Subject: [Venue-selection] Singapore

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 16:39:00 -0400

After some sober consideration following Ted's compelling complaint at the
plenary, the conclusion I've come to is that while the situation in
Singapore sucks, and the idea of having to go somewhere with less good
human rights laws than we now, newly, have in the U.S. may suck, this is
not a good reason to cancel the Singapore visit.   This is not a minor
screwup, but is it not a major enough screwup to justify the expenditure of
resources that would be required to move the venue elsewhere.

It may be a reason to not consider Singapore in the future.   It can be
argued that we have enough options in Asia that going to a country that has
any restrictions on LGBT folks is inappropriate.   Indeed, I would argue
that this is the case.   I hope that Singapore eventually changes these
laws, but as long as they are on the books they should not be considered
for future IETFs, IMHO.   The counterargument that was raised, and that I
think is also valid, is that at the same time that we would be advantaging
non-SG LGBT folks by not going, we would be disadvantaging SG LGBT folks.
If the venue selection committee were to advance that as a reason for
considering Singapore in the future, I would not personally object.

Full disclosure, though: this simply isn't a problem for me.   I do not
_think_ it is an actual problem for others--none of us have to bring our
families.   But I think my opinion on this probably weighs less heavily
than that of those who are effected.   So this should be taken more as
support for the proposed decision as it affects the people who would have
to do the hard work to change venues at this late date, rather than as a
statement of non-support for the concerns Ted raised.