Subject: [hrpc] speakers canceled, suggestions requested

From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 22:25:08 +0200

Hi all,

Unfortunately both our speakers for the hrpc session (Francesca Musiani
and Sarah Spiekerman) have canceled their presentation for the hrpc
session due to timezone constraints.

It would be great if others could help us suggest (and find) two other
speakers that could help us broaden our horizon and get a better
understanding of the relationship between human rights and standards in
specific and technology in general.

All suggestions would be appreciated.

Best,

Niels
-- 
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9

---

From: avri doria <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 18:29:59 -0400

Hi,

I think that we could well spend the meeting discussing the remaining
open issues in draft-irtf-hrpc-research-03.txt. 

I have avoided starting the last call because I do not think have have
reached a stable consensus point with the document, though I do see the
changes being made. I must admit that I still do not see consensus and
still do not hear enough voices to let me figure out where the rough is.

In prep I would like to build of list of still contentious points and
walk through them in the face to face situation.  Would that seem ok to
the rest of you?

thanks

avri

On 27-Oct-16 16:25, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:49:34 +0100

> walk through them in the face to face situation.  Would that seem ok to

Yes. Replacing speakers with issue-resolution does sound a bit
more boring but much better use of f2f time;-)

Ta,
S.

---

From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 21:44:21 -0700

I was hoping to get to RGLC sooner than that, but I'd be definitely
down to have more of a working session too, as I think we can work
through a lot of this better synchronously f2f. best, Joe

-- 
Joseph Lorenzo Hall
Chief Technologist, Center for Democracy & Technology [https://www.cdt.org]
1401 K ST NW STE 200, Washington DC 20005-3497
e: [email-masked], p: 202.407.8825, pgp: https://josephhall.org/gpg-key
Fingerprint: 3CA2 8D7B 9F6D DBD3 4B10  1607 5F86 6987 40A9 A871

Tech Prom, CDT's Annual Dinner, is April 20, 2017! https://cdt.org/annual-dinner

---

From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 21:45:09 -0700

although I suspect Stephane may have particularly good ideas for
Asia-based HR-relevant potential speakers... maybe someone ping him?
best, Joe

---

From: avri doria <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 08:02:31 -0400

Hi,

> through a lot of this better synchronously f2f. best, Joe

I was too.  But there seem to still be unresolved issues, and I think
that we have to both have sufficient review in the RG and have settled
issues before going out for LC.  And while I know we can have multiple
LC, I think it is better to have something the group believes is ready
for publication before starting that first LC. 

The point of any all reviews is to improves the document. I think that
the pre LC conversations we are having now are helping to tighten the
draft and improve it.

RFC 5743 indicates that in the IRSG : "reviewers should assess whether
sufficient editorial and technical review has been conducted within the
RG and the requirements of this process document have been met, for
example, reviewers should evaluate whether the breadth of review the
document has received is adequate for the material at hand."

I want to make sure we meet that criteria before submitting it.

> more boring but much better use of f2f time;-)

As the co-chair shepherding the doc in the RG, I have the honor of being
the 'bit more boring' co-chair. : )

avri
avri

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

---

From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 17:06:01 -0400

> the 'bit more boring' co-chair. : )

All this being said, it would be great to have at least one speaker
with a modest slot (15-20m)... I've heard a few people (I think
Stephane was one of them) say that we "get different perspectives
about human rights issues in Asia when meetings are held there".

I probably have a very sparse set of contacts for human rights issues
in networking technologies based out of the Asian/ASEAN -- and those I
do have would probably be somewhat controversial. It would be great to
try and get someone who could speak to protocols and human rights and
then do the balance of the session in "bit more boring" mode. :)

best, Joe