+1 on all of the analysis/ observations below. Couldn't say it
better myself and have tried.
john
--On Sunday, August 29, 2010 17:10 -0700 Dave CROCKER
<dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> wrote:
At the risk of turning this into a string of competing
anectdotes
It turned into that long ago. In terms of the tone in these
discussions, folk continue to believe that their personal
experiences are relevant for deciding logistics policy in
choosing IETF meetings.
Unfortunately, such folk constitute a remarkably skewed sample
of what is typically touted as the target population of IETF
attendees.
The premise to these anecdotes appears to be that IETF
meetings are designed for people who have:
* hefty corporate travel funding -- so money is
largely no object
* extensive travel experience -- therefore
accepting requirements
to handle
complex travel details
* frequent travel schedules -- so extraneous,
1/2-day incremental
time and cost
doesn't mean much
* a full week at the meeting -- so remote
locations have minor
impact
* a desire to use meetings for tourism -- which is more
important than venue
convenience or
reliability
* complete lack of empathy for anyone not fitting into this
category
"Lack of empathy" is typically being demonstrated by overt
hostility, but certainly dismissive handwaves. The concerns
of others simply do not matter and are to be classed as petty,
naive, or the like.
It's difficult to imagine a more elitist demographic,
particular for a community that has been predicated on
diversity and inclusiveness.
At the least, the IETF should be honest and re-cast its
community culture as being tailored for well-funded
professional meeting goers...
d/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf