On Sun, 11 Nov 2012, SM wrote:
Is there any analysis to determine whether there has been an increase in
IETF participation from these economies? Is the outreach effort a
failure?
Personally I believe there could be value in describing what the value is
to attend the meeting physically. I attended the last meeting in Stockholm
because it meant I only had to pay the entrence fee, since I live there.
Getting buy-in from management to allow me to go for a week somewhere and
not be available in the office, pay for hotel and travel, plus the
entrence fee, it's hard to justify to management. What is a good answer to
the question "why?".
Remote participating works well in some WGs, in some WGs I have had a hard
time getting through. People in different WGs treat the WG mailing list
differently, culture seems to differ quite a lot.
So elaborating on what the benefit of being there physically would
probably help. Remote participation both during and between meetings is
crucial for a lot of people I would imagine (it is for me anyway, it's my
only chance to participate). Getting a low bar for entry into the
discussions is what I feel is the biggest advantage of the IETF model,
some WGs really work well in this aspect.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike(_at_)swm(_dot_)pp(_dot_)se