On 8/24/2011 12:28 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
I feel that a lot of
concerns have been raised, and I don't find the responses very
convincing.
As the new guy on the IAOC block, I'm still learning the complexities of IETF
venue planning.
Perhaps you can list the concerns that have been raised and -- as an efficiency
filter -- are shared among a significant base of the community?
It would also help to see what responses have been offered and what is
unsatisfactory about them.
When I've looked into issues with the IAOC, I haven't found
the visibility necessary to really evaluate things.
The issue of transparency/visibility has been raised a couple of times in this
thread. While I understand it as a general concept, I'm not clear how to apply
it pragmatically here.
I don't understand what folks should be done differently /in specific/ that
would continue to permit a practical process of event planning. To use an
extreme example: A completely fishbowl model of administrative process, in
which every discussion and decision is explored under full view of the entire
community, is not practical.
d/
ps. As a personal aside, I'll note that I've lobbied rather vigorously for
venues that entail less travel effort, by eliminating the additional hop needed
to get from a major hub. Note that that has gotten essentially zero support
from the community. The community has vigrously expressed a preference for
"interesting" venues rather than ones that are chosen solely for logistics
convenience.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf