Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process
Niels ten Oever <lists@digitaldissidents.org> Fri, 20 April 2018 11:08 UTC
Return-Path: <lists@digitaldissidents.org>
X-Original-To: hr-rt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hr-rt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E07E21270AE; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 04:08:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GB_AFFORDABLE=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 rUjnjbzXxmWD; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 04:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D9421250B8; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 04:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <lists@digitaldissidents.org>) id 1f9Tu8-0002PY-UM; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 13:08:37 +0200
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
Cc: hr-rt@irtf.org, ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process@ietf.org
References: <d0739bb2-626e-8aa3-f22f-d51b07dfdacf@digitaldissidents.org> <21952.1524157167@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <7B17FF2E-4393-4644-998B-16462F71A00F@qti.qualcomm.com>
From: Niels ten Oever <lists@digitaldissidents.org>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Autocrypt: addr=lists@digitaldissidents.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsFNBFgpcR0BEACnfvNwTMlN+pyZT0AFYhWqxG3N4AoPIeNfbxLQH7dk8ZL7Ls05xtORfnu9 ovoaRrZpDufkMviUFidNYePbQNdgf63vWVgwpQR7utluwWraetcmZOu6tayJuyBK2b6d2Z23 MJAQxfa2/GMlN3QkvobaoyKtgbc8rOCgNla7WwkgtiVJ89xbAUHXPFpKWZluVRjaFh4p5C5r 7E5OvUiEGLQ5Cn2ir2PGIyIVqjB+hLTyaI6dIGCz2jtL0RATjmsmYUX7UkU/pz8MPPC2BJ5P KU9pdXMRBhAStxcph8vCo2ze9xSi3+1/5A2ULVtvO4s0hZ+exbTfMxMg3H5CCRFEEJXlQEXa Cd0ZHvqcv5xq8n9w/Ccd0CqYWATIwyP8Jlzd+BY3QGTWnWlgoAbs3Guh/pFYhEFNuuAF5Jk1 k5OlNGsRE/LQJmbT5SE7AtLJLbWewcHlEyIH+K6J8uVa4ExLXmRy+eRkFaxjGy3fLlUpy1Ee 1kU7VsQ/TZ8g8ujsMzxqsdB6y0TD/kVlWaDqPL6F+b+pm3lAuCBGWM1YZROTG58R6pD7sNVm i0ift4dIttAsg+2KoShm9A8kQ3tACXZDgNPC0l7VOqnVayjnF0RmjGeiX7PjOcLQCZ9a5wAH 5mrXMaKvfszqAVkP9HSrk1QVZOipF6vEimL43Czy7Rp1aUaUwwARAQABzSVOaWVscyB0ZW4g T2V2ZXIgPG5pZWxzQGFydGljbGUxOS5vcmc+wsGZBBMBCABDAhsjBQkJZgGABwsJCAcDAgEG FQgCCQoLBBYCAwECHgECF4AWIQQkWAtwXEr9ipSIZDoO2D86RorIswUCWG0tCwIZAQAKCRAO 2D86RorIs3pMD/9W/Tww1uLG0m0jQkBV3TmBOVzS79fVyoj6lEYCNPJigCqOi9wbZSTB2HL6 h4ftSCl4ErGHcIqngRPcNRt7G8/3OoA1h6qRHcqrpS6H4niW1E+rtxIxul+PSsXXZEgDyUSK XXczf4MmRbR6tKGY4hp4KFedSOEL2C0j8htB2um4C8KFyX4gAYMPJoBfZqlrCmXsyLjdjIvN wd7FLLKA6CNVjwYsDgmKiLQm0Np4fz1AW72rnGGktyUT3u0GsbyDmwM6YU80anh647Pc7cyo ie6c21Ajcph1k7BjHAB/EopQzoQVporHFrCNqhpgVXihhlVDGdOD1JSHCgWO4toflJAT6+kP 3uOXeHv6AoLcXKnY/8QWFjwoj9DYtpw4bSsiP++sF3Dg0xaaivvOzU5+IBoSxNTnqj0M7/Fk jergVF60QdwMGukFZDMSjFnX/gvFPbxy4JebvrfzSY5ZJxLjrlswSeVkWTU1DvtfJxJHKTPQ 9dnodrSN3vynJS+u+wRbzQLdSLBgSgGbUVVHu2dyJhXGPwoh/2Gu4gFilV6+dBhcwHwuxlsd 0pdnTdq4wJodT1rDZRgP3QjR+miyFqjahUDMTJlf4BRq6CiWiHb5UfvQvUsPtMLfQafqYCEy 98b4RHnbckPXa+pXRTYz3z9CBuiJTQWTT0CIBVLhyzqQjYrFTM7BTQRYKXEdARAAxYOE3/AF mEfQ0SVVFujYFhZKX+BGXolYytC2a1soZogVYTIIlypxkRtN+ljteFAY3xX/El7cx5Fxj+uX vLKAm9xQRI/DCug7/NGULMk9bDK5bzSGw817cyiL5Kb+0RkWj2Y5ArOAK6XPGBZWZTHwyIaw sSCN9AhDXZQWVRqkR1QXcq3IYKl+OHWMO7+1VfixCSakNf7T/Kiq46rQEPW8Eghk6CVOBR8x UCBbyk5aRW4VSGO6pUD3H21ur+5fTLsVyan1NHhxNNiXfnEJKr+JI5dXSkj7WqA5n8ITaNdF SAttkdT56wAQpxE2h8zaOmBaFUWQ4D8SdXDVymP5QMtLG+ItMMiNV6kXgsRFugAKM5yZtPP9 gIX+ic8QO5iuct37bRXJU/rmrH54Ab0kyAeeRE7oSsfTZPKvgtUh7VLAUEw/wy6TORJHE8JM aX0yYT6h4PGRS3mNM4bka8hjdfcrexI0zSqFOl2I22zQlG3YqSzIvVh98W67hxfAIaCVaTfJ LFPEru3drxNwi6ogdkRmcLGKqqTgeYItrvITyFvzqbrcO2exp0KKEK3cDIZypqHHUf4+uPlD tuExehLsNOMpjP8qhZpFtyLeDS07qunbvstcyvR30wOJ3DyAbHGzq739UyDcO9Jt5jwODyVw k3MK5Em4pJ0+IAJx+F6gta0Bk2MAEQEAAcLBZQQYAQgADwUCWClxHQIbDAUJCWYBgAAKCRAO 2D86RorIs0ykD/4t151SZG9MbeKRVKbs9Ecjady9bO0L3oBos4rhqY12ha8smFlsUzvbgB4C tkBuXQlq+plOBWv+rFEThOzy3bezgEDjlxycoO1W2wJD6E7Fo9fkHT6UOm9fQBkuKRqK83OG nfM02qP1Ky8d7EoZz+nTSMf/DJgWw1YRKrXkMHBwKD83lCENsmePWE5AjMqk8cojPv9Oy1wW y6fHjwx3r+wQSokBNfxgQyAFonmgBbhlic/pZUYRSIcldyUlaomrjFfr4egzmNE7aWDvLwOU YKevBIeJJcqTyfAn3TtJbPCEHOC2+lP6EcmPFyhQdiia+RqOClumqbWOPeQ2VM8j7NWvKKmB NBB5OJ/rmHogbNU+wWPJ723qMBoOp1jIwFNkQhx01W6v55VMwLr+IuBKY1ggJ2BhwQiGpWv4 tMc5oB/qVh3my1VO65ErcJ3S9blpwJdDj5/YDOU7BKEmpRUP+xkaryNzH2x7FzrOOHzJBX6j eYZabGvnTicQlBAzfGpblFqV3YN6EhCF2AHmGLTZ/DrjGYToIsW8cXlEMqN4u8ODEUY0Ohbn ytnopKJKk99bwMoCqDkfQvT3LKDWtZj9NzFndfuoKXsVpwAitrG0mau0/16DKDyVWdtJ9DYm tE40zO6g70VVxUj+dKt2hbJTy/KQTb7Ijhw7wZrGp/P7nhbVyA==
Message-ID: <7f7fced1-489b-94a8-170b-0038e330484f@digitaldissidents.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 13:08:34 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7B17FF2E-4393-4644-998B-16462F71A00F@qti.qualcomm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Authenticated-As-Hash: 29cc722430e8f1f6ed904119444c0d49b0f3ee91
X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net
X-Scan-Signature: 1aface135a56bc3c00430d8c4acb72ca
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hr-rt/B-9pSjnj-Q5Uvay52Q4DZgYwPa8>
Subject: Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process
X-BeenThere: hr-rt@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Human Rights Protocol Considerations Review Team <hr-rt.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/hr-rt>, <mailto:hr-rt-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hr-rt/>
List-Post: <mailto:hr-rt@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hr-rt-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hr-rt>, <mailto:hr-rt-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 11:08:42 -0000
Hi all, Thanks for the great responses! On 04/19/2018 11:08 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: > Hi Niels, > > Thanks for the extensive review. Much appreciated. Many of Michael's > comments are spot on; I'll add my replies below (and trim a bit of the > explanatory text to save space): > > On 19 Apr 2018, at 11:59, Michael Richardson wrote: > >> Niels ten Oever <lists@digitaldissidents.org> wrote: >>> This is a review done within the framework of the Human Rights Review >>> Team, is was done by Beatrice Martini and Niels ten Oever. The Human >> >> Thank you. >> >>> 1) >>> Section: 2. Venue Selection Objectives/ 2.1. Core Values >> >>> Text from draft: >>> "Inclusiveness: We would like to facilitate the onsite or remote >>> participation of anyone who wants to be involved." >> >>> We suggest an edit along these lines: >>> "We would like to facilitate the onsite or remote participation of >>> anyone who wants to be involved and who may contribute to the diversity >>> of perspectives represented in the working sessions" >> >> I suggest you reword your suggestion to: >> "We would like to facilitate the onsite or remote participation of >> anyone who wants to be involved. Widespread participation >> contributes to the diversity of perspectives represented in the >> working sessions" >> >> the problem with the "and" in the sentence is that the sentence can >> otherwise be parsed >> to say that we only want to facilitate partition from those who >> contribute to >> increased diversity. > > I have to agree with Michael's suggestion. In addition to the possible > ambiguity, there was pretty explicit consensus in the WG that the > objective was to facilitate people who participants that want to > participate, and explicitly not to use venue selection for purposes of > outreach. Michael's reformulation makes that a bit clearer. Does that > satisfy your concern? > Yes! >>> 2) >>> We find that the current draft is not totally consistent in regards to >>> the affordability of participation. >> >> This is my intepretation. >> >>> Initially, it acknowledges that many participants are self-funded, and >>> that budget solutions should be available. That's great. >> >>> From Section 2. Venue Selection Objectives/ 2.1. Core Values: >>> "Economics: >>> Meeting attendees participate as individuals. While many are >>> underwritten by employers or sponsors, many are self-funded. In order >>> to reduce participation costs and travel effort, we therefore seek >>> locations that provide convenient budget alternatives for food and >>> lodging, and which minimize travel segments from major airports to the >>> Venue. Within reason, budget should not be a barrier to accommodation." >> >>> But then, in Section 3.2.2, things sounds less affordable. >> >>> From Section 3.2.2 Basic Venue Criteria: >>> "The cost of guest rooms, meeting space, meeting food and beverage is >>> affordable, within the norms of business travel." >> >>> "Business travel" has commonly a higher cost than "self-funded budget >>> travel". >> >> The intention is that the *venue* (primary hotel) should not be so >> expensive as to be prohibitively expensive to even those on "business >> travel". There are locations (resorts in really exotic locations) where >> the nightly price of room is like $500/night. The intention is to rule >> those out. >> As a self-funded individual, I accept that I can't often afford to >> stay at >> the primary hotel, but I will find something acceptable within a few >> blocks. So that's how section 2 and 3.2.2 are reconciled. > > Michael's explanation is correct, but I take your point that "guest > rooms" in the second bullet of 3.2.2 sounds like the combination of > rooms in the IETF Hotels, Overflow Hotels, and other nearby local > accommodations. Perhaps we can clarify. Let's see if Eliot has any > thoughts. > >>> 3) >>> We invite to consider the addition of a few items to Section 3.2.2. >>> Basic Venue Criteria. >> >>> 3.1) >>> "All Meeting Venues should have at least one gender neutral restroom >>> with stalls on each floor." >> >> I'd like to support adding this as aspirational, but it's gonna be two >> hotel renovation cycles before it can be found often enough to be a >> reasonable criteria. > > Given that the 3.1 criteria are those for which IASA MUST NOT enter into > a contract if they are missing, I don't see how we can make this > mandatory at this point, unless IASA can tell us that a sufficient > number of Facilities meet this criterion already. Perhaps something > along these lines could be added to 3.2.2, but even there I think we'd > want input that there are such Facilities available, lest the criteria > simply be ignored. > 3.2.2 would be nice, also because asking hotels/venues for this also would prompt them to include it in their renovation plans. >> On the topic of being family friendly, the major thing we can do to >> support families is to outside of the mtgvenue, and is with the nomcom >> eligibility criteria. > > Agreed Michael. :-) One does not exclude the other imho. > > On to the rest of your comments, Niels: > >>> 3.2) >>> "The Meeting Venue should have at least one dedicated infant feeding >>> room and one family restroom." > > I presume you mean "Facility" here and not "Meeting Venue", correct? > Like the gender neutral restrooms, I think we probably want to hear from > IASA that this is going to be satisfiable by a reasonable number of > Facilities. > I would be surprised if this would not be the case. >>> 3.3) >>> "The event should be accessible to non-smokers and those with >>> respiratory conditions. Therefore all meeting spaces during daytime and >>> nighttime should make it possible to fully participate in the scheduled >>> activities without being exposed to second-hand smoke." > > I have no particular concerns about adding this in section 3.3, barring > objections. > >>> 3.4) > > There is no section 3.4 in the document. Did you mean for this to go in > 3.3? > Yes, sry. >>> We believe that supporting parents with small children attending events >>> is a great step forward towards inclusivity. >>> >>> We would like the document to address this aspect in regards to venue >>> requirements. >>> >>> In particular, it would be helpful for the document to provide >>> information about the following: >>> >>> * Can participants feel comfortable and welcome to have their kid(s) >>> with them at the event? If so, are kids under a certain age not allowed >>> to be in session rooms? >>> >>> * Would the venue provide a childcare space and service, like a >>> play/activity room managed by a licensed childcare professional? See >>> further information about childcare at events at: >>> http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Childcare >>> >>> If the organization determines that children should not be allowed to >>> access meetings, and/or no childcare space and service can be provided, >>> it would anyway be important for the document to acknowledge that the >>> organization is aware of the limitation that this would constitute and >>> that this might hinder the participation of some attendees. > > Whether children can be present in meeting rooms sounds like a policy > issue beyond the question of venue selection, so I believe is out of > scope for the document. > > As for whether having childcare services available at the Facility or > Hotels should go in 3.3, I have no particular concerns about adding it, > again, barring objections. > Thanks >>> 4) >>> We invite to consider the addition of one item to Section 3.3 Other >>> Considerations. >>> >>> Section 3.2.2 Basic Venue Criteria says: >>> "The Facility is accessible or reasonable accommodations can be made to >>> allow access by people with disabilities." >>> >>> This is great! >>> At the same time, sometimes one person's required accommodation might >>> create a barrier for someone else. For example, the same session could >>> be attended by one participant with a guide dog, and another participant >>> with a severe allergy to dogs. >>> >>> It would be ideal if the document could mention a consideration on this >>> type of conflicting requirements that might occur. For example, it could >>> say that, in the full respect of everyone's needs, the organizing team >>> will aim to find the most suitable solution on a case by case basis. >>> >>> This statement should also include information about who / what team can >>> be contacted to ask for information in case of need. > > I think adding a short informational note to that bullet in 3.2.2 makes > sense. I'll again leave it to Eliot to see if he can come up with > something. > >>> 5) >>> Correct typo in the title: "3.3. Other Consideraitons" >>> >>> Edit: "3.3. Other Considerations" > > Of course. > > Thanks again for the great comments. > > pr Our pleasure! Best, Niels -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
- [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-… Niels ten Oever
- Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-i… Michael Richardson
- Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-i… Pete Resnick
- Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-i… Niels ten Oever
- Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-i… Beatrice Martini
- Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-i… Mary B
- Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-i… Eliot Lear
- Re: [HT-rt] [EXTERNAL] Re: HR-RT Review of draft-… Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)
- Re: [HT-rt] [EXTERNAL] Re: HR-RT Review of draft-… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [HT-rt] [EXTERNAL] Re: HR-RT Review of draft-… Mark Perkins
- Re: [HT-rt] [EXTERNAL] Re: HR-RT Review of draft-… Eliot Lear
- Re: [HT-rt] [EXTERNAL] Re: HR-RT Review of draft-… Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)
- Re: [HT-rt] [EXTERNAL] Re: HR-RT Review of draft-… Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)
- Re: [HT-rt] [EXTERNAL] Re: HR-RT Review of draft-… Eliot Lear
- Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-i… Beatrice Martini
- Re: [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-i… Beatrice Martini
- Re: [HT-rt] [EXTERNAL] Re: HR-RT Review of draft-… Eliot Lear