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

[Paul Wouters <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, 25 May 2016, Melinda Shore wrote:

> 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).

I have been thinking about this. If we would meet in Dubai, then I would
not go because I'm an atheist which is a crime there and I don't feel
secure enough this is a "legacy law not enforced". However, I would not
be against the IETF meeting there because I do want us to try and be
inclusive of the Middle East, something we haven't done well so far.

However, I would hope we continue to strife to go to locations that are
as inclusive as possible. Which includes skipping the US if Mr. Trump
gets his no-Muslim rule enforced - as a practical statement, not a
political one.

Paul