It appears that Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen@xxxxxx> said: >So, sure, let's make sure the fine print is read and understood. I don't see how that helps. While I do not doubt the good faith of the people we are dealing with, I also do not see how they can make promises they can keep. If someone from the government shows up when we're setting up the network, after we have booked hotels and bought plane tickets, and says new rule, everyone has to log in with their badge number and you have to use this upstream connection we approve of, what are we going to do? We and our hosts have no leverage. I realize that hypothetically this could happen anywhere, but experience tells us it's more likely in China than in other places we have met. I'm also wondering about the financial issues since there are a lot of people (like me) who would go to other places in Asia who won't go to China. Looking at the LLC's statments I see that Brisbane had 687 in-person and 742 remote, while Vancouver had 833/681. The notes say Brisbane had 189 fewer in person and 133 more remote than budgeted. No relative counts for Vancouver yet but the budget expected higher registration income for Brisbane than for Vancouver which seems unlikely. I wouldn't expect a China meeting to have a lot more in-person attendees than Brisbane so it would also be very expensive, perhaps needlessly so. R's, John
