>
>
> On 4-Dec-2006, at 17:39, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>
> > If you agree that cutting cost is a secondary component to fixing
> > the root cause, why not start with the root cause?
>
> The SC felt that fixing the immediate symptom (that costs exceed
> revenue, and the reserve fund is shrinking, and has been doing so for
> the last year or so) was pretty important too, hence the recently-
> announced attendance fee increase. This isn't to say that we aren't
> also paying close attention to the programme, and to sponsorship
> funding.
I don't disagree with the funding increase. I already stated that
and I consider NANOG to be beyond that. You've got statements from
people saying that $450 is too much for what they are getting and
I think that is "the" concern to consider. Merit already announced
the increase. It's not going backwards, and I doubt that prices will
ever be lowered. That makes less sense. If there is a glut of cash,
Merit should spend it in upgrading and making themselves better, but
I don't see that coming soon either, but if it does, I'll support
keeping the prices the same for good value.
> > I'd like to see some fine tuning of what it is we do around
> > groupings like:
> >
> > [tracks]
>
> The question of whether to run the main session in tracks has come up
> many times, and I don't believe there has ever been definitive
> support either for or against them. Those who have experience of
> conferences with tracks tell us to beware, since a complicated
> timetable and extensive overlaps between sessions cause irritation
> ("I paid 500 elbonian dollars to be here, and everything I'm
> interested is happening at the same time, I think, although perhaps
> I'm confusing track T1 with track G17. Either way, this sucks.").
Not really tracks. A reduction in the littany of things that we're open
to receiving as input to content. A lot of it isn't relevant any
longer.
> I can think of many people I know who would be interested in tracks
> in more than one of your categories, for example.
They're just suggestions. I think that we're suffering from a bit
of "why we can't" vs. "why we can" attitude.
What are your suggestions to improve attendance?
-M<
