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

Brian E Carpenter <> Fri, 13 February 2015 22:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5328D1A1B16 for <>; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 14:47:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ue2raRuqal9Y for <>; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 14:47:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AA131A1A92 for <>; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 14:47:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id kq14so21764035pab.3 for <>; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 14:47:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=SvTTTJCWwSEDGWRYdguW8o0pKp5oK/Cm9pk/P6DaWkA=; b=pVvRqQnG244MIOEbRTUpjPxIFx9y/sQMW/QyWf7CWwdj8sP5qDt2C3+Qe2/BrC/N57 RvlYGlUWwHXt6bLK/XSKCuheRcUtNTxNOevM2EmodQN3P83BtLA20OLzKEyEWrMji5ob 1VBBb3Q1zvcyUVKpJX/Zfu3nz6meI/5G7RUASHRmO5BQAuarFp4+7uOemNhTjOLSsdsQ aQ1s59zP/1NtPKCzqipF5lrLmnmglTk86nlzdHDmn/33RgQ4AB+A7O5oPvd+f3xhqB0P Wq/t18CmpUhlv/nVQTR6VtHtOouIBAQc+NDPlBzSBuXUyUqZcJZU9+zaIk6XFQG2jZJP z0CA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id e8mr5710426pas.3.1423867650864; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 14:47:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:6310:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:6310:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by with ESMTPSA id bx10sm7753816pab.25.2015. (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 13 Feb 2015 14:47:29 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 11:47:37 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian Trammell <>, Mary Barnes <>
Subject: Remote participation fees [Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY]
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Michael Richardson <>, Sam Hartman <>, ietf <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 22:47:37 -0000

On 14/02/2015 10:50, Brian Trammell wrote:
> hi Mary, all,
>> On 13 Feb 2015, at 22:30, Mary Barnes <> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Ted Lemon <> wrote:
>> On Feb 12, 2015, at 3:27 PM, Sam Hartman <> wrote:
>>> In the past I've been nervous about giving remote participation too much
>>> power in part because I'm worried about how that impacts meeting fees
>>> and in part because I value cross-area involvement.
>> It's possible that we could collect meeting fees from remote attendees, offering a hardship exemption for those who can't afford it.   That would depend on remote attendance working better than it does now, I think, but it would be unfortunate if the main impediment to making remote attendance work well were that we didn't want to lose meeting revenue.
>> [MB] I totally agree on this latter point.  I'm very conflicted about charging for remote participation, but perhaps something nominal.  It's also quite possible that if we improve the quality, we will get more remote participants.
> A requirement (at least at first) to allocate n% of remote participation fees directly to expenses related to the improvement of remote participation would make this a lot more feasible.

But it begins to smell like a poll tax. Some people participate remotely
because they simply can't justify the travel expenditure; if it costs (say)
$200 to participate remotely, that would be enough to keep some people out.
How the Secretariat could possibly validate hardship cases remotely
is beyond me.

Also, does particpate mean "watch and listen" or "watch, listen and speak"?
I find it hard to imagine paying $200 just to watch and listen.

(Of course, I made up "$200" but it does need to be an amount of money
that's worth collecting, and in that case it will be a significant issue
for, say, a student in a developing country.)

    Brian C