Keith, Here is the tradeoff: "The community" has expressed a strong preference for one-roof venues [which often translates to convention center + hotel next door in our case] in a city setting (City West and Maastricht being non-examples). This leads to (generally speaking): * Somewhat expensive main hotel rates (although I agree that hotel rates seem to be as variable and unpredictable as airline rates, and I would hope we could do better even if we sign the contract several years in advance.) * More choices in the city nearby ranging from apartment rentals, smaller hotels etc, etc. The second item is intended to address your "inclusive" point. As has been pointed out, QC offers a good range of hotels at various price points. Ole Ole J. Jacobsen Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal Cisco Systems Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628 E-mail: ole@xxxxxxxxx URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj Skype: organdemo On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Keith Moore wrote: > On Jun 19, 2011, at 9:55 PM, Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > > >> On 6/18/2011 9:52 PM, Keith Moore wrote: > >> > >>> Frankly, I'm appalled at the prices and think it's highly inappropriate for > >>> IETF to be meeting in venues where the "conference hotels" are so > >>> expensive. > > > > May I point out that there has been a survey on the topic and the community > > expressed a clear preference for Quebec over other Canadian cities, knowing > > that travel would be longer and the number of cheap alternative hotels > > smaller. > > Is it necessary to remind "the community" that consensus of the > community is meaningless if the community isn't inclusive? > > Keith > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf