Subject: [68ATTENDEES] smoking / non-smoking proposal

From: Rohan Mahy <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:48:11 +0100

Hi,

I have a concrete proposal regarding the smoking / non-smoking  
discussion.

I suggest a voluntary moratorium on smoking in the bottom floor  
(where most of the meeting rooms are), including the toilets, in  
exchange for a voluntary moratorium on whining about people smoking  
in the smoking areas of the mezzanine.

This would keep smoke from blowing into most of the meeting rooms  
that non-smokers cannot just avoid and where we are getting our work  
done. It is unlikely that non-IETFers will be hanging out down there  
to smoke.
It also acknowledges that smoking is allowed in some parts of the  
hotel, that smoking in this country is allowed in designated public  
areas inside, that asking smokers to just go outside in this climate  
when it is allowed by the hotel is inconsiderate, and that we cannot  
ask non-IETFers for their cooperation with this proposal. The  
mezzanine is common space.  It is not far away, and it is indoors.

thanks,
-rohan
(a non-smoker from the almost republic of California)

_______________________________________________
68ATTENDEES mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/68attendees

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:55:41 -0700

At 3:48 PM +0100 3/19/07, Rohan Mahy wrote:

>  asking smokers to just go outside in this climate when it is 
> allowed by the hotel is inconsiderate

It may be, but asking people who have physical allergies, breathing 
difficulties, etc. to spend all day in a smoky environment is far 
worse.  It is a disregard for physical health of others in preference 
for one's own personal convenience.

Cultural norms do evolve over time.  In civilized countries we no 
longer tolerate slavery, stocks, or physical abuse.
-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
Democracy is a form of government that substitutes election by the
incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.
                                                      --G. B. Shaw

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:55:41 -0700

---

From: Avri Doria <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 18:22:06 +0100

> longer tolerate slavery, stocks, or physical abuse.

and these are of a par with smoking?

i have only experienced one out of 3 and would argue that the  
comparison is one of apples and hammers.

a.
ex-defensive smoker

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 17:30:11 +0000

> and these are of a par with smoking?

No, they're not as bad.
 
-- 
Tim

---

From: "Eric Gray \(LO/EUS\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:12:25 -0500

Tim,

	I don't think I agree on the slavery thing, but in 
comparison with having someone who obviously doesn't give
a darn about their own health blowing their particular 
favorite form of chemical weaponry in my face - I long 
for the good old days of simple torture and abuse...

--
Eric Gray
Principal Engineer
Ericsson  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Chown [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 1:30 PM
> To: Avri Doria
> Cc: Randall Gellens; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [68ATTENDEES] smoking / non-smoking proposal
>

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 18:31:03 +0000

> for the good old days of simple torture and abuse...

I meant from the choice perspective... people get the secondary smoke from 
the smokers and have to put up with it.   

I have no problem with smokers, just let those of us who don't want to
risk our health have clean air, and give the smokers somewhere they can
indulge in their habit without affecting others :)

-- 
Tim

---

From: "Arnoud van Wijk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:52:53 +0100

AMEN

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Chown [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: maandag 19 maart 2007 19:31
To: Eric Gray (LO/EUS)
Cc: Randall Gellens; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [68ATTENDEES] smoking / non-smoking proposal

-- 
Tim

---

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 00:18:08 +0100

Tim Chown writes:
> risk our health have clean air, and give the smokers somewhere they 
> can indulge in their habit without affecting others :)

Visiting .no not long ago, I was _greatly_ pleased that a restaurant we 
visited had ~25 different cognacs and armagnacs. I would never have 
been able to choose from such a list if the after-dinner cigarette were 
still legal.

Imagine how many good slivovices you could get at any restaurace here in 
Prague if the after-dinner cigarette were outlawed here, too. And you 
could enjoy that slivovice with a good concience, since while you might 
harm your own liver, you would not harm any bystanders. ;)

Arnt