Re: [Mtgvenue] document status, the role of the iaoc, and enforceability

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 1/6/2017 10:13 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
> I don't really know the composition of the meetings
> committee, but it seems to me that perhaps that is a place for a certain
> amount of diversity so that concerns can be identified early.  Maybe
> it's just me, but when I consider a question like, “should the IETF meet
> in a certain location?” my first question is, would I be comfortable
> with my wife or daughter present?  In other words, I personalize it.  I
> would expect others do something similar, if only subconsciously.  Had
> Ted been a member of that committee, I'm sure we never would have been
> standing there in BA in that uncomfortable situation, even if the
> decision were STILL to go to Singapore (Ted's better at this than me- he
> can put himself in many people's shoes).


Eliot,

What you describe is a natural and common view, but in terms of 
methodology it makes a classic sampling error:  it assumes that /some/ 
diversity ensures /enough/ diversity.  A healthy bit of diversity does 
help, but since the size of the committee is necessarily limited, it is 
guaranteed that its diversity will /always/ be limited.

So, for example, I believe that all of my co-participants in the 
meetings committee do, in fact, bring their personal concerns into play, 
just as you suggest.  That was not sufficient to uncover a community 
concern about Singapore.  Your suggestion that if only Ted had been a 
participant misses the point that there is always the likelihood that 
the committee composition will lack some useful perspective for some 
relevant issue.

The only way we are ever going to align city selections with community 
concerns is to get the community, itself, to raise those concerns. 
Relying on meetings committee membership to do this is never going to 
ensure proper synchrony with the community.

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net