On 08/11/2014 05:18 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: On 8/11/2014 8:49 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
We are going to a location to get work done (or, at least, that's what
I was led to believe), not hang out on a beach or sit in your hotel
room, sipping Mai Tai's.
[MB] Right, which is why we *really* should get away from arranging
meetings at resort locations (e.g., Orlando during one of their busiest
weeks of the year). [/MB]
Unfortunately, the recent survey that was taken gave the highest
rankings to popular tourist destinctions, including one or more that are
far from almost all regular IETF participants. It's almost as if asking
a collectionon of well-funded folk where they'd like to go would
encourage their choosing popular vacation spots.
In any event -- or rather, in the IETF event, with such enthusiastic
community preference, those popular choices are like to be... chosen.
d/
Which, of course, just highlights how broken this survey process is. I'd love to see the responses weighted by *any* metric of contribution to IETF work product, i.e., RFCs... Or for that matter just kill the idea that such surveys have any real benefit to the IETF. (That is other than to justify IETF tourism.)
It’s not so much the responders as how the questions are put:
- Who’s in favor of more funding for education? - Me! Me! Me! - Who’s in favor of more funding for fixing roads and bridges? - Me! Me! Me! - Who’s in favor of more funding for security? - Me! Me! Me! - Who’s in favor of lower taxes? - Me! Me! Me! - Who’s in favor of a balanced budget? - Me! Me! Me!
Obviously all other things being equal, I’d rather be in Hawaii than Minneapolis. And I’d rather have a cheap hotel than an expensive hotel. And stay at the venue hotel rather than another one. And be downtown rather than in the boondocks. And fly for 5 hours rather than 30.
We can’t get everything at the same time, and surveys don’t reflect that. They don’t ask you to make a trade-off.
Yoav
|