Re: [73attendees] Attendance by country

hallam@gmail.com Thu, 04 December 2008 18:27 UTC

Return-Path: <73attendees-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: 73attendees-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-73attendees-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E72763A6BA4; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 10:27:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: 73attendees@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 73attendees@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 837163A6BA4 for <73attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 10:27:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7e1E42rCV+ra for <73attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 10:26:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from yw-out-1516.google.com (yw-out-1516.google.com [74.125.46.166]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47CEB3A6BA1 for <73attendees@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 10:26:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by yw-out-1516.google.com with SMTP id 7so1313231ywc.4 for <73attendees@ietf.org>; Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:26:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.90.92.16 with SMTP id p16mr2567142agb.9.1228415214260; Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:26:54 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <0016361e7d947b974e045d3cb4d6@google.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:26:54 +0000
From: hallam@gmail.com
To: Mary Barnes <mary.barnes@nortel.com>, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>, "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <drage@alcatel-lucent.com>, 73attendees@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Attendance by country
X-BeenThere: 73attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for the attendees of IETF 73 meeting." <73attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees>, <mailto:73attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/73attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:73attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:73attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees>, <mailto:73attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0087215304=="
Sender: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org

Most of the single parent folk I know actually have an easier time of it  
since they are sharing custody of the children with another party who is  
anxious for as much contact with them as possible. Dumping the kids on the  
ex for a week is usually an available option.

Also the age of the children is rather significant as is the effect that  
dad being away has on their behavior.

I don't think that the IETF should be entirely indifferent to the personal  
lives of participants as you appear to suggest. Most IETF participants can  
find alternative jobs even in a down economy - although the crisis of the  
past few months is something of an exception. But I really don't want to be  
placing volunteers with a choice between participation and their job  
unnecessarily. And I suspect that those of us who are full time corporate  
representatives are a minority in any case. And even if that were not the  
case, we are not recognized as such in IETF process.

If we are going to argue for making meeting times on the assumption that  
this is a job then we should carry that assumption over to other areas. If  
we are going to continue to be a volunteer organization then we should  
encourage widespread participation by chosing meeting times than minimize  
impact on personal life as much as possible. It is not going to be possible  
to satisfy everyone everytime. But I don't see why the fact that some  
people are going to chose to travel on the weekend should oblige everyone  
else to. Or the fact that you have to get up for a 6am flight in SFO to  
make it back to Europe the same day argues for holding meetings on the  
Friday.

On Dec 4, 2008 11:29am, Mary Barnes <mary.barnes@nortel.com> wrote:
>
> Again,
>
> a YMMV issue. Having spent 14 years in a both parent's working household
> (and now being in a single parent household), this is still not such a
> significant issue. In my experience, it's actually a bigger issue in a  
household
> where the mother is a SAHM because they rarely get a break. And, yes, I
> know this is a controversial point. When I was at Telecom '99, which  
required
> more than two full weekends away, the guys were fussing as
> the SAHM wives back home were complaining about all the
> family issues without the Dad home for support and they were really
> taken aback when I told them that the job that the moms were doing was  
far more
> stressful than anything we were dealing with on a daily basis,  
particularly
> when you consider most of us have opportunities of enjoying at least one  
nice
> meal and we usually have someone that makes our beds daily, etc. There is
> research that shows that the stress levels of mothers (determined by both
> questionnaires and blood tests of hormones impacted by stress) is  
equivalent to
> that of a soldier on the front lines of a war.
_______________________________________________
73attendees mailing list
73attendees@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees