[J3] [EXTERNAL] (SC22WG5.6240) 2022 WG5 meeting

Mon Jun 22 08:46:59 EDT 2020

I have looked a little bit into hosting a meeting in the DC area, either at NASA HQ or at Goddard.      Both present some annoying challenges for hosting international visitors.    (And if someone from a “designated country” were to join, it would become truly painful.)

Goddard is out in the suburbs and would generally require cars to get to/from the the hotel,  and only TGIF is a reasonable walk from the hotel.  NASA HQ is downtown which presents many more options for commuting and dining.

My major reticence is that if the meeting is in DC I would be forced to commute from the suburbs each day.  (NASA only pays if the meeting is more than 50 miles away.)   With traffic (if there is traffic again by then) that would be about 1.5 hours in each direction.   But I certainly understand the appeal of the location and would be willing to "take one for the team” if that is what is wanted.   (May even just decide to spring for the hotel out of my own pocket.)

- Tom

On Jun 20, 2020, at 11:04 PM, Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org<mailto:j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>> wrote:

Vipul,

I very much agree that Las Vegas is not a good location.

If WG5 or PL22.3 is ever considering hosting another meeting in Las Vegas, we would be happy to arrange for that meeting to be hosted either at an NVIDIA facility or in DC at no cost to the committee, with as many meeting rooms as needed, A/V support, catering, comparable hotel room rates, cheap flights, and easy access.

Pasadena would be a fine location.

No one has been excluded. No one was "cancelled", censured, or punished. No punitive actions have been taken.

Most of those involved in the recent discussions chose to participate in a calm, honest, and frank discussion. Some did not.

I hope no one feels the sword of Damocles is hanging over their head. But I do hope that we all are giving extra thought and care to our conduct and how we express ourselves.

--
Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash
US Programming Language Standards (PL22) Chair
ISO C++ Library Evolution Chair
CppCon and C++Now Program Chair
CUDA Core C++ Libraries (Thrust, CUB, libcu++) Lead @ NVIDIA
--

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 16:06 Vipul Parekh via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org<mailto:j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>> wrote:
Under better circumstances, WG5 and J3 would undoubtedly have received an offer from Van to have Pasadena, CA as the location for the meeting, one that he had made many, many times previously but which was never accepted.  I believe it was to his anguish based on what I had discerned even with my limited interactions.

Should ISO and INCITS and by extension, WG5 and J3, really intend to advance on the diversity and inclusivity (D&I) front generally and especially on the gender and other minority representation globally, then it should immediately take note of many, many diverse points:

1) Honest and frank discussions and an environment that can foster them is a must,

2) Las Vegas, given its image and all that it 'sells' as possible, has considerable disadvantages from a D&I perspective.  Arguments in favor of this location, particularly by those who have an overwhelming amount of "soft" influence on the functionings of the committee, ostensibly on the basis of cheap flights, hotels, and easy access, fail to take into account the concerns of other potential attendees with differences on the diversity spectrum have with the LV location,

3) Pasadena, CA has a considerable number of attractive qualities that have been overlooked until now, unfortunately.

4) It is a no-brainer any consideration of true inclusivity begins with the notion of not being exclusive.  And no one sensing or fearing - consciously or unconsciously - they will be excluded or worse shunned or abused or otherwise 'canceled' on account of their ancestry or their words directed elsewhere or being insufficiently penitent even when their *actions* generally and specifically are otherwise conducive to the goals of D&I.  I think what transpired recently with the censure following the discussions regarding the ISO gender survey has laid a seed of 'cancel culture' that played into the exclusion.  I think this will harm the effort at improved D&I with WG5 and J3.  Following the recent email threads and what has transpired and given how I perceive and comprehend things that are ever so orthogonal to the developing 'orthodoxy' on so many aspects currently, I can feel the sword of Damocles hanging over my head too ever so sharply and the clock ticking toward my own 'cancellation'.  I don't believe true advancement in D&I is possible if matters remain as they are - organizations may achieve some numerical/superficial measures, but not real progress.

5) Both an informal and formal effort to address and overcome the exclusion (and which strikes directly against any and all D&I initiatives) that has taken place, regardless of whether it was voluntary, will go a long way toward addressing future issues as well as easing the immediate concerns of someone like me.  I feel a concerted effort to bring Van and JPL 'back in the fold', one that might begin with a gesture and overture followed possibly by genuine initiative and acceptance to have Pasadena as the location of the next WG5 meeting will be an act of 'healing' for all that will go a long way toward fostering D&I.  Perhaps this effort is underway, kudos if it is.

6) One can credibly argue an organization such as ISO is motivated per its "environmental, social and governance" ESG charter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental,_social_and_corporate_governance<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Environmental-2C-5Fsocial-5Fand-5Fcorporate-5Fgovernance&d=DwMFaQ&c=ApwzowJNAKKw3xye91w7BE1XMRKi2LN9kiMk5Csz9Zk&r=EDCdNzkccJ25Co3sjWrr1HlJQ3_CoIFWfekFE1ulcLI&m=x5sa0-sFltkSG7Hbvdq0uyjMTXZa3pqxNxiD2wgNBBc&s=B5fAdnzxjKsKhonkjBjBsJf31FTuVwCZAlzAI-biSpM&e=>) to take various actions such as the one which led to the recent gender survey.
    * Travel, especially airline travel, retains a heavy environmental footprint with carbon and pollutants.
     * From a social perspective, recent WG5 and J3 emails themselves provided an instance of a case of someone of a different gender being hesitant to travel; there is considerable evidence involving gender and parenthood and diminished in-person conference/meeting attendance.
With both environmental and social considerations, I hope all WG5 future meetings will be dual-mode and they will permit and enable *virtual* and in-person attendees to participate and contribute equitably.  For WG5 and J3 to make this happen successfully is another challenge it must willingly and immediately accept if they wish to be truly virtuous in their signal to improve D&I.

Regards,
Vipul Parekh

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 8:15 PM Steve Lionel via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org<mailto:j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>> wrote:
All:

It's time to look for volunteers to host the 2022 WG5 meeting, which is,
by our alternation-convention, to be in North America. Dan has offered
(and received permission) to host us at Mesa Labs in Boulder, Colorado.
As wonderful as that is, I'd be pleased if someone who hasn't hosted
recently (or ever) to step up - Dan hosted us in 2016. Don't be shy!

Steve

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20200622/661250eb/attachment-0001.htm>