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

<> Thu, 26 May 2016 16:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A04012D79C for <>; Thu, 26 May 2016 09:59:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SgwCkS3CCn2g for <>; Thu, 26 May 2016 09:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AA2012D788 for <>; Thu, 26 May 2016 09:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=s2048; t=1464281416; bh=9JysxE7vOSlm406C8P6ZNPlm1iaxQ48sycuauVDAaDY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Subject; b=Ss5cF0HQLW5gJSeSaI66UbOVLQz6sTc7heahxOXmOZL777BE1NuWuEAgjolTyjuAHdYrmWhK0BqNvzTiZOgBhWGhdtEkblrp4rAksPOHuWALUQ4hr2cEViG3+23JJSHLwOjmc5JuvVNFhYcLKusc/viGN8G4qh7Xv5IIMp0VbcEHzhgAE2L5Fk682GMHROz/Xh5+NjHvTNs/jKaKtyDChLe0+ouYuztixiA08So3UwE6DN8loJCWAL7hXjMt5cGKZ3b8ExzrQoTmxRMo1BdsIxJTSNvMvU0yZX21MOMOrq20WTha2xGeSFKuPLcXVJlEX5rnnpVAMhr77d4SP2iMtQ==
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 26 May 2016 16:50:16 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 26 May 2016 16:47:35 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 26 May 2016 16:47:35 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 26 May 2016 16:47:35 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-4
X-YMail-OSG: u4CUDnUVM1lI402DWJdikQ8uXv9Shl1IJ0k1pB0dxgSw5.zPeon4suLUGaYzgRU JzoqVMNp55G3aCz5wRM9djKE51UXPruswe_cx0xJ97WDC2IOIlL7tmtzyjX6tqAi1aGldJvG8dqi Fyse0o9l23IYwVp7MUNUrJYtTx.3dqxNv6T0dm7tPKHn70NoWB6RYHUTWuxxKSDTSvdFqb.bIugQ j3A9C60XcdQd7Ppws2DS82wv6_Xz4wm1YoqA7LvYPwDO_RNMYJZoSXH3whUqllCT0bXzO6NvdduP 9BvmYh_eCRTSwzne30ZcPRzz7.4LdPglUBeP4aIIqbvAjxzBunsF1vW0VYMVpzlRCzoJ3rNM2J8F 1tFmRzfT.3cQdeL146.UvyX.liewsgpDGdA6enXk87djg9MbhWv87f5w4QFHk4yBHzET.QG4y84c MowjtBmwGBzJa2lgzHtZvlE27rB2mgDsphq0WArm3i874YMHLXM65HJbBN28mal9G1UyKt1oRntx 5FXBNy3MJsQRJ3YSXfEfYnUx1UCrMrVhJR1Tp_JZ6n0Fv_jow..x49UWqTozHQQmLukS4fhe5l_z sqtTPeVtIHNlvJ_lYq3M-
Received: from by; Thu, 26 May 2016 16:47:34 +0000; 1464281254.731
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 16:47:13 +0000 (UTC)
From: <>
To: Melinda Shore <>, "" <>, ietf <>
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <027501d1b724$632c2c40$> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1023057_1862733963.1464281233913"
Archived-At: <>
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: Thu, 26 May 2016 16:59:32 -0000

On 5/26/16 8:18 AM, wrote:
>> But I think for some people, no matter what I or any of the other
>> people say, they will not be convinced.  So now what?  I think we are
>> pretty much at that pass today.

>I think it was rather clear from the questions you proposed
>that you don't actually understand the potential problems
>around parental and familial rights, etc.
What questions do you think are better to pose?

>I would also suggest that it's extremely difficult to understand the>subtle ways in which particular bigotries are implemented
>unless you've lived it, or the ways in which they're negotiated
>by the people who live with those bigotries daily.
Frankly, I find it rather amusing of you to suggest that a short woman of color in high tech in the United States does not understand bigotry.
I would say that I have a fairly full and rich understanding of discrimination.    No need to go into more details, irrelevant to the issue.
>On a personal note, I'd be grateful if people would avoid
>posting statements of the form "I totally support GLBT rights,
>but <insert unsupportive comment>."

Sorry if you saw my comments as unsupportive.  It was not my intent.