Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

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

 



Melinda,

you mean like disadvantaging the families of attendees, who don't participate in meetings,  rather than disadvantaging the attendees who do?

Lloyd Wood
http://about.me/lloydwood
________________________________________
From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> on behalf of Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, 23 May 2016 4:04 AM
To: Eliot Lear; ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

On 5/22/16 10:02 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
> Sorry- but there is no doubt that f2f meetings are high bandwidth
> compared to any electronic form of communication.  And I'm saying that
> if we're going to have them we have a choice of who we disadvantage, for
> surely we will disadvantage someone.  This discussion is about how that
> choice is made.

Allow me to suggest that avoiding disadvantaging people who do not
actually participate might be somewhat lower priority than avoiding
disadvantaging those who do.

Melinda






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