> There is value in having to pass some form of "is it worth it" test - no matter who will be actually paying for it. Doesn't remote meeting participation show some sort of counter-argument ? Cost is zero, and I haven't noted much disruption in current meetings (though that would be possible). Julien. -----Original Message----- From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Eric Gray Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 5:19 PM To: Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: RE: We gotta stop meeting like this Look at the impact of near-zero cost mailing (in the form of E-Mail) on the tremendous volume of trash we all receive, even after filtering, and extend that to zero cost participation in the IETF. There is value in having to pass some form of "is it worth it" test - no matter who will be actually paying for it. -----Original Message----- From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Keith Moore Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:12 AM To: ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: We gotta stop meeting like this On 7/23/19 10:48 AM, Eric Gray wrote: > I would also point out that zero (or near zero) cost participation should not be a goal. I disagree. But perhaps you would care to explain why you believe this?
