[Mtgvenue] Where we are, post #2

[Melinda Shore <[e-mail]>]

Hi, all:

This post will try to identify questions under discussion
in which there is no agreement.

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.

2) There was disagreement about the use of the phrase "business
travel" in section 3.2.  Brian proposed "typical business travel"
in its place.  I don't think I've seen any comments on this, and
it should be an easy one to close out.

3) The food discussion is, as usual, somewhat contentious.
Stephen has proposed that accommodating chosen dietary restrictions
should not be mandatory.  My understanding from his messages is
that the scope of "chosen" includes religious and ethical
dietary restrictions.  At this point I'd be interested in hearing
from anyone who agrees with that, as he appears to be alone on
that one.

There's also a long list of issues raised in the last 24 hours
on which there's been no little or no comment, including a detailed
review of the text regarding accessibility posted by John
Dickinson.  We'll circle back around to those later today.

Thanks,

Melinda