Hi John, First, apologies for the late reply (I missed your note initially). > On May 10, 2022, at 1:26 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > --On Friday, May 6, 2022 15:20 -0700 Alexa Morris > <amorris@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> Not including the hotel room link in the "Registration >>> open" email appears to be an (understandable) ploy to get >>> as many paid IETF registrations as early as possible. >> >> This approach, which we initiated at IETF 113, is typical of >> many conferences. It's not actually a ploy to get people to >> register early but rather a strategy to protect the IETF room >> block for those who genuinely intend to travel to >> Philadelphia. >> >> Unfortunately, in past years guest rooms were often snatched >> up early and hoarded until just prior to the meeting, when >> there was a rush of cancellations. This left the IETF with an >> underutilized room block AND it left many onsite participants >> stuck at other properties they'd booked when the block was >> (temporarily) full. > > Alexa, > > While I hope this works as you intend, my guess is that it won't > make much difference. I don't know how typical I am, but don't > know whether I'll be in Philly in person and, as circumstances > change, am unlikely to be able to actually make that decision > until late June or early July. So, with the present policies, > including the promise that, if I need to back off to remote > participation, the difference between the in-person and remote > registration fees will be refunded, my incentives are to: > > * Register now (or at least before the early bird > cutoff) and pay up. > * Book a hotel room now, noting that the Sheraton > doesn't even want a deposit from me. > * Possibly explore other options, either close by or a > train ride away. > * Make a decision as to whether I'm going to be in > person or not and, if so, where I'm staying, no later > than the first week in July and then sort thinks out. > > Whether you consider that hoarding or not [1], the > symptoms/effects are no different from what you say you are > trying to avoid: I'm snatched up a room early and will sit on it > at least long enough that, if I do cancel, you get a > cancellation after many onsite attendees have made other plans. > I don't have a suggestion about how you could do better (at > least without policies that would just about guarantee I would > not attend and that would probably create far more uproar on > this list), but, other than your getting registration fees in > hand somewhat earlier, I'm not confident that this new policy I certainly don't consider the behavior you describe below to be hoarding -- quite the opposite! What you outline (register, reserve your room and then weigh the situation again close to the meeting) seems to me to be about the best any of us can do these days. You hope to attend, and are planning accordingly. You will remember that not that long ago one could register for the meeting without paying, and reserve a hotel without registering. The result was greatly inflated registration numbers (which were useless for planning purposes) and a hotel block that filled up immediately and then opened up again close to the meeting. More than once the Secretariat had to intervene to help someone who had reserved a hotel room, forgot they had and reserved a second room, only to cancel both at the 11th hour. That's an extreme example but it points to the problem that we observed, time and time again. There was a mad rush to get a room at the main IETF venue *just in case* it was needed, and people often didn't stop to consider the likelihood that they would actually attend. The current process aims to help with that, as much as is possible. It's not meant to impose an undue obstacle -- it's meant to encourage people to pause and assess the odds that they will actually attend the meeting. And because we do know that plans change quickly these days, right now the IETF LLC isn't even imposing the usual 10% service fee for registration cancellations. Hope that clarifies things and I hope to see you, in person, at IETF 114! Best, Alexa > will make a big difference. > > best, > john > > > [1] If you do, that description makes me uncomfortable, because > it unfairly attributes a very negative motivation to behavior > that seems to me to be not only reasonable but consistent with > the behavior you are encouraging. >
