Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities

Joel M. Halpern <jmh(_at_)joelhalpern(_dot_)com> writes:

> There is a lot of value in face-to-face interaction.
> While we can not always get the interactions we want, virtual interaction is 
> no
> replacement for face-to-face.  Being able to chat with people between 
> meetings.
> Having folks in the same place to set up high-interaction discussions.  And
> multiple additional benefits.
>
> Yes, funding matters.  But in my view that is secondary to the actual benefit 
> of
> the meetings.  Which is why I attend.
+1

Whenever I read messages that advocate for switching to remote only
meetings, I have to wonder, are those people just not getting what I get
out of f2f meetings? I find the meetings invaluable for the reasons you
list above.

Thanks,
Chris.

> Yours,
> Joel
>
> On 4/14/17 12:38 PM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
> > On 12/04/2017 15:30, Michael Richardson wrote:
> > > Right, so this is why it's better for everyone to be remote.
> > Except that the IETF funding model requires attendees to pay their
> > meeting fee.
> >
> > - Stewart

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature