Responding to the original question: Indeed, MTGVENUE is the place to discuss the impacts of this and other potential issues to how we select future meeting locations. Now would be a great time to read the documents and participate the discussion. For what it is worth, the IAOC and its meetings committee are also tracking the situation, including understanding specific impacts. And obviously this is a developing situation and the long term is more interesting than this week’s particular issue. As for possible other reactions — maybe, but it isn’t as obvious. Clearly, I think we all are unhappy about this development. And I have not met anybody at the IETF who wouldn’t stand for open participation. SM posted ACM’s statement. But, if I look again at the crystal ball of obvious predictions, I wouldn’t be surprised if recent trends would at some point also generate some Internet-related bad policy suggestions. This is just my 0.02μBTC but I personally would want to prioritise putting my time to dealing with those situations, be it about making statements or developing some tech to help the situation. As we have done in the case of pervasive monitoring, for instance. But again, just my personal opinion. Jari
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail