Re: [91attendees] Social event cost
Stephen Botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com> Thu, 13 November 2014 20:23 UTC
Return-Path: <stephen.botzko@gmail.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 4E7E91AD042 for <91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:23:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 wYLm-wxrtdIg for <91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:23:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22a.google.com (mail-wg0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5B891AD024 for <91attendees@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:23:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id y19so2227055wgg.29 for <91attendees@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:23:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=hGKYwgczM3HMYptwgMrJSv+zYI4OJB5SJk9GOVU+DDk=; b=0f0JXo0HJnAiyYgtCk/5f0stSOKLPwtV1Tlax9HZz2bqzPwLBmvy+xvgRANL+LlNbL 6JBTfETbHxZ/O90C43g9F37bIuosL4IwITpWS0J6Q006AezheMoKQGh60OFTaTsQ2oPe NrO4092UXI+VedGuIfDkCb6WYoO7NfgsyS+tT0QrUsb2dJd7RwdEbJ/DmzUYuTWiY/x7 fX8EwYN9HEYzuKTJdGIwamUyJeo+qPaK9PxypepUhpkKu9W3suJgLIMOHcMwEgpE7PKj NsyZg/7BLtdRKbyjYGtwz72WN2WLg0pfsnzk6puhfVO3L/t0hIUpouNguVSSiLeykccL zdCw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.187.164 with SMTP id ft4mr7298016wjc.76.1415910214601; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:23:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.127.38 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:23:34 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <D08A3403.4B177%stewe@stewe.org>
References: <54648590.7050400@earthlink.net> <1068CD97-B435-4C98-BE35-7BBC72A1CFC2@hawaii.edu> <7101E5BC-8A1D-4F40-86BF-1BE4DD20C8E6@tzi.org> <54650E77.8030003@hawaii.edu> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B27A365@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <CAMC7SJ79-bbm3bnsRHPvYubUw440fJCdFuvh_gtLXBuuNOoxzA@mail.gmail.com> <D08A3403.4B177%stewe@stewe.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 10:23:34 -1000
Message-ID: <CAMC7SJ41JrYys7tEVL=JXLr30TOuyKOf+0WVB=G6qTy1DRueKw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stephen Botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com>
To: Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b874b266011890507c349fc"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/91attendees/foow5ORvE86lLG0IMC5lwRC2UYY
Cc: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>, Alan Whinery <whinery@hawaii.edu>, 91attendees <91attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [91attendees] Social event cost
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: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:23:40 -0000
I think the social event would fail if the cost exceeded what most businesses will reimburse. So while I agree that some would go anyway, I think it establishes a reasonable upper bound what hosts should charge - if they wouldn't fully reimburse their own employees for participating, they are charging too much. In this particular case, the charge was within my own company's guidelines, and I found it enjoyable and worthwhile. Stephen On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org> wrote: > -1. > The social event is a great opportunity to get business done and to > socialize at the same time—and a quite effective one if employed > correctly. Many sponsors understand that. Some don’t. However, even if I > had to pick up cost the myself, I would gladly do it for the opportunity. > There is no law that one is prohibited to pick up a part of the expenses in > a business trip oneself (at least not in any of my previous jobs) > Stephan > > From: Stephen Botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com> > Date: Thursday, November 13, 2014 at 10:08 > To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> > Cc: Alan Whinery <whinery@hawaii.edu>, 91attendees <91attendees@ietf.org> > > Subject: Re: [91attendees] Social event cost > > +1 > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:07 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) < > keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote: > >> I would note that while the social event cost is below what I can >> reasonable expense for an evening meal, I will probably participate. As >> soon as it goes above that, then I will give it a miss. >> >> I have certainly heard that view expressed by others in the past as well. >> >> Regards >> >> Keith >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: 91attendees [mailto:91attendees-bounces@ietf.org] On >> > Behalf Of Alan Whinery >> > Sent: 13 November 2014 20:03 >> > To: 91attendees >> > Subject: Re: [91attendees] Social event cost >> > >> > On 11/13/2014 10:01 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote: >> > > On 13 Nov 2014, at 07:13, Alan Whinery <whinery@hawaii.edu> wrote: >> > >> Just data: >> > >> IEEE [...] $120. >> > > This gives a reliable upper bound for the actual cost, >> > because IEEE conferences are designed to make money for IEEE. >> > > >> > > Grüße, Carsten >> > > >> > Add inflation for fuel price, if not other factors. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 91attendees mailing list >> > 91attendees@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/91attendees >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> 91attendees mailing list >> 91attendees@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/91attendees >> > >
- [91attendees] A little soft music in the night Charlie Perkins
- [91attendees] Social event cost Alan Whinery
- Re: [91attendees] A little soft music in the night Charlie Perkins
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Hongyu Li (Julio)
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Carsten Bormann
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Alan Whinery
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Stephen Botzko
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Ben Campbell
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Stephan Wenger
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Stephen Botzko
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Bert Wijnen (IETF)
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Alan Whinery
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Dave Dolson
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Dominik Bay
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Charlie Perkins
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Victor Kuarsingh
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Peter Yee
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Ackermann, Michael
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Warren Kumari
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Andy Bierman
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Toerless Eckert
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost ietf
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost ietf
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Alan Whinery
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost joel jaeggli
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Howard, Lee
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Василий Долматов
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost ietf
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [91attendees] Social event cost Sean Leonard