Re: [91attendees] IETF Fee increase alternatives

Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com> Fri, 14 November 2014 04:21 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: 91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1BE41A003B for <91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:21:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.095
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.095 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.594, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i06PxVzs6zk4 for <91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:20:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 620171A6F2C for <91attendees@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:20:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1585; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1415938859; x=1417148459; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=Bd3vnbdVjtowrb3L+kPTd5/B2+ayNZig5INPsesF/as=; b=UL2IpcYDuo1GANPuevJxlpSnciW1/bmu/3L0mBr9+XMfuLcU28JjCoGQ DwJDagXm02auKXd/ZOT8W/0q8wpB/G8PIGOYgyowd5JYEbPsal2g1SbZN lBCiodYGymwmwFaZtXnqFIGSOHymgOwabdCDyBYFslcEN6rITElp29kcG 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhEFAE6CZVStJV2R/2dsb2JhbABbgw5VWcx7CoZ5VQKBIhYBAQEBAX2EAwEBBAEBATcuBgsQCxgJJQ8FEzYTiEEN0HwBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQETBIp9hiUHgy2BHgWMEZI6AZZ6hB0cMIJLAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,383,1413244800"; d="scan'208";a="372106480"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Nov 2014 04:20:58 +0000
Received: from mcast-linux1.cisco.com (mcast-linux1.cisco.com [172.27.244.121]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sAE4KwhW031686 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 14 Nov 2014 04:20:58 GMT
Received: from mcast-linux1.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by mcast-linux1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sAE4KvNo031692; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:20:57 -0800
Received: (from eckert@localhost) by mcast-linux1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id sAE4Kvph031691; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:20:57 -0800
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:20:57 -0800
From: Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com>
To: Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com>
Message-ID: <20141114042057.GB28706@cisco.com>
References: <CB79E3A1-A560-41A3-90CF-E1302AC6997E@bangj.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CB79E3A1-A560-41A3-90CF-E1302AC6997E@bangj.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/91attendees/UAzU6X51y2BgmhtF5cNhpzkjRL0
Cc: "<91attendees@ietf.org>" <91attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [91attendees] IETF Fee increase alternatives
X-BeenThere: 91attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list of IETF 91 attendees that have opted in on this list." <91attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/91attendees>, <mailto:91attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/91attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:91attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:91attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/91attendees>, <mailto:91attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 04:21:01 -0000

Tom:

I fear the choices that typical hotels with conference facilities give
are limiting the flexibility to be frugal. I have almost no
experience, but when i once tried to just have a small meeting setup
in a hotel, you had to pay a minimum per-day/per-person for food.

Meaning: I could perfectly live without IETF breakfast and coffee/cookies too,
but i bet that offer will not be on the table for most conference
facilities. 

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 06:00:06PM -1000, Tom Pusateri wrote:
> I know the organizers are trying to do the best they can and they have a lot of demands from us on them for features and great hotel venues but I just noticed the fee increase from $650 to $700 for the next IETF meeting.
> 
> This may not seem like much difference to most corporate attendees but it's already a burden for small companies and self employed.
> 
> There are some of us that would rather do with less services than pay more.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, you can cut things down to the bare minimum. I can get my own snacks, drinks, breakfast. We can minimize the extra meeting rooms, etc.
> 
> I would rather have a greater diversity of companies, individuals, and students than price these people out of the event.
> 
> I'm not criticizing the current decisions but just suggesting a different path as an option.
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 91attendees mailing list
> 91attendees@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/91attendees

-- 
---
Toerless Eckert, eckert@cisco.com