IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [81attendees] are we getting complacent? Good job!

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Mon, 01 August 2011 19:43 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: 81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB54511E8147 for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 12:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.344
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.344 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.469, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, PLING_QUERY=1.39, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FsWQxsKVBAtw for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 12:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oproxy9.bluehost.com (oproxy9.bluehost.com [69.89.24.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DBE0B11E8132 for <81attendees@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 12:43:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 9881 invoked by uid 0); 1 Aug 2011 16:56:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by oproxy9.bluehost.com with SMTP; 1 Aug 2011 16:56:37 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=tCzbnuYjYqx31qFY3BfN9WapgdDKIGrlWo8uskO20Ro=; b=t0cyjPTzLjL0h0zjFB1UUBPouS42aHaW4ecQ7O3+lfKekr3cXUDN/WDFefUHusttU7lR8cavMdG8bnsuiiORVKNduKqWOEJby8KLFty/QGwjP92m304q6Y3+f83sStyf;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1QnvnB-0006Qg-A3; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 10:56:37 -0600
Message-ID: <4E36DAC9.2020702@labn.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 12:56:41 -0400
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
References: <4E34C3A9.2020502@att.com> <A5B9F059BE69461F8008EBECD84A1E67@china.huawei.com> <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A6402713C27@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net> <DB9C80EF-5231-40B9-B9A9-D0EFB3744DC7@isi.edu> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F13512DF4D3@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <C47A1ABD-4815-4C84-A794-4F251F92DCE1@isi.edu>
In-Reply-To: <C47A1ABD-4815-4C84-A794-4F251F92DCE1@isi.edu>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Cc: "<81attendees@ietf.org>" <81attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [81attendees] are we getting complacent? Good job!
X-BeenThere: 81attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF 81 Attendee List <81attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/81attendees>, <mailto:81attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/81attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:81attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:81attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/81attendees>, <mailto:81attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 19:43:10 -0000

While I 100% agree with all the positive things said about the venue,
city, sponsors, and staff, I have to agree with Joe on the following:

> AFAICT this venue was preferred for its vacation qualities, not for
> business reasons (see the early post on why this was selected over
> Vancouver).

Going to tourist locations during high season seems to becoming a more
common habit for the IETF.  While some families enjoy trips to Disney
and interesting locations, this is not while many/most of us go to the
IETF.  It seems to me that something has gone wrong with the IETF
location optimization algorithm.  It would interesting to hear about
upcoming locations that were mention last week to see if this suspicion
is reinforced or discounted...

Lou

On 8/1/2011 11:13 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
> 
> 
> On Jul 31, 2011, at 10:52 PM, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> wrote:
> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: 81attendees-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:81attendees-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Joe Touch
>>> Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 4:02 PM
>>> To: Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)
>>> Cc: <81attendees@ietf.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [81attendees] are we getting complacent? Good job!
>>>
>>> -1
>>>
>>> A city with a real set of international connections is better (eg
>>> Vancouver)
>>
>> Since Quebec City has direct flights to Montreal, Toronto, Newark
>> and Chicago, all of which are major intercontinental hubs, I'd say
>> it has plenty of international connections.
> 
> An international hub would reach more than two other counties (the
> neighboring one and France).  Yes, there are connections to
> international hubs, but this isn't an international hub by any
> stretch. Traveling via train would have required an overnight in
> Montreal - which I've never needed before for travel to Europe or
> Japan.
> 
> AFAICT this venue was preferred for its vacation qualities, not for
> business reasons (see the early post on why this was selected over
> Vancouver).
> 
> I hope future selections will focus on ease/speed of travel to the
> venue as well as the meeting space and hotels. For me it was easier,
> cheaper, and nearly as much time to get to Maastricht as would have
> been QC. If that persists, I'll be glad to remind everyone that our
> primary forum is the email lists, and take planes for true vacations
> instead.
> 
> Joe
> _______________________________________________
> 81attendees mailing list
> 81attendees@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/81attendees
> 
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email