IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [91attendees] IETF Fee increase alternatives

ietf@johnlevine.com Fri, 14 November 2014 21:36 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 227551A6F60 for <91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:36:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.663
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.663 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 J-b1_jxMmgVl for <91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:36:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F1551ACD66 for <91attendees@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:36:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 9818 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2014 21:36:45 -0000
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 14 Nov 2014 21:36:45 -0000
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 21:36:16 -0000
Message-ID: <20141114213616.11034.qmail@ary.lan>
From: ietf@johnlevine.com
To: 91attendees@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <636AF99A-177F-49AD-A94B-298D4DBA932A@netapp.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/91attendees/W5BeykvAP-p_bziyVd0eB0__Nj0
Cc: lars@netapp.com
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 21:36:47 -0000

>Do you know if it is possible to indicate that a donation to ISOC should fully
>benefit the IETF? As compared to ending up in their overall budget?

Money is fungible, and the ISOC's budget is set at least a year in advance, so no.

The ISOC could certainly set up a fund to subsidize penurious
IETF-ers, but it would need some sort of policy to figure out who gets
subsidized.

Having said that, I go to a lot of conferences, and unless the IETF
wants to go seriously low budget and meet in college dorms in the
summer, it's not likely that we could trim much that wouldn't have
an adverse effect on the conference.

A tradeoff that means that people spend more time on a bus to and from
their hotels rather than hanging around a single site with other
IETFers is not likely to be a win for most of us.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email