> On 5 Jan 2016, at 13:28, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > --On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 09:15 +0000 Stewart Bryant > <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 04/01/2016 21:33, John C Klensin wrote: >>> (1) While it is clear that people who favor going back to >>> Minneapolis are in the minority of the Meetings Committee (at >>> least as they and the IAOC count votes), it is much less clear >>> that such people are in the minority of active participants in >>> the IETF. > >> Minneapolis is really a metaphor for functional, works well >> for most people, easy to get flights and hotels, flight times >> not too bad, not regarded as a holiday trip at work, everyone >> is there to work. > >> It does not have to be Minneapolis, but the utilitarian >> properties above, are in my view far more relevant than the >> IETF World Tour model we seem to have in place. > > Agreed. But Minneapolis is, in one way, not just a metaphor. > Especially as we start discussing "go back to the same places > every year" again, Minneapolis was a place we went to multiple > times and found successful (for the reasons you give). Then we > stopped. There has never been an explanation to the community > as to why we stopped It would be interesting to know. It is, or was, a good meeting venue. I’m guessing attendance is lower, and meeting fees matter more now? Tim