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

Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> Wed, 25 May 2016 20:45 UTC

Return-Path: <melinda.shore@gmail.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 D47B112D150 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 13:45:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 f5y679RY1ch9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 13:45:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x230.google.com (mail-pf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::230]) (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 95B8412D0CC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 13:45:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id f144so8770053pfa.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 13:45:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hnSTL4D779O1yIyX04RisGRIFZ/5RXT5vb7aX0Cwz+c=; b=CJrtFIfVjI237FwuvkFdtxv2wJd1lU3Z9QxNQqb22ZCaRFhzoSY2NXSQHtsWiazCsy tTPkNUiGnvQnhYeeG1fRSLcPrOWPCgO/zHLXvu3Yqiji7GnCK5Idxwc36txr7gWkKCn/ xJX3MCVKwT688mNlo/h9F0XOWkdu/brWXObbsy7rQq2GSf8GosFpTxl+VMXndgKnSXRA uIKR4FANczBaosKT7MvzUtjL9oAgkWNXOMdbVgkQiVhxYnBygNDXTH5nmDgphtFIYbuF Y2uNRkmWrigQFPOej0HcYTBKKtLkviczaikhBCQtNC6M/HOrmuW+ZGECM+B7PVDodVNi PiCQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hnSTL4D779O1yIyX04RisGRIFZ/5RXT5vb7aX0Cwz+c=; b=h1QicG41icQYKrCzeWNcghe9NDwbL4DilSk0hD/O7FHroNyBzI7Le0z9CX5ROHVI7C WQ0vbf3vYl28UtGjH6U+k+jMFWetIjzImWKhgf9KomUBJAOoO2u7fRY+UjwgwLrvJasU Qvn3bK464tzt5DHNR19lYolCYFqEa9KRDuXOB+9kgh5H61FRwE6jQktQlWn45wThEhLN Jaod/iCQY3yjHpJCn73KHNii9/vstkVCVKMu4dfygWmoXtLkemDtdvpeiie3bAL1Wfe5 TSUKrPIdqElZndQMFMqj0xpwTKZNDRf2u3WNv3obnCGikz9MHjFB7Ul9zp2rJP7THKwZ DfcA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIb/+JhYV9vUzekVxlszzHMB+p29jpO7rbc2QdgGQQVypjhsFbjPkN/wVYQkDEK4w==
X-Received: by 10.98.35.15 with SMTP id j15mr8873352pfj.108.1464209112193; Wed, 25 May 2016 13:45:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Melindas-MacBook-Pro.local (63-140-104-230-radius.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [63.140.104.230]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 7sm553948pfn.30.2016.05.25.13.45.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 25 May 2016 13:45:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
References: <20160524210344.64781.qmail@ary.lan> <5f7621d7-326d-3d94-0b78-5a463dd6c496@gmail.com> <1940321298.573455.1464202942241.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <08f1ee7c-eb15-77bf-9e7e-5a164e5a38f9@gmail.com> <CAPt1N1mOMf9u+CXwhrjtD9R7FJOq1=6N+T3zHKJHVfSdy0t_Uw@mail.gmail.com> <d33789e4-caf5-21be-e4b1-a7d3065d43fe@gmail.com> <CAPt1N1mhK=p1YboDnKE5xF+gdMdXkOZBqbpaodkaq8jR0Lophw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <75ca0a38-0807-a91f-5b2a-bab8f6fc7042@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 12:44:27 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPt1N1mhK=p1YboDnKE5xF+gdMdXkOZBqbpaodkaq8jR0Lophw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/QbtIHzUW8o3zNyXY68pCRtFekRM>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
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 20:45:14 -0000

On 5/25/16 12:36 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> It's probably easier to enumerate who's excluded than who's included:

No, it's still not really working.

Would we, for example, be willing to meet in a place that
criminalizes Muslims or Jews or Hindus?  I sincerely hope not,
and I don't think that we would.

I suppose it would provide some small personal assurance if the IETF,
in fact, would meet in such a place and the issue here is not that
people here are comfortable excluding GLBT people as a class.  (I'd
skip that meeting, too, for whatever it's worth).

Melinda