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

Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen@me.com> Wed, 25 May 2016 15:42 UTC

Return-Path: <olejacobsen@me.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9019612D61A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 08:42:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.147
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.147 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_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=me.com
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 QjSgPR14doZe for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 08:42:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com (mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com [17.110.69.252]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6763512D0F4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 08:42:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from process-dkim-sign-daemon.mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com by mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.36.0 64bit (built Sep 8 2015)) id <0O7Q00M00OFZ0M00@mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com> for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 25 May 2016 15:42:06 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.1.10.8] (173-11-110-134-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.11.110.134]) by mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.36.0 64bit (built Sep 8 2015)) with ESMTPSA id <0O7Q00CWGOY49H30@mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 15:42:05 +0000 (GMT)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2016-05-25_09:,, signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=1 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1510270003 definitions=main-1605250190
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 08:42:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen@me.com>
To: nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com
Subject: Re: IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
In-reply-to: <270093544.407294.1464189518299.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-id: <alpine.OSX.2.01.1605250826150.2005@rabdullah.local>
References: <20160524210344.64781.qmail@ary.lan> <bd1f61ef-3be2-1a16-804c-68548df0b789@gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1605242300120.194@rabdullah.local> <da508fd5-307c-c61e-5b72-185238414a9c@gmail.com> <1936013436.371962.1464185835726.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <439c30dc-3d3c-e6e3-43f2-812a66496379@gmail.com> <270093544.407294.1464189518299.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.01 (OSX 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=me.com; s=4d515a; t=1464190926; bh=V+1A5wB243XXW6ruh1vrsfDogyhLhHtYc2HDZIjoC9Y=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-id:MIME-version:Content-type; b=c2dmXpYM1zjn2hWCeO0YePwfkCkEazVj6IyCqj0jyF56p8VQJ+FfaoMk8+6G6WX4h w9tns1qKDcnt/pLsMIMReJ4oVmc/yx7pTu1/Oi8gOhdyoBTcEsbmNHpUVGmNyfq+f9 ntvExNuBJERzCevg0CXEIEN586MFAA57M0Ll9M6P/5l2u/PEsiHbyi5+irUNLiE5MF 82Kp49FlgYW5ioV5+YgfpsAgud/j9f44PMXaG7mBlPEXks4TIuP6ws9+IGDoTtpP7l biwU3R9BMDHBhSxlprU0om2mG1qsn4ZkFtUsoBhXCJC5hUtmfLveVwRGrTWk9DZsyI iGK4hfVu/SXxw==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Lw7sD_N1F-Qd43QTVZdoDak7bxU>
Cc: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen@me.com>
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 15:42:08 -0000

On Wed, 25 May 2016, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com wrote:
>
> >>On 5/25/16 6:17 AM, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com wrote:
> >> So, it is not OK to put an additional burden sometimes on GLBT people
> >> but it is OK to put an additional burden on Asian and African and
> >> other people as far as cost, racism, visa, etc, etc?
> 
> >Perhaps we should regard this as an opportunity to talk
> >about which forms of bigotry we'll accommodate and which
> >we won't.
>
> Well said.
> 
> Nalini
>    

In an ideal world, there would be no travel costs, no visa barriers,
no discrimination and no bureaucracies to deal with. We don't live
in such a world. Until we do, this isn't a matter of what type of
bigotry is worse or better IMO, it's about making practical choices 
about meeting locations (assuming we still want to have physical
meetings). Every meeting we hold excludes some number of people for
numerous reasons, hopefully it's not the same people every time.

(Yes, I know some people are not able to attend at all for economic 
reasons, but that's not a problem solved by the 1-1-1 model unless
by sheer luck we land a meeting in someone's "back yard")

Ole