Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100

[Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]>]

I looked at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=mtgvenue
but didn't see much. A search for "singapore" finds 9 messages, only 2 of
which seem relevant to this issue.

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Ted Lemon <[e-mail]> wrote:

> You are probably looking for the mtgvenue mailing list, and the consensus
> (we hope) document that is being worked on there.
>
> However, that doesn't help us with the IETF 100 problem.
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Margaret Cullen <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> we get to say _this_ to the Singapore government, who wants us to meet
>>> there enough that they have offered us $150K in incentives for us to come
>>> there:
>>>
>>> > “    Singapore laws against same-sex relationships between men and
>>> >    preventing the recognition of same-sex marriages could create
>>> >    difficulties for same-sex partners and their children
>>
>>
>> Where was this discussion held? I don't recall it here on the IETF list.
>>
>> In addition to the obvious impact on future venue selection, which I
>> assume has already been debated (Are we going to have to stop holding IETFs
>> in Asia for a few years? What does that mean for IETF participants who live
>> in Asia? etc.) I would assume there are other local practices such as free
>> speech or unfettered Internet access that the IETF might want to take a
>> stand on. How do we decide which ones those are?
>>
>> As a community-driven organization, we make most decisions via community
>> process (e.g., we make technical decisions via rough consensus). Should we
>> be working on putting together such a process to make this sort of decision?
>>
>> It seems bad to make this sort of decision on an ad-hoc, case-by-case
>> basis as appears to be happening here.
>>
>
>