-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 9/23/09 10:05 PM, Ole Jacobsen wrote: > There is absolutely NO intention or requirement to have any approval > process for agendas or materials by a third party for this (proposed) > meeting. What do we mean by "third party" here? It seems risky to *not* have some review process for the slides and oral presentations made during working group sessions, plenaries, and other official meetings, since those sure seem to fit the definition of "the Group's activities, visual or audio presentations at the conference", which are explicitly covered by the restrictions described in the original email. Perhaps that review would not be completed by a "third party" but by a team of IETF participants who have been specially instructed in what does or does not count as "defamation against the Government of the People's Republic of China", "disrespect to the Chinese culture", "violat[ion of] any laws of the People's Republic of China", or "topics regarding human rights or religion". But to not perform any kind of review seems to open the IETF to additional risk. Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkq7m7IACgkQNL8k5A2w/vwqvQCg6lng0j2dev0k6vbsgldVXcdL H20An342v0uS0jSNm/u4uHnA74xfH/kf =rbo4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf