People periodically suggest that the structure should be different to
facilitate better participation by "another group" that we would like to
have.
But simply saying "maybe a different structure would work" does not help
anyone. Without an actual alternative on the table there isn't even
anything to discuss.
We have made changes to improve remote participation. There are
proposals to empower more participants in more ways. In each case these
are based on concrete proposals to address concrete problems. Not "we
can do better".
Yours,
Joel
On 5/12/19 8:01 PM, Keith Moore wrote:
On 5/12/19 7:02 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
It’s amazing that you were willing to make it work out of pocket, but
that’s just not scalable.
Or maybe IETF has structured itself so that most serious participants
require sponsorship. If, on the other hand, IETF were structured in
such a way as to accommodate self-paying contributors, it might scale.
It would look different than it does now, but that would not necessarily
be a Bad Thing.
(More likely, money to fund travel wouldn't be the scaling constraint -
some other constraint would dominate - but it might still attract more
contributors, and more diverse contributors.)
Keith
