On 9/7/2010 2:50 PM, Michael StJohns wrote:
Dave and I don't always agree :-)
I don't think we've got either the database of "people not attending because
of costs" nor a good model for factoring them in if we did (e.g. N pnac's
Well, we agree on this. But I class this as a failure or at least a problem,
rather than something to accept.
We have good data on past attendees. From that we can probably build a
pretty good model on what each past attendees Pa (percentage chance of
This is called selling to the installed base. It's important to pay attention
to the installed base of participants, but it is death for an organization to
pay attention /only/ to that base. It's form of incest, and really destroys the
adaptive DNA of the organization. Withers on the vine, loses touch with
reality, etc. etc.
Let's stick with solid data rather than try and resolve the hypotheticals - I
doubt the latter is possible in any meaningful way.
My point is that we need to reach out empirically, to get input from potential
attendees, not just from guaranteed attendees. The fact that there is some
challenge in identifying and contacting these new folk does not make it less
important that we do it.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf