Eric,
I have a hard time memorizing and recognizing peoples faces & names in
in-person meetings. At work in the early 2000th, i often came out of meetings
with lots of new people that i wouldn't even be able to match names&faces
after the 2nd or 3rd meeting. What helped me a lot was the company directory
with its face pictures, where i could match names and faces from meeting notes.
Next meeting, socialization was a lot easier.
Then some #*^&#*@ in the company seemed to have created a web page to
vote on something like "hottest chick in the company" (i never saw it,
was just hearsay for me) using pictures from the company directory, and
soon thereafter a photography policy for the company directory was established,
defaulting to showing no photo. I came out of that thinking "the terrorists
always win".
IETF is very similar. Same struggle matching name & faces, for example when
editing meeting notes trying to change names in notes from mumbleguy1,
incomprehensible2 or so to real attendee names using the blue sheet.
So, i think it helps the work in IETF a lot, the easier it is to match names
and faces. Leadership is just faces that you much more likely would
want to recognize for the work you are doing in the IETF, otherwise nothing
special about them.
IETF does not even offer a way to voluntarily publish face pictures
unless you're in leadership or WG chair, and now with this whole thread,
it just becomes another instance of "the terrorists always win". How about
trying to support also the sensibilities of face recognition challenged
attendees like myself and offering a voluntary option to publish face
pictures for attendees ? And promoting it in the same way as promoting
knowledge about the no-photography rights ?!
Oh wait,.. i know what the answer is "different problem, lets do it another
time... like - never." *sigh*
I don't like people taking pictures of my face. But i think the utility
for such legitimate purposes outweighs my preferences.
Btw: I am fine in abolishing all IETF in-person or non-name tagged video
meetings to eliminate the need for face recognition. That would be an
appropriate response to eliminate the disadvantages of face recognition
challenged participants and would show a real committment to inclusion
on behalf of the IETF. Would also increase privacy and ease the development
of non-human participants, given all these challenges we seem to have
with humans.
[yes, the last paragraph was a cynical joke]
Its perfectly fine to only have a web page with identified access
to attendee pictures - and tracking of who looked at the web page.
Like e.g.: linkedin does (gives you tracking of who looked at your
profile page, and i think can limit access to groups).
Cheers
Toerless
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 03:07:13PM -0800, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> I don't understand the motivation for this proposal, and it has clear
> downsides in terms of discouraging participation by people who wish not to
> be photographed.
>
> Why should being a leader require you to have your picture publicly posted?
> Your appearance isn't any necessary part of the leadership function.
>
> In case it's not clear, the purpose of the text about panels is, like the
> text about large groups, a concession to practicality, not derived from the
> notion that leaders inherently have some diminished right to privacy.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> Yes, there is text about panels. But that seems insufficient. I would
> > suggest we add:
> >
> > IETF Leadership (such as IAB members, IESG members, and Working Group
> > Chairs) should understand that when they are performing their formal
> > duties they may be photographed, and those photographs may be
> > displayed in public.
> >
> > That would be in addition to the existing text about panels. Thus, it
> > would cover WG chairs and cases where for example the IAB Chair or IETF
> > chair are presenting even without a panel of others.
> >
> > I will leave it to others as to whether the example lsit of leadership
> > needs to be more comprehensive. I hope that we do not need to be more
> > specific about what we mean by performing their formal duties.
> >
> > Yours,
> > Joel
> >
