On 10/2/23 09:51, Livingood, Jason wrote:
Saying that "pay-to-play fee was instituted" seems a little overblown. Pay-to-play **IS NOT** IMO: - Paying a fee to attend a conference in order to partially cover the costs of that conference - An employer letting an employee spend time volunteering to serve as a WG chair or AD, etc. Here's what pay-to-play **IS** IMO: - Paying a fee of $X for a company to join and participate in an organization (without the fee you could not join a mailing list, etc.) - Having documents that are approved by voting by named, paying companies & where the amount of payment drives the weight of the vote (i.e., if Company A paid $10 and Company B paid $5, then Company A's vote is weighted at 2x Company B's vote)
It doesn't matter (much) what it's called. Fact is, to participate effectively in IETF these days costs a significant amount of money, even if only a fraction of that money goes to IETF or the people who manage IETF meetings. We used to honestly do most of our work on mailing lists, but these days mailing lists are much less effective than they used to be, for a variety of reasons that are not easily fixed.
Keith
