Re: [87attendees] [87all] IETF 87 Berlin Meeting Review

[Mary Barnes <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Ted Lemon <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Aug 17, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Melinda Shore <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> > I consider it a negative, since it has a negative impact on
> > travel and distracts from the meeting.  It's a working meeting,
> > people.
>
> Yes and no.   Yes, it's a negative for IETF to be a junket, because that
> becomes an attractive nuisance—people go because they want to go to the
> city IETF will be held in, rather than because they really have pressing
> business at IETF.   No, it's not a negative, because cities that are good
> tourist destinations are often (not always, cf. Orlando) good places to
> have meetings, because there is a variety of food near the venue.
>
[MB] Right the tourist places do have many of the resources we need and
they are much more affordable IF we go off season.  Orlando never has an
off season and the IETF meeting was scheduled during one of the BUSIEST
weeks of the year.  It was a bad idea for so, so many reasons - the food
issue alone (given that it was arranged after Dublin) should have been
enough to discount that location.

>
> I always thought Minneapolis in winter was a good choice—it's a lovely
> city, but not really a winter city, so you get convenient food _and_ nobody
> goes just for the fun of it.
>
[MB] I agree 100%.  Minneapolis meets all of our needs in terms of an
effective and efficient place to get work done.  [/MB]

>
> _______________________________________________
> 87attendees mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/87attendees
>