Hi Doug, I'm not sure where you are getting with your comment. I would count myself as belonging into both of your categories. The IETF should not go to the PRC (or any other country with a similarly questionable human rights, free speech, and Internet restriction record) on principle, AND it would not be prudent to meet under the contractual terms as communicated. I would be surprised if many of those who feel uncomfortable with the PRC as a venue on principle can agree to the contractual terms, for the simple reason that the contractual terms spell out an IMO despiseable policy against free speech. If this were a vote, I would object quite strongly on not having my vote counted as a member of your second group, just because I also belong to the first group. Obviously, I'm speaking in a private capacity only. I think that the ISOC and IETF officials have indicated sufficiently clearly those few emails where they spoke in an official capacity, and I assume that all other mails have been sent in private capacity as well. (Personally, if I had a leadership role in a large, semi-political organization, I would not have argued strongly in favor or against a proposal on which the leadership asks the community for input. Not even in a private capacity. But that's a matter of taste.) Stephan On 10/10/09 9:18 PM, "Doug Ewell" <doug@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ole Jacobsen <ole at cisco dot com> wrote: >> Objectionable hotel clauses notwithstanding, some folks have argued >> that we should basically boycott China and not hold a meeting there >> for reasons ranging from Internet policies to Human Rights. > I've only heard a handful of people argue against > going to China on principle. Several more have expressed concerns about > going to China on the basis of unprecedented contractual terms. > Statistically at least, it might be proper to treat the first group as > outliers in this discussion, rather than as representative of the second > group. I'd sure like to see a clearer indication of whether people in > positions of authority are expressing opinions in that capacity, or just as > individuals. That request is not just for you, of course. -- Doug Ewell | > Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | > item-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing > list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf