Ed Juskevicius wrote:
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?
It's very hard to get those data. We've tried looking
at how many local first-time attendees from (say) Korea
later became regular attendees but the data are hard to
state in any meaningful way and the time constants are
long (years). There is no objective way to identify 'primary
contributors' other than by assuming the regular attendees are
also contributors.
We certainly know that going a long way from most places,
as we did in Adelaide, impacts attendance significantly -
but my recollection is that Adelaide was a very successful
meeting in terms of WGs making progress.
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.
Which, BTW, means income that we badly need.
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.
It will also help the IAD significantly in comparing hosting offers.
We also badly need hosts for financial reasons.
Brian
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
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf