--On Thursday, 19 April, 2007 07:25 -0400 Dave Crocker
<dhc2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Whether a break period should or should not include food might
> be a reasonable question, given the limited time to forage for
> food elsewhere.
>
> But what is the reason for presuming that the IETF has an
> obligation to feed us meals? Why breakfast, but no other
> meal? Why any?
I have to agree with Dave. Recognizing that the questions
weren't included in the survey,
(1) I think it is an open question as to whether the IETF should
be feeding us any meals, including breakfast, especially if
doing so increases either the hotel room costs or the
registration fees. The observation that the combination of
other commitments and personal habits result in many of us
missing some or all of those "included" meals reinforces that
view. Of course, if the negotiation with the hotel is such that
the IAD and secretariat have a choice between "supply at least
one meal each day" and "pay for the meeting rooms at
significantly higher net cost", that becomes a different
question... and I don't believe the community needs to get
involved in a discussion of how that particular sausage is made.
(2) In cities where hotels routinely offer "with breakfast" and
"without breakfast" rates, I would hope that the IAD and
Secretariat would negotiate for the lowest room rates possible,
without breakfast if that is less expensive than the "with
breakfast" rate. In a perfect world, they could negotiate for
a "breakfast supplement" to the "no breakfast" rate, but the
goal should be lowest possible participant cost.
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf