On Apr 02 2005, at 15:35 Uhr, Sam Hartman wrote:
Similarly the
rest of the world would like to show that we should have the meetings
closer to them.
You are making an assumption about the motives of the people that point
out the continuing decline of suitability of the US as a meeting place
for an international organisation.
This assumption may suggest itself, but it certainly does not apply to
all of those making the argument.
I for one live in central Europe, but would be happy with all further
meetings located in Seoul or Yokohama (if organized as well as these
were).
I would be less happy with Pyongyang, although the distance from here
is almost the same.
The US/non-US dichotomy in the argument probably stems from a
difference of experience:
Of course, US residents experience less of a problem traveling to US
destinations, so they subjectively may still consider those
destinations viable IETF venues.
(I'm not arguing for an all-out change of IETF policy tomorrow, but
this little misunderstanding needs to be set straight.
Canada does look more attractive every day, though, so I'm quite happy
with the current plans.)
Gruesse, Carsten
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf