[Mtgvenue] Political considerations (was: Re: Comments on draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-02

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

Alissa, et al:

On 6/22/2016 6:49 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote:
> (b) Political considerations
>
> "we do not choose or not choose venues based on political criteria."
>
> What does this mean exactly? We know that the IETF is getting paid by
> local governments to hold meetings in many (but not all) locations. That
> doesn't seem like an entirely apolitical activity. Furthermore, both of
> the prongs of the inclusivity principle derive from actions that local
> governments take and that we then consider in selecting venues. If none
> of those are considered "political criteria" then what would be? Perhaps
> there is a better way to phrase this that doesn't appear contradictory.


Ignoring the line of academic debate some economists and political 
scientists like to have claiming that the two topics are highly related 
and maybe even the same topic...


The IETF takes sponsorship funds from a host country as an economic 
incentive, independent of the country's political details.

Individuals who participate in selection discussions often offer 
comments about a country's politics, but I believe they do not wind up 
affecting the choices directly, nor are they typically discussed at 
length.

Rather, matters of convenience, cost, safety and other purely logistical 
and operational matters for the criteria that get used. And I think we 
have a number of places we've gone and places we haven't gone, that 
reflect a fair range of political paradigms, demonstrating this.

As such, I believe the current draft text is exactly correct.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net