Mike, My answer is that this is a judgement call and it forms part of the decision making tree that the IAOC has to make when selecting any venue. We have asked for community feedback in this case, and we've received it (or we are receiving it I should say).
Personally, yes, I see the benefits and I also don't believe that we really WOULD run afoul of the "rules" and suffer any consequences, but one can always come up with worst-case scenarios. If we all go there with self-censorship and fear in mind, I'd rather we went somewhere else, but I don't believe we need to be fearful. Ole On Wed, 23 Sep 2009, Michael StJohns wrote: > > And I'm at a loss to understand why censoring such a statement (or > ejecting an individual who says it, or terminating the IETF meeting > in which is was said) should be a required part of an IETF meeting? > > This isn't a China issue per se - this is about what we expect from > and for ourselves in the context of the IETF. We have a way of > interacting that - while not pretty - mostly works. It's unclear to > me why we should accept restrictions on that way of interacting that > are imposed from without. If your answer is - "because there's some > benefit to the IETF" - I would then ask what else should we be > willing to give up for other benefits and where should we draw the > line? > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
