Do we really want to debate this now and in this list?
My suggestion was looking into “hopefully” we don’t start that way with the first case Singapore, because then I will must take all the points in the “Topics” section of the web site you suggested.
Just to name a few (not in any particular order), which are relevant to countries that we visited already, and some that we visit often:
1) Freedom of Speech
2) Death penalty
3) Torture
4) Justice
5) LGBT rights
6) Free use of guns
As said, if we go that way, we will end up in reducing to the half the number of possible countries from the ones we have already been.
I think EKR's point is that if we don't make any distinction among these, we'll end up only having virtual meetings because we can't go anywhere. Human Rights Watch has a page on every major country highlighting abuses there.
I think more to the point, it's about creating an inclusive 'place' to get work done. Only one was a matter of inclusivity.
Kathleen
We need to make smart distinction here. Yes, issues of justice and torture are very important. But they are pretty unlikely to affect an IETF meeting.
--Richard
Saludos,
Jordi
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxx>
Responder a: <ekr@xxxxxxxx> Fecha: martes, 24 de mayo de 2016, 16:18
Para: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: IETF discussion list <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
>It seems like generally most countries have some human rights issues to complain about. Could you please indicate which countries we would be free to visit under your proposed rule?
>-Ekr
>
>P.S. You might find https://www.hrw.org/ useful here.
>
>
>
>On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:50 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>In the context:
>
>“IF” we decide not to go to Singapore, then we must avoid going to ANY country that is against human rights, including death penalty.
>
>
>Saludos,
>Jordi
>
>
>-----Mensaje original-----
>De: Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxx>
>Responder a: <ekr@xxxxxxxx>
>Fecha: martes, 24 de mayo de 2016, 15:46
>Para: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>CC: IETF discussion list <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
>Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
>
>>
>>
>>On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 5:25 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>I will go further:
>>
>> The same must apply for any country where death penalty is still applied.
>>
>>
>>
>>So I take it you oppose meeting in Singapore?
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Singapore
>>
>>
>>-Ekr
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Saludos,
>>Jordi
>>
>>
>>-----Mensaje original-----
>>De: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> en nombre de Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Responder a: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Fecha: martes, 24 de mayo de 2016, 14:22
>>Para: <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
>>Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
>>
>>>+1
>>>
>>>Saludos,
>>>Jordi
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Mensaje original-----
>>>De: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> en nombre de Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>Organización: People's Front Against WWW
>>>Responder a: <swmike@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>Fecha: martes, 24 de mayo de 2016, 14:09
>>>Para: Harish Pillay <harish.pillay@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>CC: <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
>>>Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 23 May 2016, Harish Pillay wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ever used. That is my world experience. When I travel to the US and
>>>>> I see people carrying weapons, how am I supposed to react/respond?
>>>>
>>>>Let me +1 this here, I am seriously scared for my life whenever I interact
>>>>with law enforcement officers in the US, just from the fact that I know
>>>>they have to interact with armed people all the time and have to be
>>>>cautious that anyone they interact with has a decent likelyhood to be
>>>>armed.
>>>>
>>>>http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-law-basics/states-that-have-stand-your-ground-laws.html
>>>>
>>>>If we can't go to Singapore because they happen to have anti-LGBT laws on
>>>>the books, then I suggest we do not have any further meetings in USA at
>>>>all, especially not states that have stand-your-ground laws on their
>>>>books.
>>>>
>>>>As opposed to Singapore where anti-LGBT laws aren't really enforced, in
>>>>USA these kinds of laws seems to be on the rise instead of things getting
>>>>better.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@xxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>>**********************************************
>>>IPv4 is over
>>>Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>>>http://www.consulintel.es
>>>The IPv6 Company
>>>
>>>This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>