At 03:20 PM 3/15/2003 -0500, Melinda Shore wrote:
My guess is that going to two would hurt income, unless we raise fees by
50% - the same people would come, I think.
Going to four would be damaging to my sanity, at least - don't know about
others'.... we whould expect slightly lower per-meeting attendance, but
many would indeed feel obligated to go to all four, so would pay more, I
think. Whether they would get more things done is an open question.
I hate the idea of more travel, plus I suspect 4 may be
harder to justify to management. However, try as we may to
do things "right," the IETF is increasingly doing its work
at meetings instead of mailing lists. If we can't fix it we
should probably accept it. Also, more regular meetings
might tend to discourage interim meetings, which would be
excellent.
I agree. Given that the work of the IETF is centered on the
publication of documents, and given that most I-Ds are published
near the I-D cutoff deadlines, it stands to reason that IETF
productivity will increase by 33% if the number of publication
cycles per year is increased from 3 to 4.
Melinda
Andy