Behcet Sarikaya writes: > I also supported IETF 107 participation to count but IETF 107 participants > including myself did not pay registration fee, > so no pay no vote, > it is that simple :) That is simple, yes, but I don't think it really comports with the way most people see the IETF. Things are a bit more complicated than that, even if the practical effect has been to make that connection. While I agree that in-person attendance is something that is normally paid for, the idea that we are participating as individuals but very often have our way payed by our employers has always made murky just how much contributors are really representing companies. (Yes, I expect some argument on that point.) Making a pay-to-vote system brings even more questions about the meaning of the source of the payment. I don't think we want to go down the road of explicitly tying voting rights to payments. Money was never really the currency of the IETF, despite its infrastructure necessity. I have more thoughts on this, it'd be headed down a rathole. I think the current document is a good way of addressing the current situation. -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
