On May 28, 2016, at 12:49, Jari Arkko <jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net>
wrote:
Several people have pointed out that it is very important that the IETF
treats everyone's issues the same. I'd point out though that not everyone
reacts in the same fashion, e.g., we need to be aware of people who are or
have been silent about their issues, attempt to identify such issues, and
consider those as well, fairly, *while* still needing to find a reasonable
set of real-world venues.
<cowboy hat on>
No, we don’t. If they aren’t the sort of issues that prevent real work from
getting done in the IETF, we do NOT need to be identifying or considering them.
This is not a social club. It is not a debating forum. It is not a
junket-factory for family-friendly excursions. It is work, and work is hard and
requires sacrifice.
I understand that it is trendy for everyone to need safe-spaces, group hugs,
and lemon-scented-napkins before takeoff these days, but this is getting
ridiculous.
Being able to get through customs at a destination, being able to afford that
destination, and being safe once one gets there are critical issues. Adequate
meeting, hospitality, and bandwidth accommodations are critical issues.
Most of the rest of this debate needs to be taken somewhere else. Sure, we can
each have personal concerns about how to get more of our clique-du-jour into
the process, but that, in general, is something the IETF as a whole needs to
avoid wasting time on.
So stop being a silly wanker, kick some ass, and call an end to playtime.
Everybody back to work!
<cowboy hat off>
—
Dean
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail