On 02/05/2015 02:29 AM, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> On 04/02/15 22:59, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>
>> Could frame this differently? The normal framing (above) often ends up
>> with an assumption that everyone must eat meat, with only a limited
>> set-aside for vegetarians. This results in overconsumption of meat: it
>> forces normal people to eat meat in order to avoid running out of
>> vegetarian dishes for the vegetarians.
>
> While I am in the group that sometimes wished they could eat the
> vegetarian dish, because it looked tastier, or because they wanted to
> skip meat one day, I really don't agree with your proposal.
>
> No dietary restrictions means what it means, not that meat is mandatory.
> Lacto-ovo-vegetarian is by definition a dietary restriction, no matter
> how you frame it.
OTOH we could change the question.
IIRC there was some discussion to offer less meat. I don't think we should
offer mandatory meat/fish every lunch/dinner. But if somebody think that
eating meat/fish every meal is a MUST, we could add "must eat meat/fish at
every meal" as restriction. This could be added later, when we have more
information, and in any case not the default.
I'm also in favour to book more vegetarian menus, and offer meat only to the
first 60-80% of carnivore people (as first served basis), which could help
me, tincho and many others to have a mixed diet.
ciao
cate
_______________________________________________
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
