On Aug 30, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote: > On 30 aug 2010, at 21.57, Olaf Kolkman wrote: > >> If you want to be fair to the individual participants you have to optimize in such a way that attending 6 meetings costs the same for every individual that regularly attends the IETF. Obviously one can only approximate that by putting fairly large error bars on the costs but isn't the X-Y-Z distribution where X= approx Y= approx Z the closest optimum? (or finding one place that sucks equally for everybody) > > I agree with this finding. It seems to me that a process like that would tend to lead to incorrect results. There's already bias in the population of meeting attendees - do you, and, if so, how do you account for people who are already not attending because of costs? And "region" can be tricky and misleading, and it's hard to know how to account for corner cases. I'm in the United States but travel from interior Alaska has very little in common with travel from NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, etc. I think it's very difficult to find really great meeting facilities as it is, and it seems to me that that should be the primary focus. Melinda _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf