On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:01:41AM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> My argument is as follows: if a significant number of people can not attend
> in person due to visa, travel, etc. issues, then the value of the meeting
> declines. The people that we interact with a high bandwidth become the same
> set of people who can get through. Our views become myopic.
I will contend that there more easier ways to improve the value of the meeeting
than trying to figure out which city/country might score a bit better on the
visaa-trouble/pricing/convenience scale.
For example, there is a lot of death by powerpoint in meetings that pushes off
high bandwidth discussions ("oh, we're out of time"). AFAIK, most active work
on drafts during IETF meeting week happens outside of the WG meetings. I think that
a) was not the original plan, and b) i have not seen IAOC sending around questionaires
what/how to improve the quality of the meetings in this respect.
Cheers
toerless
> So in the case where we can not have everyone in the same place, then it
> would be fairer to have "everyone" remote.
>
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>