On Nov 14, 2010, at 10:50 PM, SM wrote:
enough, because the corruption that we're trying to solve would
require collaboration between the IETF chair and the IAOC. I would
say that the risk is low enough that privacy trumps transparency.
As you used the term "corruption", I'll go with it. The corruption
can be solved by charging everyone, including NOC and hosts, for
tickets.
I don't think charging hosts would matter that much. They'd just pay more in
tickets and less in sponsorships. But as far as NOC and volunteers are
concerned, they definitely deserve the tickets. If we had to hire network
people with that skill level for a week, we'd have to pay a lot more than $650.
It is likely that such a solution will increase meeting
costs and decrease sponsorship revenue.
I'd say very likely.
The price of the ticket may
have to be increased. This looks more like the law of unintended
consequences instead of corruption.
Whenever you give anyone power, there's a risk of corruption. You can never
eliminate this risk, but you can reduce it. Reducing the risk costs. It costs
money, privacy and time. The same supervision can also reduce waste (such as
giving comp tickets to people who don't deserve them). With just a single
discretionary comp ticket (or even if it were 10), the waste reduction is a
moot point. There's no point in adding any more supervision. And as for
corruption, I believe the current safeguards are more than enough to put our
minds at ease.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf