Re: [Diversity] Concerns about Singapore

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Sun, 10 April 2016 22:32 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20A1812D0E2 for <diversity@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 15:32:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.297
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.297 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xDiwzfq-X-y1 for <diversity@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 15:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A831A12D0AC for <diversity@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 15:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6929BE25; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 23:32:29 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rqVQ3oKHnWBA; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 23:32:25 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.87.49.100] (unknown [86.46.23.241]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 01B44BDF9; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 23:32:24 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1460327545; bh=nBNI+GZCnntAR2AV+avbCkb6Cm74ZG7OaUU+aYDRbYQ=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=ETAkrOdLa73JbeE4rhhBwYBjmzOSKo4ZFvxzGj/LMDyJIRFxrtZt3RMRik/CxXzZK p2YsdF8rD1JTcfvjqB/ln3M8GE8mpSlVfuB/MmZGsIiu5qKuO1cVIk6dlSc3nIIUOj ke0R6KxRJJLXQsP6FoieJPhlvqAK7zos7E56Yt+A=
To: SM <sm@resistor.net>, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com, Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com>, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <20160410063603.6283348.44889.10575@blackberry.com> <459690655.171220.1460293717474.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20160410074445.0de30c68@resistor.net> <570A8B0E.5060505@cs.tcd.ie> <6.2.5.6.2.20160410104617.0e49b7a8@resistor.net>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <570AD478.4040606@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 23:32:24 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160410104617.0e49b7a8@resistor.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms080003030102010403020007"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/kUVh7dFbQAGTsBfy0djUgWUxOHI>
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Concerns about Singapore
X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list <diversity.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/diversity>, <mailto:diversity-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/diversity/>
List-Post: <mailto:diversity@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:diversity-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity>, <mailto:diversity-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 22:32:33 -0000

Hiya,

On 10/04/16 21:14, SM wrote:
> 
> I complain sometimes. :-)  

Heh - maybe if we include skillful obliqueness and "I'm not quite sure
if this is a complaint or not" as a category you'd win a category
prize:-)

> I did not do a count of the participants
> commenting about those issues.  I'll attempt an unscientific count of
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg97604.html
> 
>  Asia             3
>  Europe          20
>  North America   25
>  South America    0

Those numbers don't convince me that IETF complaining is a US-specific
thing, for various reasons, including the date-range, topics in-play,
and lack of counts per thread to name just a few. There may be such a
case to be made, but so far we don't have good evidence for it I think.

I'm also not convinced that arguing such a case is really productive.
I think if we want to name a subset of IETF participants as being more
or less culpable for some bad thing, then we really should base that on
better numbers, if those actually exist. Or else, we shouldn't make the
claim, which I think is usually better.

Cheers,
S.

PS: As in many things, the US population includes sets of people who
embody both the best and the worst on these topics - I reckon that's
mainly characteristic of their state being the 20th century's behemoth
and has not much deeper significance.