+1 (including the hat)
Issues beyond those critical for getting work done SHOULD be used to select
between otherwise equal venues in a region, but MUST NOT be used as the
primary discriminators.
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Dean Willis
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 6:40 PM
To: Jari Arkko
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org Discussion
Subject: Re: my summary of discussion regarding IETF #100
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