--On Wednesday, July 27, 2022 10:30 -0400 Lars Eggert <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi John, > > On 2022-7-27, at 10:15, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> > wrote: >> However, my recollection is that the decision that is must be >> possible to be an anonymous observer in real time was made, on >> privacy grounds, after significant community discussion and >> IETF consensus. IIR, some of that discussion included a >> sense that disadvantaging such observers in any way was >> inconsistent with the privacy principles the IETF was trying >> to promote. >> >> I hope we can avoid reopening the original discussion. >> However, we normally take the position that a decision made >> by IETF consensus can only be reversed by IETF consensus. > > would you have a pointer to where/when that IETF consensus was > established? Lars, I do not. I don't remember when the discussions occurred either -- never thought I'd need that information. If it is important, the Meetecho team might be able to tell us when those options were turned on and off, which might, in turn, let us make a good guess as to where to look. > (I'll also note that audio streams remain available for live > listening without a login.) Understood and appreciated although it isn't clear to me how someone who is not "part of the system" is expected to figure that out. In case it wasn't clear earlier, my issue is much less with the choice than with what looks to me like a trend toward decisions, ones about which some members of the community might feel (or have felt) passionate, being made out of sight and deployed so that they feel like a surprise and/or create loose ends. Even if there were no disagreement about the decision, the community is very good at catching things like the absence of an obvious way to find out about the audio and posted slides option (assuming the slides actually are posted in advance). To borrow from another discussion, it not only unreasonable for the community to expect staff to get all of those details right, it would be unreasonable for staff to expect it of themselves -- it is part of what "community" is all about. At an even higher level, the emergency situation brought on by the sudden onset of the pandemic more than justified small groups of people, including those who were part of the leadership, consulting with each other and then making decisions an an emergency basis (typically at least announcing those decisions). I don't have any idea where the consensus of the community lies, but, speaking only for myself, I'd hate to see that become a habit that is continued as we try to find a "new normal". thanks, john
