Dave Crocker write: > the questionnaire will not serve to understand the needs > of people who are *unable to attend* Perhaps we should ask a more open-ended question (i.e. "B" below): A) Did you attend IETF-65? B) If not, why not? Regards, Ed -----Original Message----- From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 9:26 PM To: Marshall Eubanks Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: IETF65 hotel location > However, to be constructive, I would like to suggest adding two yes or > no questions to the next meeting questionnaire : > > A.) Do you feel that the venue chosen for the meeting was too remote, > in > terms of accessibility of restaurants, bars, your or other hotels, etc. ? > > B.) (If "A" is answered yes.) Would having another IETF meeting in a site > that is similarly remote make it less likely that you would attend ? > Asking questions like this could be quite useful. The challenge is in making sure that the right people get asked. If the questions are asked of people who already attended the meeting, then the sampling is of people with the resources to accommodate the current style of meeting arrangement. While some might grouse about one characteristic or another of the current choices, the questionnaire will not serve to understand the needs of people who are *unable to attend* IETF meetings because of current costs, due to remoteness, hotel fees, or the like. (By the way, the "what will make it less likely you will attend" type of question is often interesting to ask, but is usually not a good predictor of actual behavior.) d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://bbiw.net> _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf