On 30 aug 2010, at 22.10, Melinda Shore wrote: > 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? What Olaf wrote, if I did not misunderstand him, was that X=Y=Z, so that people living in the three regions each have to travel to say four meetings outside their region while getting two meetings inside their own region. No connection to who goes to the IETF meetings today. Part from of course that we do not have Africa or South America as regions, and the poor people in Australia have to travel far for all meetings. Patrik _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf