On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 14:13 -0500, Mary Barnes wrote:
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Paul Hoffman
<paul(_dot_)hoffman(_at_)vpnc(_dot_)org>
wrote:
On Aug 3, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
> Instead, I think we should ensure that future venues have
adequate space for both circulating between meeting rooms and
for side conversations.
Just to be clear: you would rather that we pay higher meeting
fees in exchange for that adequate space?
[MB] Yes. [/MB]
Just to be even clearer, are you offering to pay those higher fees out
of your own pocket or just to type a larger number into your expense
report?
> I suggest that you could cut the cookie budget if funds
really are the only reason this wouldn't be done.
That is one way to pay for the extra space; it might not be so
popular in this particular crowd.
[MB] Yes, I know it's not at all a popular idea (to reduce cookies),
BUT we have had adequate space at previous meetings for which we paid
the same meeting fee, so it seems possible to get space without
increasing meeting fees (and I thought Vancouver was selected as it
was deemed a very moderately priced venue for meetings). Note, that
we did get additional space on the 34th floor during the week (which I
assumed we paid for). Also, there was a block of rooms on the 2nd
floor that we did not use for our meetings. [/MB]
--Paul Hoffman