Re: management granularity (Re: Meeting "lounges" at IETF meetings)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 8/4/2012 4:24 PM, Livingood, Jason wrote:
On 8/4/12 1:31 PM, "Dave Crocker" <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If we really want venues to function towards some ideal, we need the
benefit of a multi-visit learning curve.
...
Of course holding meetings in a range of locations, some new, also
provides the opportunity to attract new meeting hosts rather than relying
on a small pool of regular hosts. Ultimately, there are pros and cons to
either model and the current model does not seem especially bad (quite the
contrary I think).

My note highlighted some tradeoffs, and your note adds to that. The main point is that choices among tradeoffs have very different effects, both desirable an not.

If the community wants venues to be reliably excellent, it's not enough merely to have excellent staff. We need to go back to the better places and benefit from the learning curve. This doesn't mean "no new venues" but it means fewer.

The influence of choosing sites based on hosts has, in my view, tended to work against these functional benefits.[1] The counter, of course, is the benefit having a host can bring, most notably funds.


Perhaps when we the Internet is less dynamic (I hope it is never so) we
could meet in just one city all the time, as I understand some other
standards development group does. ;-)

It's been amusing (not) to hear claims that the IETF needs to wander around the world for its meetings, for what is really a marketing campaign, to counter some of those other groups... who do indeed sit in one city for all of their formal meetings.

Moving around in order to spread the pain of travel among folks who actually do the work is one thing. Moving around to improve public relations is quite another.



On 8/4/2012 8:55 PM, John Levine wrote:>> And it means we stop being tourists.
>
> Depends where.  I would be happy to be a tourist in Vancouver, Quebec,
> Paris (assuming we can sort out the Hotel Klepto issue), and/or Berlin
> every year.

Given the context and content of my note, I suspect that I was not referring to attendees' taking advantage of a venue's sightseeing opportunities, but rather to a possibly strategic orientation to choose different venues in order to /create/ tourism opportunities. I might even have thought that I made the latter focus clear enough, but alas didn't word things to bullet-proof against creative misinterpretation.

Sorry.

d/


[1] Shortly before I joined the IAOC, an important paradigm change was instituted. In the past, venues were primarily chosen /after/ getting a host, so the host could largely decide where to have the meeting. With some regularity, this produced extremely limited choices in sites. More recently, the model is to choose the venue and then seek a host. This permits us to get a venue much sooner than we used to, which greatly improves our choice of meeting site. While sometimes creating a greater challenge for finding a host, I think the newer paradigm is a vast improvement.

--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]