Re: [Mtgvenue] Where we are, post #2

[Melinda Shore <[e-mail]>]

Looking for feedback:  Does anybody object to Brian's proposed
text?  Silence will imply that it's acceptable.


On 1/30/17 1:30 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> 1) Stephen raised questions about temporal aspects of the policy -
>> that a venue's acceptability may change.  After some disagreement,
>> he further clarified that he thinks that section 5 should contain
>> a substantive statement that the IAOC would publish how they're
>> diverging from the processes laid out in this document and then
>> get community feedback.  Dave asked if there's some reason
>> that this should be treated differently from how other documents
>> change and Stephen answered that he thinks that processes will
>> change more often than the document will be revised.
>>
>> So, we need to bring this to closure.
> 
> I think his point has some merit. Perhaps it can be met by a
> small addition in
> 
>>> 5.2.  Consultation
> ...
>>>    d.  On a public web page, the IAOC lists all candidate cities, when
>>>        community input was solicited, and if a city is to be considered
>>>        as a potential meeting location.
> 
> Add to this:
> 
>  If the IAOC has decided to waive any requirements for a
>  particular location, or to consider additional requirements,
>  this will also be noted on the web page.
> 
> That is both transparent and future-proof.