Re: Proposed Photography Policy - Transparency and Leadership

[Ted Lemon <mellon@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mar 5, 2018, at 10:46 PM, Toerless Eckert <tte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Right. and i did not content that goal of a photo policy. But
for that matter, we can write whatever we want into that policy,
it doesn't have to be related to harrassment/intimidation. That
was my point.

I do not believe that policies about IETF meetings actually require or should require IETF consensus.   The IESG runs the IETF meeting.  The IESG has access to confidential information that would not be appropriate to share with the IETF as a whole. That's the job we appoint them to do.

So the proposed policy is being put forward so that we can comment on it, but "we" can't write "whatever we want" into it.   If you think there is something that is unclear or problematic about the policy, of course you should say what, and perhaps "send text."

But as far as I can tell, and please forgive me if I missed it—the thread has been long—you haven't done that.  We're talking about something somebody said about the policy, not about the policy.