+1 to drop companion stuff IF it is increasing the IAOC venue-selection
criteria difficulties, and I want to make it clear, even if it affects me
personally at any time.
Even if is only for simple curiosity (I don’t think our decisions must consider
other organizations decisions, but is always good to know), it will be nice to
know if venue-selection-criteria of other similar organizations take in
consideration possible “difficulties” for companion/familties.
Regards,
Jordi
-----Mensaje original-----
De: ietf <ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> en nombre de Yoav Nir
<ynir(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
Responder a: <ynir(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
Fecha: martes, 24 de mayo de 2016, 20:52
Para: Melinda Shore <melinda(_dot_)shore(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
CC: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and
request for input
On 24 May 2016, at 9:28 PM, Melinda Shore
<melinda(_dot_)shore(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 5/24/16 10:14 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
Then I guess where I disagree with both you and Melinda is that I don’t
think the ability to bring families along should be an important
consideration.
I don't, either, but as long as the IETF does, and provides
a companion program, I feel quite strongly that IETF travel
should be equally accessible to all families. I'd personally
be good with dropping the companion stuff UNLESS it was done
specifically to avoid problems with travel to places hostile
to same-sex partners.
I would be happy with dropping the companion stuff for many reasons. The fact
that it adds considerations and criteria to the IAOC’s decision process that
already has way too many criteria is just another reason to drop it.
Yoav