John C Klensin wrote: > Let me extend the suggestion a bit, although I'm happy to leave > the decision as to how many of these experiments to layer on > each other in a given meeting to the IESG and IAOC: > > If someone buys a day pass --for any day of the week-- admission > to the newcomer's tutorial session, any other sessions that they > can get into on Sunday, the Sunday reception unless there are > serious sponsor constraints, and both plenaries are free. If > our goal is to show "day" attendees how we work and integrate > them into the community, we should give them as much chance as > possible to be exposed to those sorts of activities and the > informal contacts they permit. For your own safety I'd like to suggest that if you are not already sitting down that you do so now. Also, please clear your mouth of any food or beverage related items. I am in agreement with John Klensin (up to this point anyway). :) > Note that this is almost independent of whether the newcomer's > tutorial session should be free for someone who does _not_ buy a > day pass. I'm not certain if that was what David was suggesting > or not. I can probably argue it either way, but I've generally > found that things work out better if people have to make at > least some investment (other than of time) rather than having > things be completely "free". So, if someone doesn't get at > least a day pass, I'd be happier if we charged a nominal (even > if only $10 - $20) fee for registration for the tutorial than > just open the doors. I disagree here. I think that opening the newcomer's session and (if the host is agreeable) the reception on Sunday to all comers would have way more benefits than costs. Of course we would have to capitalize on all those fresh bodies by having registration open and suitable promotional materials for both full and one-day registration prominently (yet tastefully) displayed. I think I understand at least some of the issues regarding how we got to this point regarding registration fees and their relationship to the organization's funding model. But whether we agree with that particular status quo or not I don't think anyone could argue against the ideas that the current costs are (and have been) creating a barrier to entry that we would like to avoid, and secondly that we need to attract "new blood" if we're going to survive. Kudos to whoever came up with the day pass idea, and I look forward to hearing more about the experiment after Hiroshima. hth, Doug _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf