Mike Bishop <[e-mail]>
>>>     wrote:
>>>
>>>     And this, in my opinion, is the primary goal. It is a useful
>>>     secondary goal to minimize excess exposure to CoVID among
>>>     participants relative to the exposure we would have had without
>>>     an IETF meeting. But the primary goal of the IETF's precautions
>>>     is to ensure enough attendees are willing to take the risk of
>>>     coming to ensure a successful meeting.
>>>
>>>     The recommendations as stated strike an excellent balance
>>>     between comforting the nervous, reducing transmission where
>>>     possible, and minimizing burden on attendees.
>>>
>>>     Sent from Nine <http://www.9folders.com/>
>>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>     *From:* Eric Orth <ericorth=[e-mail]>
>>>     *Sent:* Friday, August 12, 2022 2:25 PM
>>>     *To:* [e-mail]
>>>     *Subject:* Re: [114attendees] [114all] Consultation on COVID
>>>     management for IETF 115 London
>>>
>>>     Scientifically beneficial or not (I'm not going to get into that
>>>     debate), the proposals Jay has outlined would go a long way
>>>     towards making me feel comfortable attending an international
>>>     conference, so I support those proposals.
>>>
>>>     On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 5:03 PM Yaron Sheffer
>>>     <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>         +1 to Marc.
>>>
>>>         *From: *114attendees <[e-mail]> on
>>>         behalf of Marc Petit-Huguenin <[e-mail]>
>>>         *Date: *Saturday, 13 August 2022 at 0:00
>>>         *To: *Ross Finlayson <[e-mail]>,
>>>         [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
>>>         *Subject: *Re: [114attendees] [114all] Consultation on COVID
>>>         management for IETF 115 London
>>>
>>>         We should do better than that. Except for the couple of
>>>         first days of IETF 114, the policy was stronger than what
>>>         was recommended locally and that's the reason why I will go
>>>         to London.  FTR I support everything Jay proposed.
>>>
>>>         On 8/12/22 13:34, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>>         > I think that the IETF (and IETFers) should avoid straying
>>>         into areas outside their areas of expertise, and just follow
>>>         whatever policy is recommended by the locality where each
>>>         meeting is held.
>>>         >
>>>         >        Ross.
>>>         >
>>>
>>>         -- 
>>>         Marc Petit-Huguenin
>>>         Email: [e-mail]
>>>         Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org
>>>         Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug
>>>
>>>         -- 
>>>         114attendees mailing list
>>>         [e-mail]
>>>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/114attendees
>>>
>>>     -- 
>>>     114attendees mailing list
>>>     [e-mail]
>>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/114attendees
>>
>>
>     -- 
>     114attendees mailing list
>     [e-mail]
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/114attendees
>