Dave Cridland <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Douglas Otis <doug.mtview@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> 10) Establish a reasonable fee to facilitate remote participants who >> receive credit for their participation equal to that of being local. > > > > I understand the rationale here, but I'm nervous about any movement toward > a kind of "pay-to-play standardization". Alas, that is what we have now. :^( There are a certain number of Working Groups where it's standard operating practice to ignore any single voice who doesn't attend an IETF week to defend his/her postings. I don't always understand what Doug is asking for; but I suspect he is proposing to define a remote-participation where you get full opportunity to defend your ideas. This simply doesn't happen today. > I'd be happy to pay for good quality remote participation, but I'd > be unhappy if this blocked participation in any significant way. The fact remains that full remote participation has costs. These costs only become greater if we pretend that we can expect current WGCs to do the additional work. > One option might be to give chairs some heavy influence on remote > burserships. Do you mean " " bursarship: noun " a grant or payment made to support a student's education. That seems premature at this point: the likely costs aren't neatly correlated to number of remote participants; so it's not clear there's any reason to "support" an individual, rather than support the tools. Today, requests for IETF-week sessions include checkoffs for "WebEx required" and "MeetEcho" required. AFAIK these simply generate requests to cisco and meetecho to subsidize the tool for that session. Cisco seems to automatically approve using the fully-automated tool, while meetecho seems to need to allocate staff for setup. But of course these checkoffs happen long before the WGC knows of individuals desiring to participate remotely. :^( Conceivably what we need is an automated tool to receive offers to (partially) subsidize the cost of a tool for a particular session. -- John Leslie <john@xxxxxxx>