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

Ted Lemon <> Wed, 25 May 2016 14:35 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBA9712D720 for <>; Wed, 25 May 2016 07:35:17 -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, 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 2r8qQIWTxU5i for <>; Wed, 25 May 2016 07:35:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8023F12D12A for <>; Wed, 25 May 2016 07:35:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id k7so15906684lbm.0 for <>; Wed, 25 May 2016 07:35:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=DKdmLqegh14pX9RzPUUYCDKq0KOV9dDrHS1ZAFcnZw4=; b=uNDP5h1TD/aWKKJYjpMIWK/QhUptJw/gA8lzIuUZhQksmX+f9TX/K2N8W5MIMPs9zf J5F9/cDlg84gn7xYyO2OpUmlvcDBa/cItzN1Ya7JHOfyj7k9S9R9AxlQy4ggvmR1nwBU sxPhERSjUuNDapoSY0/JhwhK+e2YfqC4eL+iUntXGvezmTYFa8WzfoekMHk2Ciahwfgr gW1ia61s9Nd0hXV/jteL3qRN4sT1vBXvWyqqdcuZHpcDsVjqG26oEk+SRIJjjuQ8yj8X BUmCLvVBmj4w4XcIAce5+A3kSCmEF75DmcPVj8ACS/z8APJaIhFLZl+1hz/KcR8SgxTo 7QWA==
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:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=DKdmLqegh14pX9RzPUUYCDKq0KOV9dDrHS1ZAFcnZw4=; b=BhHvn82umDKTAZoqw09r6nEDsDIxn/Xd/+xHg2KqWBHlQqh1mr0iPrPm5DR2nva4Ub qwmriqtXEZ2uF61L8XWyAOEnguJUswN9JQnFm9V2cEViBCmbGopAw8GlP580JHJzP5UY xMve5D5hOZaoSetf+h05RdwlgqilYNnds+Pu6GC6DemzEkwUlKqfQwBxej//INdfltsf YrqiCNwQKGL2X6oDF+XI4MVShW9yIkmg+mhxY3KGJKt/v5fnyGPj2skPeomE08fGfFIV BmnfJZbeuL6cBEMaa83iTfucrVMk7ju8DhY5TOvuXXN4UG/53OAKINlHf5Vt1Q7wuvHo X3Bg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJYTV7dwR+V1wAuRtD1YyIG7bthJq9Rd0mNYFnyEcNkrAiGSYn66LOk9xZp4sc8P68ZIqkUCkZuvvflHw==
X-Received: by with SMTP id q8mr1312297lbi.78.1464186909562; Wed, 25 May 2016 07:35:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 25 May 2016 07:34:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Ted Lemon <>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 10:34:28 -0400
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
To: Patrick McManus <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="14dae9473583a12cac0533ab94db"
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Margaret Cullen <>, IETF Discussion Mailing 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: Wed, 25 May 2016 14:35:18 -0000

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Patrick McManus <>

> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Margaret Cullen <>
> wrote:
>> I am fairly disturbed with where this discussion has ended up
> Me too. A little empathy could go a long way here (as in so many things).
> That's a property of good leadership.

I think it's really important to understand that a desire to get clarity
does not indicate a lack of empathy.   It's also important to understand
that empathy isn't something that some people deserve and others don't.
The fact that person A has a worse problem than the problem person B has
does not mean that person B's problem doesn't matter.   And indeed even the
act of trying to make such a comparison is incredibly fraught.   As I said
earlier, it's very difficult to discuss this because it's difficult to
avoid making it sound like we have no empathy for person A when we talk
about person B's problem.   But it is not fair to ignore person B's problem
just because person A's problem is worse, particularly because what "worse"
means is very subjective.

For someone who has been discriminated against and marginalized their whole
life, a discussion of the practical effects of a particular example of that
marginalization, and how that particular example compares to the
less-pervasive marginalization that someone else is experiencing which
happens in a particular instance to be just as serious, may indeed feel

However, I think that on a practical level the only problems that we, the
IETF, can address in this context are specific practical problems.   We,
the IETF, cannot directly address the pervasive discrimination and
marginalization, much as we wish to do so.   Nor need we--these problems
are being addressed on a social level, and many of us participate in trying
to address them on that level.   It is no accident that things have changed
for the better, nor is it the case that we are done.   The IETF is no more
capable of getting Singapore to change its laws with respect to same-sex
relations than we are capable of getting the U.S. to be less unpleasant to
visitors from disfavored countries, or for example to protect travelers
unknowingly carrying prescription asthma medication, Adderall or Ritalin
into Japan.

That is why I at least have chosen to focus on the practical.   It is not a
lack of empathy.