On 10/27/10 6:32 PM, Joe Provo wrote: >> When we were discussing the fee structure in August and September, I >> used this argument, and nobody could offer me a convincing counter >> argument. My argument was... If we are offering a "fellow" membership >> for someone that has contributed a extraordinary amount to the >> community, then are we saying that students are more important to the >> community than people that would be regular members? That students >> contribute more to the value of NewNOG than people that are not students? > > Growing the base. As a community, we routinely gripe about the existing > training (both the now-extant academic track and vendor-specific in > workplaces) and from where the next generation will come. Seems that > directly engaging thw student population is better than indirectly > hoping that the right moths are attracted to our flames. None of this has anything to do with GOVERNANCE. Growing the community is fine. I see no more value in students being members of the GOVERNANCE function of a corporation than I see anyone else. I'm not saying that they don't have value. I am saying that they have no more or less value than anyone that has to pay full rate.
-Sean _______________________________________________ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
