Re: [Diversity] Consideration for participation

[Abdussalam Baryun <[e-mail]>]

Hi S. Moonesamy,

I think no one should tell any to be remote or present, it is the decision
of the participant to find what is best. However, the organisation needs to
do their best to treat both remote and attended participants the same. They
are not the same in their advantages and disadvantages but still both are
needed by the organisation but I don't believe that there is a problem if
most often attendees become remote participants once a year. Overall, IMHO
it is normal that many cannot attend IETF meetings while their are reasons,
but what is not normal that few attendees cannot become remote participants
once a year while the remote-facilities are available.

AB



On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 3:25 PM, S Moonesamy <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Abdussalam,
> At 04:20 19-06-2016, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>
>> I did not understand some lines in both conversation, and sorry if it is
>> long email,
>>
>
> There is a message from Spencer Dawkins at
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diversity/current/msg00808.html The
> last part of that message might explain the discussions.
>
> I think I understood the issue raised, that a participant with low
>> technical contribution should not be equally considered as a participant
>> with high quality, or what is argued is when we decide to go to a city (ex.
>> singapore or paris, etc.) if few high quality
>> contributors cannot meet then we should change, or when we decide to go
>> to a city with majority agreeing but that majority are low quality
>> contributors, then we should not go to that city. In my opinion, we should
>> not stop equality and openess, because what makes
>>
>
> My comment was about whether it would be appropriate of me to tell a
> person who cannot attend a meeting because he/she would not be treated the
> same as some other group of persons that he/she can participate remotely.
> I do not believe that it is appropriate.
>
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
>
>