RE: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100

Another thing to put in the pros and cons: this would set a precedent for 
future meetings.

This map reflects the current situation worldwide: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_same-sex_marriage#/media/File:World_laws_pertaining_to_homosexual_relationships_and_expression.svg

BR,

Jose

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Recentattendees [mailto:recentattendees-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] En 
> nombre de
> IAOC Chair
> Enviado el: jueves, 26 de mayo de 2016 0:08
> Para: IETF Announcement List <ietf-announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
> CC: recentattendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> Asunto: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100
>
> All,
>
> In the IAOC's previous message on this topic we stated that the IAOC believed 
> that
> it is possible to hold a successful meeting in Singapore, and that meeting in
> Singapore is the best option for IETF 100.  This statement was based on 
> several
> factors, including evaluation of the site based on the requirements and 
> process now
> being updated and tracked in 
> draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-
> 02.  In particular, this included consulting with the additional information 
> sources
> identified in the document (specialty travel services, etc), and no specific 
> issues
> were identified as to actual situation in Singapore.  More detail on the 
> information we
> have to hand is provided below.
>
> Additional arguments have come forward since our earlier messages,  which 
> leads
> us to continue exploring.  The IETF Chair has been in touch with the meeting 
> host,
> which is obviously another factor in whether we can/should move.   But we 
> need to
> make a decision, so this message contains such information as we have at 
> present.
> We understand that it is difficult to express a view about what to do in the 
> absence
> of known alternatives; but we do not know what the alternatives are now, and 
> we
> need urgently to make a decision, so we are sharing the incomplete 
> information we
> have in the interests of transparency.
>
>
> Laying this out in a pro/con format:
>
>
> Not Singapore:
> --------------
>
> If we cancel the contract we have for Singapore for IETF 100, the onward 
> positive
> impacts include:
>
>       . We might have the opportunity to establish the meeting in a venue that
> permits more IETF participants to be comfortable being present and engaging 
> in a
> celebration of this milestone meeting, which is important to some.
>
>
>
> If we cancel the contract we have for Singapore for IETF 100, the onward 
> negative
> impacts include:
>
>       . Losing approximately $80,000 (USD) hotel agreement cancellation fee[1]
>
>       . Losing up to approximately $150,000 (USD) in Singapore government
> incentives [2]
>
>       . Re-prioritizing people time to find a new location (the IAD, 
> Secretariat staff)
> who have full plates for lining up other future meetings; there’s an unknown 
> amount
> of impact in terms of how that impacts *other* meetings (N.B.:  some of this 
> effort is
> already underway to obtain the information on possible alternatives and 
> outline the
> pros/cons outlined here).
>
>       . Likelihood of IETF 100 in Asia is very small — we have few prospects 
> and
> it takes us months to get all the pieces aligned to get to a signed contract 
> in Asia
> (Singapore took over a year).  This would create additional challenges for 
> our Asian
> community members (travel distance, visas).
>
>       . Possible shift of dates — to be able to find a venue elsewhere that 
> works
>
> We have some wiggle room in the point about time to find a new venue insofar 
> as it
> would be easiest to use a North American site that we have used before.   If 
> we
> have to consider non-North American, and/or new venues where a site visit is
> needed, effort and cost will be higher.
>
> Note, we should only cancel the Singapore contract once we know that an
> alternative venue, that is acceptable to community, is ready to put under 
> contract.
> The cost of cancellation ($80k now) goes up to $192k if we don’t cancel before
> November 2016 (i.e., a few months from now).
>
>
> We do have to give the hotel a reason for canceling our contract:
>
> Reasons for Cancellation of IETF 100 Meeting in Singapore, and the IAOC
> understands that to be:
>
> “    Singapore laws against same-sex relationships between men and
>     preventing the recognition of same-sex marriages could create
>     difficulties for same-sex partners and their children; these have
>     discouraged affected members of our community from participating
>     at the IETF meeting in November of 2017 and have also influenced
>     others to decline to attend in principled solidarity with them.
>
>
>     Accordingly, the IETF has decided to postpone indefinitely the meeting
>     in Singapore and is pursuing alternative venues.”
>
>
>
> If we stick with Singapore for IETF 100:
> ----------------------------------------
>
> If we keep the contract we have for Singapore for IETF 100, the onward 
> positive
> impacts include:
>
>       . we have a functional meeting venue set for our 3rd meeting of 2017
>
>       . meeting site research resources can remain focused on filling in the
> remaining gaps in the 3-4 year timeframe
>
>       . we don’t have the financial hit of the cancellation fee, and possible 
> loss of
> government incentives
>
> If we keep the contract we have for Singapore for IETF 100, the onward 
> negative
> impacts include:
>
>       . we have a meeting at a location where some community members will
> perceive themselves as unwelcome and unsafe, unable to bring family
>
>       . possibly fewer attendees than we might otherwise expect — which is a
> consideration for both getting work done and financial reasons (registration 
> fees per
> person)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The above is the practical information as we can best scope it.
>
>
> If you would like to provide some considered feedback on this matter, please 
> feel
> free to send it to venue-selection(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org .  Please note that 
> mailing list is a
> PUBLICLY archived “drop box” [3].
>
>
> Leslie Daigle, for the IAOC.
>
>
> [1] The cancellation fee can be recovered if it is used as a deposit at a 
> later meeting
> with those hotels in Singapore, if it is before 2020; for this discussion, 
> it’s perhaps
> best to consider it gone.
>
> [2] Government business incentives are not unusual; we might obtain these in
> another country hosting IETF 100, but we are late to be expecting incentives 
> and
> opportunities for good deals, and are unlikely to get this in a North America 
> venue.
>
> [3] The venue-selection mailing list is not open for subscription, and it is 
> not intended
> to archive dynamic conversations (i.e., don’t cc it on an e-mail discussion 
> thread,
> because there will be too many addressees and your mail won’t go through).
>
> --
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Leslie Daigle
> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises LLC
> ldaigle(_at_)thinkingcat(_dot_)com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Recentattendees mailing list
> Recentattendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/recentattendees