Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

Kathleen Moriarty <> Tue, 24 May 2016 18:56 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2E7A12B03A for <>; Tue, 24 May 2016 11:56:05 -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 ZV81V0Fhib21 for <>; Tue, 24 May 2016 11:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08E42127058 for <>; Tue, 24 May 2016 11:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id f66so34510046vkh.2 for <>; Tue, 24 May 2016 11:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=X85Vh1lMqFv289qVqkM1GXLyvViKgqnhbEzB/ImBBo0=; b=elAr+qUmNlcWR0dwdzZhnq8MzWS4keV8Kxlp+uQa/EqnI5MfbEumOjFrNd2BgdHIAh FaDZb92OXl2vVy6NXpPqpUS0l5Swh89V16tOexeyy9ySIWrQNyNtg12LRSvxHtaD/9eO 3oOLn4cMcH5o+Ytk3QcVRbo93+Gr7bfLq+9R+pzdpHaF2qRo8t12Sn/G5bRtmooCeH0P RBatIBQEveuLygcq/xQiVRmobNQY7u2FV5HuZ90DEW263SlCDDpd2mK8piB15Y67rWgI qjhLITmW5SV/bS48p6N6wpllGHlC3vV+g+nM8mYGEywgw6tnxZVvFflMcQMVUKujAwWl AJQg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=X85Vh1lMqFv289qVqkM1GXLyvViKgqnhbEzB/ImBBo0=; b=fGS4WL4bXMJLt+5iRO5AzGo7jqWEQfq71moZX4cKjeY9qELDATbUk5JZPwqPAmxJVL nm0+73g5UcVrV5f1UZlaXVtu3jkU+PflNnMWX9iawa8pesXk+ccS8hgtXGI1P8hra03r ugETFbVvDp83TFacUtW75DTlm1c+mPe/P2GRJnaCgtx4r87AqGisotTqoqKwAPwkbuWf F6vpOLyu8UGde4K3DnUvUa7s7hmQrCPBRMt4oBndntYjc7hCp8rN3aD7yodfMvqvkngU r2vXjBhJAUWt9YWx3ExBc/g3rPDOwOztpIJ5HX4f9iCjZCLP4smYKVYS6spbrER6kHj5 Js/Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKuwvpLWVzwIee8uEMdGumR/xNH3gaZ0HDfFviKKIYjl2uP42nSSK0+j1UkjtAhHrdQ63fylAntFED5CQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id k93mr3283862uak.95.1464116163058; Tue, 24 May 2016 11:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Tue, 24 May 2016 11:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 14:56:02 -0400
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
From: Kathleen Moriarty <>
To: Yoav Nir <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Cc: IETF discussion list <>,
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 18:56:06 -0000

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Yoav Nir <> wrote:
> On 24 May 2016, at 8:44 PM, Adam Roach <> wrote:
> I do not doubt that it sucks to be a gay or bisexual male living in
> Singapore. Spending a week there for work should be fine.
> I'll again agree with Jari's formulation, adding emphasis to the final three
> cited words: "I think it is of course necessary to consider things that
> affect the ability to enter, safety (possibly including usual human
> activities that people do outside meetings anyway, families travelling
> along)”.
> Then I guess where I disagree with both you and Melinda is that I don’t
> think the ability to bring families along should be an important
> consideration. This may be because I have never traveled to work with
> family, nor do I consider them coming as anything other than a vacation (for
> them - I would be stuck in meetings). I am somewhat uncomfortable with idea
> of a companion program, but that’s a subject for a different thread.
> Yes, there are exceptional cases such as when people need to travel with
> companions due to disability. Traveling with family beyond that is a choice.

Breastfeeding is another instance where brining your family is
important.  8 days is just too long to be away from a baby
breastfeeding.  It's a lot of milk to pump and send back or have
stocked up in advance.  There are some instances where having a
support person and child are essential to some attendees being able to
participate.  I've said this already and Ted made this argument
already.  There may be other situations, I don't know as I haven't run
into them yet.


> Assuming the worst about Singapore, it’s not fair that I have that choice,
> while Ted may feel that he does not. But if we can conclude that our
> participants themselves face no risk of harm or discrimination, I don’t
> think that should be a consideration.
> Yoav


Best regards,