Re: [Diversity] Consideration for participation

Melinda Shore <> Thu, 16 June 2016 02:39 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E79712DADE for <>; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:39:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FDqHtkHOWKyP for <>; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F006F12D599 for <>; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:39:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id t190so14803372pfb.3 for <>; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:39:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ihLu/i8sxX/Q60S3SBflQgAmHGU7jkfNH5y48wGsAyw=; b=oLcEj2Y7Uvzq+Yh234l68J/nvLOfgBU9FnDKNEdnfTocHExmTxCNAUwcJx/gMbWnZG UT8/VXsZLS79ZBVslu3sWia/2ixHqYc3aSNU/wmSq5aRqSErGCpkpHexZr8q4B3CjbjG KikIuiMmxZ2sgYiusfzzkToQFMTDhsYII6+iEI3t4mOFyDJ1VVgfm5mEvQ2erlDHU/sn 7BJRaYl/4LPZIH/V+pahoPfVsbOBIGQVzvmIJUeqF5vcZh0cI6+3LV50jQfxQqp7CVRN 9ljRKgh4yUsKMePejvHLGbejOchJAxRGPfv5IhoCaWNz8upsdxDWtc3icDWiSeLwq/q5 NR8Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ihLu/i8sxX/Q60S3SBflQgAmHGU7jkfNH5y48wGsAyw=; b=mE5xfcclIu114YQCN8aBpg5fAGRZ5uLo2AVR6iCWBJ1hkMfFfKW5xzYoRBs2/XLyDC CXUnCiF7qOt24BA6cZ2rhSA2iRQg/dMEs7kHhqF31KLPgH2VTPt4QJBA/SRn+VfD+dP2 VJgPIlLRxElp3EhFql2JlGpX1H3LcDjuIDyr/KRU+Wt8IIPSJ2PfPa0GyK+X6L48YkGi zCGAE/saVXGM3TjrPwT7P1BdSswZNJHc57a6AL1AndtVGWiXmPuyieIBm347keadsRED gCjmRclqMr3CYvMn/1Zxdh1s7L/mANdJCJ31dh8wjGpO+FOPZu3Q/Jk+xPnxbdhPXeUq KMHg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJk6zJ5xI+gUxEmJkVUWCeUmK8a6ZCONvULv6rHbx66NQsF6fh9AS4OVWdPVBFGUg==
X-Received: by with SMTP id z188mr2290201pfz.100.1466044776549; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:39:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Melindas-MacBook-Pro.local ( []) by with ESMTPSA id f187sm55962729pfb.60.2016. (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:39:35 -0700 (PDT)
To: S Moonesamy <>,
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Melinda Shore <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 18:39:33 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Ted Hardie <>
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Consideration for participation
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 02:39:38 -0000

On 6/15/16 5:55 PM, S Moonesamy wrote:
> I'll quote [3] an email from 2012: "One of the great aspects of the
> IETF's openness is that anyone can participate for the cost of an
> Internet connection".  I could have made that argument in response to
> the issue which was raised [5].  I would be ignoring the issue by doing
> that.

I'm unclear on the relevance of *any* of this to the points I
raised.  But I'll tell you one thing for sure:  I am disturbed
by the extent to which we're an organization in which someone
can participate meaningfully while being remote when we're
talking about Singapore and the extent we're an organization
in which someone needs to attend meetings to build relationships
and move work forward the rest of the time.  Seriously, this
needs to stop.

Be that as it may, my point remains unaddressed by anything
you've written:  the extent to which we allow barriers to
participation by certain demographic groups to stand, we
are not open and we do not have our participants rise and
fall on the quality of their contributions alone.