Daniel Kahn Gillmor <d...@fifthhorseman.net> writes: > On Thu 2015-02-05 03:13:46 -0500, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: >> On 02/05/2015 02:29 AM, Martín Ferrari wrote: >>> 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. > > Can you think of a better way to frame it so that we can avoid the > every-meal-has-meat baseline assumption that the current framing > implies?
I fail to see why you think that the current proposed wording of "no dietary restrictions" implies that every meal will have meat. I don't see anything in this option that guarantees you meat on every meal or even on every day. I also don't think we have to offer this at all. I at least never heared of a serious diet which requires someone to eat meat every day. We also don't offer cheese or apples or whatever every day as an option. If there are special needs, then there is always the option to contact the organizers. > >>> 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. > > Right, what i was proposing was the people who have no dietary > restrictions should be OK with getting a meal that is (as a baseline) > lacto-ovo vegetarian; those who have a restriction that requires them to > eat meat could identify themselves so that they could be sure to have > meat. > > The people who are providing us with food will need guidance about what > to prepare in any case; being clear to them about the needs and desires > of the group will help them to help feed us sensibly. > >> 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. > > Sure, adding "must eat meat/fish at every meal" to the current options > would be a fine step to take. I would strongly oppose to add such an option. This request just seems insane to me. The option "no restrictions" should just include as much meat the organiziers and the caterer thinks is reasonable. I'm all in favor of not offering meat on every meal and for ordering more vegetarian meals than the minimum number required to feed those that indicated that they only eat vegetarian (or vegan) food. Gaudenz
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
