Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
> Hi Ted,
>
> I agree with the above, but see a major problem: we have no
> way to fairly consider economic inclusiveness that I can see,
> and from my POV that far outweighs any other form of lack of
> inclusiveness when it comes to affecting the ability of
> potential IETF participants to get to meetings.
>

I think you're quite right.  There are a lot of ways to mitigate it
(sliding scale meeting fees, subsidies for travel and lodging where needed,
actively seeking lower cost facilities and hotels), but they all scale
poorly and don't address the basic issue.  The best long term solution is
no doubt moving the meetings to a mode where remote participation is
equivalent for those wanting to do work.  That's something we're already
working on, but we could do more.

Until we do that, though, I remind you that the economic issue cross-cuts
the others; there are folks affected both by the economics and the other
issues which have been raised.

regards,

Ted