Re: [IAOC] Badges and blue sheets

Marshall Eubanks <tme@americafree.tv> Fri, 12 November 2010 01:54 UTC

Return-Path: <tme@americafree.tv>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9557E3A6781; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:54:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.776
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.776 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.823, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e7OZ0WIRsgMd; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:54:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.americafree.tv (rossini.americafree.tv [63.105.122.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CB253A689A; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:54:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (rossini.americafree.tv [63.105.122.34]) by mail.americafree.tv (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5223F935949C; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 20:55:21 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: [IAOC] Badges and blue sheets
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@americafree.tv>
In-Reply-To: <C902BBBD.23A1E1%jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 20:55:18 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D686DF98-C591-45E7-A186-7C641D9F146A@americafree.tv>
References: <C902BBBD.23A1E1%jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
Cc: iaoc@ietf.org, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 01:54:52 -0000

On Nov 11, 2010, at 8:39 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:

> I've no problem with the badge being checked, and I think, at least in my
> case, it has been done in a very non-intrusive way. It increase the security
> for our personal staff and IETF/hosts properties, so that's good and it also
> helps to avoid people not paying to enter for free.
> 
> However, I'm more concerned about something related. I've been observing
> since several meetings ago that some people that show as "non-paid" have got
> their badges (or at least I see them in the meetings), and I think some of
> them appear in many consecutive meetings.
> 
> I understand that a small number of people is part of the host team, or
> future host, NOC, etc., and I see they appear as "Comp" and/or Host.
> 
> Not sure if Comp stands for Complementary? If that's the case, I think it
> needs to be MORE obvious if is just complementary for an unknown (to most of
> us I guess) reason or is all part of the host/next host/NOC.

Dear Jordi;

It's American slang for complementary. It is generally viewed as a verb, but
generally used as an adjective (as in, "he wanted a comped ticket for his efforts").

Hosts get comped tickets, which they of course are really paying for in their sponsorship. 

Some full-time volunteers also get comped tickets. They work incredibly hard to make the 
meeting a success and I, for one, do not begrudge them that. 

Please note that the IAOC does not get comped tickets.

Regards
Marshall 

> 
> I will use a more clear rations, such as "NOC", "host", "n. host" and I
> think the community needs to understand, for the rest of the cases, what it
> means complementary and why is that done (not sure if there is an RFC that
> states "special complementary cases").
> 
> Why I'm asking this is that observing the 15$ increase in the cost of IETF,
> vs. the number of "comp" folks (across certain number of meetings), we could
> have saved that attendance cost increase.
> 
> Note that I'm not saying "comp" should not be done, but we need a more clear
> rational/explanation about that, not only for cost reasons but also for
> making sure that when we see someone in the meeting rooms that hasn't paid,
> we can make sure that is not someone "faking" the system and attending at
> our expenses.
> 
> Regards,
> Jordi
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
>> Organization: University of Auckland
>> Reply-To: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
>> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 13:09:46 +1300
>> To: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
>> Cc: <iaoc@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Badges and blue sheets
>> 
>> On 2010-11-12 12:32, Lawrence Conroy wrote:
>> ...
>>> Do I think the introduction of badge police to control access to IETF
>>> WG meetings is a big deal?
>> 
>> I think that freeriders attending our meetings without paying their
>> share of costs would be a big deal.
>> 
>> I think that patent trolls attending our meetings without identifying
>> themselves and signing the blue sheets would be a big deal.
>> 
>> I am very happy to have my badge checked and I would be even happier
>> if the blue sheets could be automated.
>> 
>>    Brian
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf mailing list
>> Ietf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
> 
> 
> **********************************************
> The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org
> 
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IAOC mailing list
> IAOC@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iaoc
>