Re: [Diversity] Concerns about Singapore

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

On 11/04/16 04:11, Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
> More importantly there is nothing about that effort that needs to be in
> the critical path of responding directly to the very specific problem
> that surfaced last week.  And putting it into the critical path almost
> certainly means that responding to that specific problem will be delayed.

I agree with that.

If the IAOC were taking the path I'd like to see 'em take, they'd
just announce that they plan to move to default-open with a list of
exceptions to be published/discussed after they're done sorting out
the issues related to IETF-100. I would hope that ought not affect
their handling of IETF-100. If they even said that they planned to
revisit their level of open-ness more generally after sorting out
IETF-100, that'd help.

At no time did I make any statement about critical paths, but it is
fair to ask about that. It seems to be not fair to assert that I was
"putting it into the critical path" as you've done, but then again
perhaps part of the magical thinking you detected was me thinking
things I'd not said:-)

S.