Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Jimmy Hess]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Jorge Amodio  wrote:
> admission fee waived or reduced, all the rest MUST pay, even if you
> give a talk or serve in other capacity.
> As others said you are doing a "public service" to the rest of the
> community and if you give a nice and valuable talk you will get the

You know what I would suggest.   Give presenters who committed a sufficient time
in advance an option to have free admission, and an option to pay and donate
their free admission opportunity back.

Whether something is a "public service" or not is a matter of perspective.
Attending and paying admission is presumptively a public service also.
Should one interested in performing one public service be forced to
perform another?

Assume for the sake of argument, it's a more valuable service for a
person to present
than to pay admission,   because if there's noone presenting,  then interest and
attendance fall.

As long as you are not encountering abuses such as 'faux presenters'
just presenting
for admission.

Not all public service is free to the public.  Presumably there must  be some
motivation  for a speaker to present;  sometimes that is altruistic, sometimes
that is not.   If that motivation is free admission,   but for the
community their
service is still valuable, then who am I to argue with that?


One question you could ask... would the person even be there if they were
not giving a presentation?

If they would not, then making them pay to come donate their time sounds
like a proposition that is more adverse to the presenter.

In regards to 'fairness',  waiving admission for a presenter is not unfair, if
any attendee had an equal opportunity  for proposing to present;  those
paying simply did not avail themselves   or perhaps did not have a
meaningful thing to present

> It will be really unfair for those paying (even if their companies do

--
-JH

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Majdi S. Abbas]

On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 10:19:34AM -0500, Jorge Amodio wrote:
> As others said you are doing a "public service" to the rest of the
> community and if you give a nice and valuable talk you will get the
> recognition of the NANOG community and your colleagues, and we can put
> into consideration including a gold star sticker for your service.

Field observations suggest that presenters are more likely to be
heckled than recognized for said service to the NANOG community. (c:

As hard as it can be to find good talks for the program, giving
people incentive to take time out of their busy work schedules to prepare
a good talk does not seem unreasonable.

> It will be really unfair for those paying (even if their companies do
> it for them or don't care because they have a mountain of cash) if
> there is a special benefit for some so they don't pay.

So far the speaker exemption doesn't seem to have been very
contentious unless I've missed something.

--msa

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Randy Bush]

> The SC did not receive comp registration any time while I was serving
> on it.

aha!  sorry.  my memory is not what it used to be.

> I do feel the need to suggest that Dorian/Randy are on the mark here,
> most of these people would pay anyways.

as i said, if nanog has the funds, i would support general hardship
support with a very low bar.

randy

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[jim deleskie]

I think a co-pay would be be reasonable.If I human manually did a
refund I'm sure the process could ne 'fixed'.  It would be interesting
to know how many people, based on paste events this would impact.  I
agree in that I as well suspect its a very low number.

-jim

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Jared Mauch  wrote:
> Two comments here:
>
> In the past a human would review and refund speakers if they paid.
>
> A nominal co-pay may be appropriate, even if it's just $10. Students qualify 
> for lower rates last I recall as well. We are talking about a small number of 
> people here, at most 1-2 per conference I suspect based on historical chats.
>
> Jared Mauch
>
> On Sep 2, 2011, at 11:27 AM, jim deleskie  wrote:
>
>> If a
>> members company is willing to pay anyway, then people always have the
>> option of not accepting the free entrance.  As for people 'hardship'
>> cases, how ever you want to define it, there is no revenue loss here
>> as they would be unlikely so spend $ to attend anyway if they had to
>> pay.
>

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Jared Mauch]

Two comments here:

In the past a human would review and refund speakers if they paid. 

A nominal co-pay may be appropriate, even if it's just $10. Students qualify 
for lower rates last I recall as well. We are talking about a small number of 
people here, at most 1-2 per conference I suspect based on historical chats. 

Jared Mauch

On Sep 2, 2011, at 11:27 AM, jim deleskie  wrote:

> If a
> members company is willing to pay anyway, then people always have the
> option of not accepting the free entrance.  As for people 'hardship'
> cases, how ever you want to define it, there is no revenue loss here
> as they would be unlikely so spend $ to attend anyway if they had to
> pay.

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[jim deleskie]

I have no problem with speakers getting in free.  Speakers may or may
not be active in the community and if you  want to continue to draw
quality speakers this is truly the least the community can do.  Many
conferences will pick up travel costs, or even token 'gifts' for
speakers.  As for committee members I have no problem with them
getting in free. Unless you have 50-60 free attendees at a conference
I don't expect its going to cause financial hardship on the org.  If a
members company is willing to pay anyway, then people always have the
option of not accepting the free entrance.  As for people 'hardship'
cases, how ever you want to define it, there is no revenue loss here
as they would be unlikely so spend $ to attend anyway if they had to
pay.


-jim

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Jorge Amodio  wrote:
> I agree that only those organizing or with a real need of financial
> support (folks from developing countries or from non-profit orgs or
> some students without substantial resources) could have their
> admission fee waived or reduced, all the rest MUST pay, even if you
> give a talk or serve in other capacity.
>
> As others said you are doing a "public service" to the rest of the
> community and if you give a nice and valuable talk you will get the
> recognition of the NANOG community and your colleagues, and we can put
> into consideration including a gold star sticker for your service.
>
> It will be really unfair for those paying (even if their companies do
> it for them or don't care because they have a mountain of cash) if
> there is a special benefit for some so they don't pay.
>
> My .02
> -J
>
>

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Jorge Amodio]

I agree that only those organizing or with a real need of financial
support (folks from developing countries or from non-profit orgs or
some students without substantial resources) could have their
admission fee waived or reduced, all the rest MUST pay, even if you
give a talk or serve in other capacity.

As others said you are doing a "public service" to the rest of the
community and if you give a nice and valuable talk you will get the
recognition of the NANOG community and your colleagues, and we can put
into consideration including a gold star sticker for your service.

It will be really unfair for those paying (even if their companies do
it for them or don't care because they have a mountain of cash) if
there is a special benefit for some so they don't pay.

My .02
-J

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Jared Mauch]

The SC did not receive comp registration any time while I was serving on it.  
It was possible to be comped for one of a few reasons:

1) Host
2) Speaker
3) Merit
4) B&G Sponsor (i think they got 2 comp registrations)
5) the ARIN scholarship thing.

I was on the SC and also on a panel in Dallas (the case I'm thinking of).  The 
meetings covered Feb 14th and a snowstorm that kept people from making it.  It 
was a "big deal" at the time for the merit/nanog finances.

I do feel the need to suggest that Dorian/Randy are on the mark here, most of 
these people would pay anyways.

- Jared

On Sep 1, 2011, at 8:56 PM, Randy Bush wrote:

>> For context in this discussion, how many times have you personally
>> accepted free registration in return for presenting?
> 
> no idea.  i also think i was comped for being on the SC.  like jared, i
> would have paid.
> 
> randy

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[kobi hsu]

>
> > To bring it closer to home - we give our presenters a free admission -
> > should we also stop that?
>
> i am ambivalent.  i think there is some sort of untested assumption that
> this attracts an otherwise unattracted resources we need.
>
> otoh, committees seem to attract flies.  i will not comment on their
> quality.
>

Flies, ouch. Or maybe gadflies? ;-)

>From personal experience-- volunteering through committee work is fairly
easy when NANOG is an important focus for the employer/employing group. It
is very very difficult if one's management has no interest in NANOG or its
products.

For most of the time I was on the PC, I was also a full-time student, and
needed the help of student pricing to fulfill my commitment to the
community.

Even with student pricing, however, travel and hotels each year would run
into the thousands.

Given a choice between supporting NANOG, or taking those thousands and
increasing my support to my parents... once my term was up, the parents won.

For all the griping and moaning that goes on, I do think that valuable work
goes on at NANOG. I just can't afford to participate on an individual basis.
That may or may not be a loss to the community. ;-)

_kobi

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[William Herrin]

On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Randy Bush  wrote:
>> On the flip side of this, many of our employers donate "our" time that
>> they are paying us for in order for us to serve NANOG with nary a
>> benefit.  If you take just committee calls for the PC alone, this is
>> 48 hours a year - a workweek.  Perhaps they should feel that this
>> donation nets them something.
>
> it's "public service" not "public employment"

Pay me for the honor and privilege of doing volunteer work for me?
Nice scam if you can swing it.

File this one with "pay to beta test." Not unheard of, but ungrateful.

-Bill


-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: 
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Randy Bush]

> For context in this discussion, how many times have you personally
> accepted free registration in return for presenting?

btw, i do not remember a meeting where being comped as an SC member or a
speaker affected whether i would attend or not.

[ and no, senator mccarthy, i am not now nor have i ever been a member
  of the communist party. ]

and fwiw, i would strongly support comping hardship and place a low bar
on it.

i am recently back from sigcomm, where speakers are often introduced as
"looking for a {post-doc, research, teaching} position" and where i saw
tee shirts with "to hire a post-doc, ." 

randy

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Randy Bush]

> For context in this discussion, how many times have you personally
> accepted free registration in return for presenting?

no idea.  i also think i was comped for being on the SC.  like jared, i
would have paid.

randy

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[David Temkin]

For context in this discussion, how many times have you personally accepted
free registration in return for presenting?

-Dave
 On Sep 1, 2011 8:13 PM, "Randy Bush"  wrote:
>> On the flip side of this, many of our employers donate "our" time that
>> they are paying us for in order for us to serve NANOG with nary a
>> benefit. If you take just committee calls for the PC alone, this is
>> 48 hours a year - a workweek. Perhaps they should feel that this
>> donation nets them something.
>
> it's "public service" not "public employment"
>
> randy

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Randy Bush]

> On the flip side of this, many of our employers donate "our" time that
> they are paying us for in order for us to serve NANOG with nary a
> benefit.  If you take just committee calls for the PC alone, this is
> 48 hours a year - a workweek.  Perhaps they should feel that this
> donation nets them something.

it's "public service" not "public employment"

randy

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[David Temkin]

On the flip side of this, many of our employers donate "our" time that they
are paying us for in order for us to serve NANOG with nary a benefit.  If
you take just committee calls for the PC alone, this is 48 hours a year - a
workweek.  Perhaps they should feel that this donation nets them something.

-Dave
On Sep 1, 2011 6:41 PM, "Jared Mauch"  wrote:
> I have had my registration fee refunded when I was a speaker when my
employer was happy to pay. This frustrated me when the meeting had low
registration and lost money.
>
> I'm fine with people getting it waived, but the idea of everyone showing
up for a "roll-call" so they can get in free is certainly not the case. This
is why I suggested the BoD would have the authority to waive the fee if
recommended by someone else. The reason is less important to me honestly.
>
> Then again, the bar for giving a bad talk is really low. People can just
put in that effort instead.
>
> Jared Mauch
>
> On Sep 1, 2011, at 6:12 PM, David Temkin  wrote:
>
>> Randy,
>>
>> How is that "getting paid"? Receiving services in kind?
>>
>> Don't know if you've ever done Habitat for Humanity, but you get a free
>> lunch, paid for by those who have given cash to support the cause and not
>> labor.
>>
>> To bring it closer to home - we give our presenters a free admission -
>> should we also stop that?
>>
>> -Dave
>> On Sep 1, 2011 3:27 PM, "Randy Bush"  wrote:
>>> i do not support getting paid for community service. a primrose path.
>>>
>>> randy
>>>

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Randy Bush]

> How is that "getting paid"?  

you're kidding, right?

> Don't know if you've ever done Habitat for Humanity

no.  i teach in the poor countries.  i pay my way.

> To bring it closer to home - we give our presenters a free admission -
> should we also stop that?

i am ambivalent.  i think there is some sort of untested assumption that
this attracts an otherwise unattracted resources we need.

otoh, committees seem to attract flies.  i will not comment on their
quality.

randy

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Owen DeLong]

I support conference admission for volunteers who give their time to organize
the conference, etc. (such as program committee members, steering committee
members, speakers, etc.).

I would not support other forms of remuneration or expanding the free conference
admission beyond those directly involved in organizing and/or running the
conference.

Owen

On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:12 PM, David Temkin wrote:

> Randy,
> 
> How is that "getting paid"?  Receiving services in kind?
> 
> Don't know if you've ever done Habitat for Humanity, but you get a free
> lunch, paid for by those who have given cash to support the cause and not
> labor.
> 
> To bring it closer to home - we give our presenters a free admission -
> should we also stop that?
> 
> -Dave
> On Sep 1, 2011 3:27 PM, "Randy Bush"  wrote:
>> i do not support getting paid for community service. a primrose path.
>> 
>> randy
>> 

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Jared Mauch]

I have had my registration fee refunded when I was a speaker when my employer 
was happy to pay. This frustrated me when the meeting had low registration and 
lost money. 

I'm fine with people getting it waived, but the idea of everyone showing up for 
a "roll-call" so they can get in free is certainly not the case. This is why I 
suggested the BoD would have the authority to waive the fee if recommended by 
someone else. The reason is less important to me honestly. 

Then again, the bar for giving a bad talk is really low. People can just put in 
that effort instead.

Jared Mauch

On Sep 1, 2011, at 6:12 PM, David Temkin  wrote:

> Randy,
> 
> How is that "getting paid"?  Receiving services in kind?
> 
> Don't know if you've ever done Habitat for Humanity, but you get a free
> lunch, paid for by those who have given cash to support the cause and not
> labor.
> 
> To bring it closer to home - we give our presenters a free admission -
> should we also stop that?
> 
> -Dave
> On Sep 1, 2011 3:27 PM, "Randy Bush"  wrote:
>> i do not support getting paid for community service. a primrose path.
>> 
>> randy
>> 

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[David Temkin]

Randy,

How is that "getting paid"?  Receiving services in kind?

Don't know if you've ever done Habitat for Humanity, but you get a free
lunch, paid for by those who have given cash to support the cause and not
labor.

To bring it closer to home - we give our presenters a free admission -
should we also stop that?

-Dave
On Sep 1, 2011 3:27 PM, "Randy Bush"  wrote:
> i do not support getting paid for community service. a primrose path.
>
> randy
>

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Rob Thomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi, team.

> i do not support getting paid for community service.  a primrose path.

Bravo and agreed!

Thanks,
Rob.
- --
Rob Thomas
Team Cymru
https://www.team-cymru.org/
"Say little and do much." M Avot 1:15

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iQCVAwUBTl/prlkX3QAo5sgJAQLRYQP8DzUc9mjKMDFVe3QE7udfTa+pWKV4TbcQ
lM9EgatUnkyEPxahCAyAH9VKsM3YLJ0Brhnk8aJqzH4doXElKRijMw3A9DTxG+Qx
+KY+niCXQtF95XuK+kVcQsUBZHp/2evVr54B4CdMUZ9IywpB8w+FcMo6QS8sCttk
4kj7pqmigQU=
=C8gq
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Randy Bush]

i do not support getting paid for community service.  a primrose path.

randy