There is a key difference between a f2f meeting and a remote meeting that impacts this perspective. And, that is the networking and opportunity for hallway discussions on technical topics that can help you do a better job for whomever might be paying you to do work, even if they're not sponsoring your participation at the meeting. Indeed, for some of us that self sponsor, we get far more value out of that activity than we do the sessions themselves.
I had mentioned in a previous email the notion that rather than a fixed fee that one could register and make a donation in lieu of a fee. Following along this proposed model maybe the registration is setup such that there is a recommended donation to participate in the meeting, that gives folks flexibility. I know other non-profits that run their conferences that way.
Mary.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 1:59 PM Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen=40me.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Barbara,
I was going to suggest something very similar, recognizing that we have more or
less 2 classes of attendees; those who “always” attend in person and those who
never do so for whatever reasons. Since it is reasonable to assume that the “always”
crowd already had Madrid in their budget (private or corporate), it would seem
to follow that Virtual Madrid is indeed going to represent significant savings over
a normal meeting.
If we were to add a box with something like:
[x] I’d like to contribute an additional amount to support remote participants (etc)
… which lets you add an to the “shopping cart” during registration.
This would indeed be a very nice experiment!
Ole
> On 11 Jun 2020, at 11:42, STARK, BARBARA H <bs7652@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> If the fee waiver programme were uncapped then would you still regard that as a bandaid?
>> Jay
>
> I'm going to reply at this point in the thread with some thoughts I haven't seen expressed yet.
> Much of the commentary against registration fees has come from or on behalf of people who struggle to pay the fees.
> Much of the commentary for registration fees has come from people who do not struggle to pay the fees.
>
> As someone who doesn't struggle to pay the fee (because my employer finds it a significant savings over what would have been paid), but who recognizes that others do struggle, what I would have preferred would be:
>
> Put a statement on the registration page:
>
> IETF needs to raise $515,145 to pay for costs that would normally have been covered by in-person registration fees. See https://www.ietf.org/blog/ietf108-registration-fees/ for more details.. We request that those who are able to pay the fees do so. Any who are not able, please simply check the "waiver request" box. You will then be able to register for free. If your company would like to help sponsor our experiment with unlimited waivers (to enable IETF to continue allowing all to contribute, regardless of situation) , please contact us at <email>.
>
> And then have unlimited and automatic waiver.
>
> IETF likes to experiment. So we should experiment with a trust model. Trust that only those who need the waiver will request it, and see what happens.
> Barbara
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher
The Internet Protocol Journal
Office: +1 415-550-9433
Cell: +1 415-370-4628
Web: protocoljournal.org
E-mail: olejacobsen@xxxxxx
E-mail: ole@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Skype: organdemo
