On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 15:28 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 1) We don't have to go to any particular location. There has been an
> assumption made by people in this discussion that sometimes when we pick
> locations with particularly expensive hotels, we'll get particularly
> expensive meetings. That's great except that we were the ones who chose
> to go to those locations.
> If we can't meet our cost targets at a location, go somewhere else.
>
Sam makes a really good point here. We didn't have to go to Taipei.
For some reason we chose to go to Taipei. When the IAOC was looking at
places years ago was the dollar so strong that the hotel was cheap - I
doubt it. It was probably just as expensive back then. It should have
just been dropped from the list and the city as wel. The hotel (and
host if there was on) could/should have been told - sorry too expensive.
There was never a requirement to go to Taipei.
There was never a requirement to go to Maastricht with the 3 train
changes and hotels spread out and not under a single roof, awful
cancellation policy (unless you booked it separately from the IETF).
Nice place, but no one ordered us to go to Maastricht.
I liked Hiroshima, but even it was not easy to get to (multiple trains).
We seem to be limiting attendance to people from large companies just so
that we can meet everywhere in the world. If it isn't relatively
inexpensive then we say, sorry we can't go there. So what. We don't
have to visit every country.
I know that this is blasphemous but why can't we meet in just a couple
of the same places over and over again -- yeah it's boring for those
that want to be a tourist, but I go to work and would prefer a venue
that has good/easy access (major airport nearby) with a "cheapish" hotel
and a decent cancellation policy.
geoff
PS - Lets just go to Minneapolis 3 times a year - bet we can get a great
rate and the US dollar is on-sale!
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
