Re: Varying meeting venue -- why?

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Thursday, August 12, 2010 16:41 -0500 Barry Leiba
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>> I think Vancouver would be an excellent city for a recurring
>> North American meeting.  There is a reasonable convenience
>> factor in terms of nearby hotels, restuarants and food
>> markets (there's an excellent one just a couple blocks from
>> the venue).  However, based on the poll, it seemed that folks
>> preferred Quebec City, which suggests that the majority of
>> folks don't favor the idea of returning to the same city.
> 
> One thing this suggests to me is that the people who are prone
> to taking the survey favour the idea of variety.  I dismember
> how many survey responses we had, and how the responses broke
> down when categorized by number of IETF meetings attended, so
> I can't be sure, here.  But I'm guessing that many of the
> responses came from the long-timers who will go wherever the
> meeting is, and that not so many came from the folks who are
> relatively new and are considering increasing their
> participation.

In addition to the selection bias issues that Andrew cites and
Dave indirectly mentions (and with which I agree), there is
something special about this type of "survey".

People were asked which they preferred, but not why.  The
preferences are, IMO, a complex matter and differ from person to
person and maybe the day the question is answered.  As an
example, I generally prefer Vancouver and liked the venue
situation there (some allergy problems that I can suppress with
drugs as long as the meeting isn't over about a week long
notwithstanding - I actually had worse asthma problems in the
Maastricht facility).  I've also had some bad meeting
experiences in Quebec City although they were a few decades ago.
However, at the time the survey was taken, I was suffering from
being even more thoroughly sick of airplanes and airports than
usual and Quebec City is a convenient five and a fraction hour
drive from my usual starting point for trips north.

So, in response to the question and based partially on wishful
thinking that IAOC had qualified facilities in both cities and
could reasonably promise as good a meeting experience in Quebec
as in Vancouver, I voted for Quebec.  Had my starting point been
a few hours further away, or had I needed to contemplate the
(usually truly awful) flight connection situation to Quebec, the
answer would have been different.  Getting from that situation
to "favor variety", "dislike Vancouver", or even "would not
rather be in Minneapolis if the visa situation were better"
would be a pretty big stretch and an incorrect inference.

FWIW, Quebec City is circa 1.5 hours further from me (driving
time) than Montreal, where I remember very satisfactory meeting
and environmental experiences.   Given a Montreal - Quebec City
choice, Quebec City would lose badly for me.  And Montreal has a
meaningful international airport even though it isn't as good in
that regard, especially for flights to Asia, as Toronto.

    john