Re: Remote participation fees [Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY]

Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@isoc.org> Sat, 14 February 2015 21:37 UTC

Return-Path: <rpelletier@isoc.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B34491A0072 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:37:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 mq4k85tVycvA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:37:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0668.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:668]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DB751A0019 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:37:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.14] (72.237.59.193) by BLUPR06MB228.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.242.191.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.81.19; Sat, 14 Feb 2015 21:36:55 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Remote participation fees [Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY]
From: Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@isoc.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12B466)
In-Reply-To: <54DFBAF6.30409@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 16:36:50 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <71F05D3C-95F1-4424-B6AA-49EBCCB7065A@isoc.org>
References: <CAL0qLwZk=k-CWLte_ChK9f1kzLwMOTRyi7AwFa8fLjBsextBcA@mail.gmail.com> <9772.1420830216@sandelman.ca> <CAL0qLwZatYW2e4Wk6GXB2U26fsCn8BV2qt-07kHBugiq34zrcQ@mail.gmail.com> <6025.1423672358@sandelman.ca> <CAL0qLwYtE618sA99hgXP-5wk+BYdcXLbiZqd_36OreYQ1LB7hQ@mail.gmail.com> <54DBD71C.20101@joelhalpern.com> <26803.1423772214@sandelman.ca> <tsla90ikh85.fsf@mit.edu> <37661D4B-1842-4890-88FB-2A7B13CDC884@nominum.com> <CABmDk8m1KuSs8os9V7fcYOJC2O4yMb6dRFer+nEPBTTSHtey9Q@mail.gmail.com> <31891031-4628-49CD-B66C-38A3BD787B70@trammell.ch> <54DE7F09.8030500@gmail.com> <C5FC0DB6-82F8-4C38-ABFD-D5D9A6E65933@isoc.org.ec> <54DE90C6.6030609@gmail.com> <E39AF4E0-58AB-4249-8A37-3D1CD2D5A691@gmail.com> <54DE9844.1010807@gmail.com> <61FBB27B-4EF3-40A0-8981-00EB89698295@isoc.org.ec> <B90F5E29-06C5-41D1-9F31-1BE42382995F@gmail.com> <CABmDk8=YPZ1W2tTOqP23U2PFVLoDh-3+wwmcA8mpta-Y05op2A@mail.gmail.com> <54DFBAF6.30409@cs.tcd.ie>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Originating-IP: [72.237.59.193]
X-ClientProxiedBy: BLUPR11CA0056.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.141.30.24) To BLUPR06MB228.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.242.191.152)
Authentication-Results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR06MB228;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004); SRVR:BLUPR06MB228;
X-Forefront-PRVS: 0487C0DB7E
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6049001)(6009001)(377454003)(24454002)(51704005)(479174004)(86362001)(93886004)(76176999)(50466002)(2950100001)(36756003)(62966003)(66066001)(92566002)(50986999)(46406003)(77156002)(42186005)(117156001)(97756001)(87976001)(110136001)(77096005)(83716003)(40100003)(46102003)(122386002)(47776003)(33656002)(23726002)(82746002)(50226001)(19580395003)(19580405001)(110306001)(117466003)(104396002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR06MB228; H:[192.168.0.14]; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR06MB228;
X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Feb 2015 21:36:55.4398 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR06MB228
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3LowWDe3fVra65uqQnLznqQOAW4>
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, Carlos Vera Quintana <cveraq@gmail.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 21:37:17 -0000

+1

Ray


> On Feb 14, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>; wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 14/02/15 18:21, Mary Barnes wrote:
>> And, actually this is already happening with Meetecho.
> 
> I think we ought forget about charging for remote attendance until
> remote attendance is much better. Remotely attending IETF-91 via
> meetecho was a good bit better than I expected but is nowhere near
> the point where we could charge. Let's make it work first, and then
> see how that affects attendance and then figure out charging models
> and not try do that backwards by starting to discuss charging models
> for something that doesn't yet exist.
> 
> S.
>