Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-14.txt
Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Thu, 10 May 2018 10:43 UTC
Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EFE412EAC4; Thu, 10 May 2018 03:43:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PTR1hIEeN5LS; Thu, 10 May 2018 03:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr0-x231.google.com (mail-wr0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 931D0126CD6; Thu, 10 May 2018 03:43:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr0-x231.google.com with SMTP id y15-v6so1507122wrg.11; Thu, 10 May 2018 03:43:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=BnIBLrQbEdJj7pDYglhJ4gDbVg70ZsKaubzxIPA2pcc=; b=E20xpLFR7kbGxZhMXNPLqnfhZATQYzvH09brwhuGPLc3uWKXfJcgEmMfyEjHnHCa4m rE8SIDmh20PrH1U4xgiZsIGwlWqxZ8Kw23+s866me8vyKKjvjItbHjvSY/71lyn3XRJ7 a/G5fp+bVvsXHhWyJzQB24OWHvMOXGYqzBWVVT6YE8Hfrwj3oJw/2zwlUjtMIJx6e4xc E4fVF0+qnOzBtwam14XfOBBhkIGZrt3htz3SPwEntfwECrJqqA3Cdz898BHZPAySfIo4 W9GJqIP0xq9I4SfazFWeTbNE/YIrKHzPZD4o8qefh1evbWJB9DuAhZZnCfziIL+lGfFd BFTw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=BnIBLrQbEdJj7pDYglhJ4gDbVg70ZsKaubzxIPA2pcc=; b=NaqHkb+oVY44RNl4vESQfsyCop/26J8LQYJel2qb4bayksLZLyko0VsPxcF2dceHJp f1UoMs3ltBK2zX1xrf95GSiuRV+nLctaZlxD6GTgKdsuMkQGt68iIWCvO20kx8E9TMfg Zwqo2ZFvYB6udB/V/UulG2NeGrVfQYHZW/sDKUqepmJkz4NbJwmPoZ4kzYDuO2zEXDv1 eqJ1qUs+Dyj8Go/ZCCcX3RC1CiTko1RPSfyOz+9Vfn3vcwjOl+b5pX5SeuIDRMBtbOy9 8qrHJaPMehniuM4wPF57YJb5khxHfr36e5v8VSVajyJv5T58+CAsvUAmPsorX73Bp4qF MvDQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwf01kgiN7ynVej2n70FAJUqkTYEoaZrIwdKvX02PvD9+OQvfnRC boHK8UixBnZRAyOx+Kfb2HhqSKkJ
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZrCCFXHY86+34IdJjV3d69wUOq6HJ4sAWHqphiIa935508EiNuNDUcb7U4lrZg9N5+0GgY9HQ==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:8ac5:: with SMTP id z5-v6mr857223wrz.22.1525948997865; Thu, 10 May 2018 03:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.105] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h12-v6sm684422wmc.7.2018.05.10.03.43.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 10 May 2018 03:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, mtgvenue@ietf.org, ietf <IETF@ietf.org>
References: <152584638193.2839.7801870228413280951@ietfa.amsl.com> <c30fd21a-85ee-734c-771c-00ff65490acb@cisco.com> <CABmDk8=HKLR89dvDTuO4eguPE5LCV-YPmcbBr1WdUuFNi+NsBw@mail.gmail.com> <20180510021428.GG9500@mx4.yitter.info> <e28339ff-0046-02c7-b711-92bdc57e9ec3@cisco.com>
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2cda6e85-593b-0151-54e0-1e00823fb5e4@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:43:16 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e28339ff-0046-02c7-b711-92bdc57e9ec3@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/uf7mP556YVEXayjbbnFrmznQNjo>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-14.txt
X-BeenThere: mtgvenue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IAOC meeting venue selection process." <mtgvenue.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mtgvenue/>
List-Post: <mailto:mtgvenue@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:43:21 -0000
It seems to me that "no-smoking" is a pretty standard policy and relatively simple to include and to police. Beyond that, unless a more practical assessment method can be proposed, best effort is all we can do. - Stewart On 10/05/2018 09:25, Eliot Lear wrote: > Hi, > > <editor hat firmly OFF> > > As the person who caused this stink by adding supporting the no smoking > requirement (again with editor hat off), I think Andrew's way forward is > the best. > > Eliot > > > On 10.05.18 04:14, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >> Dear colleagues, >> >> Mary's, Ted's, and Ole's discussion of particulars of environmental >> contaminents (in this case, smoking and mo[u]ld) makes me again wish >> to suggest the position I held before the specific change was made to >> draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-14. My position at >> the time was that the Important criterion >> >> o Economic, safety, and health risks associated with this Venue are >> acceptable. >> >> was what we needed. It was pretty unlikely to be traded off with any >> kind of regularity, since "risk" and "acceptable" were sufficiently >> flexible that we'd need to call out things that were in stark contrast >> to what we normally dealt with. In any case, I thought, further >> specification would be a problem. Therefore, I claimed, the above >> criterion was as good as anyone could reasonably expect and it seemed >> that the details needed to be left to meeting planners. (I didn't >> support it becoming Mandatory because the "are acceptable" language >> means that there's no test, so no way to know whether the Venue >> necessarily fails.) >> >> We are now in the situation where we have a Mandatory criterion about >> smoking in various parts of the Venue, and at least one person who >> claims that such a Mandatory criterion requires site-visiting staff to >> do some kinds of spot checks. It's totally unclear to me what that >> would mean or what we would do if, 2 or more years later when we >> actually show up, the spot checks turn out to have been wrong. >> >> We are now also faced with the suggestion that the same staff are >> supposed to do mo[u]ld tests without having the requisite training or >> hazardous materials equipment. If in fact we are demanding staff do >> such things, it seems to me at least plausible that staff would have a >> future complaint if we did not provide them with appropriate equipment >> to undertake the tests. This is, I think, an important reason why we >> cannot realistically mandate such tests. >> >> Moreover, once we begin requiring such tests by staff, there are other >> pollutants that (1) could be required to be tested and (2) are not yet >> mentioned in the document, either because we haven't yet thought of >> (or discovered) them or because someone who is affected wasn't >> involved in all this. >> >> Therefore, I would like again to propose that we go back to the >> previous text -- which had the nice advantage too of having had >> consensus in the WG -- and drop the new Mandatory criterion in section >> 3.1, relying on staff to do their level best (as they ever have done) >> to address health issues that are likely to affect IETF participants >> at meetings. >> >> None of this, please note, is in any way intended to minimise or >> denigrate the health issues (or even discomforts, for all that) people >> have talked about. But we need a document that establishes >> principles, not rules. If one's particular concern cannot be covered >> under the principles laid out, then I think it would be most important >> to raise that. But this particular change seems to me to be the >> addition of a specific rule where an exising principle in the document >> was already adequate to the purpose. >> >> Best regards, >> >> A >> >
- [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-v… internet-drafts
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Mary B
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ted Lemon
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ted Lemon
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ted Lemon
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ted Lemon
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Mary B
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Mary B
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Mary Barnes
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Adam Roach
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ted Lemon
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… John C Klensin
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Mary B
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Mary Barnes
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Mary Barnes
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Ted Lemon
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Mtgvenue] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mtgvenue-ia… Eliot Lear