On 23 April 2018 at 18:06, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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 the suggestion was more about process than payment. In the past, it hasn't been clear how to go about changing attendance types, or even if it was possible.. I had to switch from in-person to remote for a recent meeting and ended up emailing the secretariat to get someone to do it manually. That worked because payment and registration were separate.
I'd like to echo a related idea from the thread: perhaps we could maintain the current separate registration and payment processes, but impose the deadlines on payment? In other words, it doesn't matter when I register... whether I'm early-bird or not depends on when I pay. I think that would satisfy your requirements as well as keep the status quo process-wise for anyone who has someone else (an employer, assistant, or whoever) paying on their behalf.
But I don't see how it is even remotely possible to describe "4 weeks in
advance of something" as "early".
I agree. I think the proposed schedule is quite reasonable.
