Andrew,
On 24/04/2018 10:06, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 08:59:28AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
>> 1. "Payment is due at registration."
>>
>> I can understand that in general, but there are cases where
>> somebody wants to register without being quite sure whether they
>> will attend remotely or in person. So since registration for
>> remote participation presumably remains free, there needs to be
>> a clear option for upgrading from remote to on-site registration,
>> which would then require payment as part of the upgrade.
>
> I don't think I understand what you're saying. If remote
> participation remains free (there is no current plan about rules for
> remote participation), then if someone decides later in the planning
> cycle to go to the meeting, they pay the meeting fee on that date.
> Are you suggesting that someone who registered early for remote
> participation and later decides to go to the venue should qualify for
> the rate applicable at the time they registered for remote
> participation?
I think you're over-interpreting what I intended to say, probably because
I said it badly. All I mean is: please be sure that the policy as finally
published, and the registration page, make it clear that someone who registers
for remote participation will have to pay whatever rate applies if and
when they later upgrade to on-site. I think that needs to be said explicitly
to avoid any possible confusion.
>> 2. "Early Bird 700 7 weeks before"
>>
>> Given lead times many people experience for travel approvals,
>> 7 weeks *really* seems like a lot, however normal it may be for
>> other events. In fact, for travel planning the current IETF
>> policy is very user-friendly. Could we compromise at 4 weeks?
>
> I don't see how. "Early" ought to mean, well, "early". 7 weeks is
> early. 4 weeks is not; that's standard, and should pay the standard
> fee. We are warning people about this plan well in advance, so people
> who need to get travel approval to get the early bird rate for IETF
> 103 may start their approvals process now (or, in a couple weeks, if
> they really want to wait until the final details are worked out). But
> I don't see how it is even remotely possible to describe "4 weeks in
> advance of something" as "early".
Well, I'm suggesting that we should be nicer to people than some other
events. We're on a 4 month cycle, so direct comparison with (say) an
annual conference isn't fair. People can't necessarily make plans
2 meetings ahead. Also, when dealing with corporate travel approval
processes, and with corporate travel agents, the fewer constraints you
have, the better.
Regards
Brian
