RE: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria

> Is that hope for future participation by new attendees
> an acceptable basis for making venue choices that hurt
> current participation by primary contributors?
>
> What is the evidence that we will not gain that new
> participation without hurting current participation
> by primary contributors?
Maybe I am an optimist.  I believe the world is a big place, and are
lots of venues where the IETF has not yet met, which would work for all
of us, and attract a lot of local participation.

My sense of why we are discussing "venue selection criteria" is that we
wish to encourage people to volunteer to be local hosts for future IETF
meetings.  To make the best use of the prospective local hosts' time, it
would help if we could articulate the venues that would be acceptable,
versus ones that would not 'meet' (pardon the pun) our venue selection
criteria.


Regards,

Ed


-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dhc2(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 3:05 PM
To: Juskevicius, Ed [CAR:1A12:EXCH]
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria


Ed Juskevicius wrote:
> The "ideal" venue (if there is such a thing) would enable both:
> - good participation from WG primary contributors AND
> - lots of local participation
>
> The second factor is important, imho, because a fraction of local 
> newbies are going to be impressed by their IETF experience, and will 
> want to participate again in the future.  The may well become primary 
> contributors themselves down the road.
Is that hope for future participation by new attendees an acceptable 
basis for making venue choices that hurt current participation by 
primary contributors? 

What is the evidence that we will not gain that new participation 
without hurting current participation by primary contributors?

d/



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf