Another thing to put in the pros and cons: this would set a precedent for future meetings. This map reflects the current situation worldwide: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_same-sex_marriage#/media/File:World_laws_pertaining_to_homosexual_relationships_and_expression.svg BR, Jose > -----Mensaje original----- > De: Recentattendees [mailto:recentattendees-bounces@xxxxxxxx] En nombre de > IAOC Chair > Enviado el: jueves, 26 de mayo de 2016 0:08 > Para: IETF Announcement List <ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx> > CC: recentattendees@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx > Asunto: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100 > > All, > > In the IAOC's previous message on this topic we stated that the IAOC believed that > it is possible to hold a successful meeting in Singapore, and that meeting in > Singapore is the best option for IETF 100. This statement was based on several > factors, including evaluation of the site based on the requirements and process now > being updated and tracked in draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process- > 02. In particular, this included consulting with the additional information sources > identified in the document (specialty travel services, etc), and no specific issues > were identified as to actual situation in Singapore. More detail on the information we > have to hand is provided below. > > Additional arguments have come forward since our earlier messages, which leads > us to continue exploring. The IETF Chair has been in touch with the meeting host, > which is obviously another factor in whether we can/should move. But we need to > make a decision, so this message contains such information as we have at present. > We understand that it is difficult to express a view about what to do in the absence > of known alternatives; but we do not know what the alternatives are now, and we > need urgently to make a decision, so we are sharing the incomplete information we > have in the interests of transparency. > > > Laying this out in a pro/con format: > > > Not Singapore: > -------------- > > If we cancel the contract we have for Singapore for IETF 100, the onward positive > impacts include: > > . We might have the opportunity to establish the meeting in a venue that > permits more IETF participants to be comfortable being present and engaging in a > celebration of this milestone meeting, which is important to some. > > > > If we cancel the contract we have for Singapore for IETF 100, the onward negative > impacts include: > > . Losing approximately $80,000 (USD) hotel agreement cancellation fee[1] > > . Losing up to approximately $150,000 (USD) in Singapore government > incentives [2] > > . Re-prioritizing people time to find a new location (the IAD, Secretariat staff) > who have full plates for lining up other future meetings; there’s an unknown amount > of impact in terms of how that impacts *other* meetings (N.B.: some of this effort is > already underway to obtain the information on possible alternatives and outline the > pros/cons outlined here). > > . Likelihood of IETF 100 in Asia is very small — we have few prospects and > it takes us months to get all the pieces aligned to get to a signed contract in Asia > (Singapore took over a year). This would create additional challenges for our Asian > community members (travel distance, visas). > > . Possible shift of dates — to be able to find a venue elsewhere that works > > We have some wiggle room in the point about time to find a new venue insofar as it > would be easiest to use a North American site that we have used before. If we > have to consider non-North American, and/or new venues where a site visit is > needed, effort and cost will be higher. > > Note, we should only cancel the Singapore contract once we know that an > alternative venue, that is acceptable to community, is ready to put under contract. > The cost of cancellation ($80k now) goes up to $192k if we don’t cancel before > November 2016 (i.e., a few months from now). > > > We do have to give the hotel a reason for canceling our contract: > > Reasons for Cancellation of IETF 100 Meeting in Singapore, and the IAOC > understands that to be: > > “ Singapore laws against same-sex relationships between men and > preventing the recognition of same-sex marriages could create > difficulties for same-sex partners and their children; these have > discouraged affected members of our community from participating > at the IETF meeting in November of 2017 and have also influenced > others to decline to attend in principled solidarity with them. > > > Accordingly, the IETF has decided to postpone indefinitely the meeting > in Singapore and is pursuing alternative venues.” > > > > If we stick with Singapore for IETF 100: > ---------------------------------------- > > If we keep the contract we have for Singapore for IETF 100, the onward positive > impacts include: > > . we have a functional meeting venue set for our 3rd meeting of 2017 > > . meeting site research resources can remain focused on filling in the > remaining gaps in the 3-4 year timeframe > > . we don’t have the financial hit of the cancellation fee, and possible loss of > government incentives > > If we keep the contract we have for Singapore for IETF 100, the onward negative > impacts include: > > . we have a meeting at a location where some community members will > perceive themselves as unwelcome and unsafe, unable to bring family > > . possibly fewer attendees than we might otherwise expect — which is a > consideration for both getting work done and financial reasons (registration fees per > person) > > > > > > > > The above is the practical information as we can best scope it. > > > If you would like to provide some considered feedback on this matter, please feel > free to send it to venue-selection@xxxxxxxx . Please note that mailing list is a > PUBLICLY archived “drop box” [3]. > > > Leslie Daigle, for the IAOC. > > > [1] The cancellation fee can be recovered if it is used as a deposit at a later meeting > with those hotels in Singapore, if it is before 2020; for this discussion, it’s perhaps > best to consider it gone. > > [2] Government business incentives are not unusual; we might obtain these in > another country hosting IETF 100, but we are late to be expecting incentives and > opportunities for good deals, and are unlikely to get this in a North America venue. > > [3] The venue-selection mailing list is not open for subscription, and it is not intended > to archive dynamic conversations (i.e., don’t cc it on an e-mail discussion thread, > because there will be too many addressees and your mail won’t go through). > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Leslie Daigle > Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises LLC > ldaigle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Recentattendees mailing list > Recentattendees@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/recentattendees
