Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities

Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org> Sat, 15 April 2017 09:52 UTC

Return-Path: <chopps@chopps.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60984127201 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Apr 2017 02:52:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 uvWJKTr7aSK7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Apr 2017 02:52:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.chopps.org (smtp.chopps.org [54.88.81.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F13E61242F5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Apr 2017 02:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pip.chopps.org (97-83-46-222.dhcp.trcy.mi.charter.com [97.83.46.222]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by smtp.chopps.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5FDAE62E41; Sat, 15 Apr 2017 09:52:28 +0000 (UTC)
References: <93404c29-78ba-ff9b-9170-f5f2a5389a31@gmail.com> <E068F01A-B720-4E7A-A60F-AA5BDA22D535@consulintel.es> <20170404181505.GA4004@localhost> <CAAQiQRcvu-BfBA_NEqZwXsHEn6ujpa2=w7P5Vu2f6GLXjKqkcA@mail.gmail.com> <20170404202446.GB4004@localhost> <20170404211526.GA25253@gsp.org> <003F08E0-D80E-40F7-AB15-6588B7B140CF@tzi.org> <20170410180555.GA20454@gsp.org> <AF3B5F0A-EEA7-402D-B61E-EDE6CE2AE16C@tzi.org> <8546635c-f838-e7f7-a5ec-3a855a14c0f9@dcrocker.net> <20170411232408.GE48535@verdi> <15694.1491965723@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <f1481391-b477-0596-d8ea-adc02ec48e94@pi.nu> <10890.1492007455@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <04c5e6a6-fe92-20ca-f01e-5c2d17dc6022@gmail.com> <9609909d-f631-4651-23a0-c7267bc3b7f5@joelhalpern.com>
User-agent: mu4e 0.9.19; emacs 25.1.1
From: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Cc: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities
In-reply-to: <9609909d-f631-4651-23a0-c7267bc3b7f5@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2017 05:52:26 -0400
Message-ID: <87inm6uhet.fsf@chopps.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/rn9syjoTOoBplRjReZt9_ud1pok>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 15 Apr 2017 09:52:30 -0000

Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> writes:

> There is a lot of value in face-to-face interaction.
> While we can not always get the interactions we want, virtual interaction is no
> replacement for face-to-face.  Being able to chat with people between meetings.
> Having folks in the same place to set up high-interaction discussions.  And
> multiple additional benefits.
>
> Yes, funding matters.  But in my view that is secondary to the actual benefit of
> the meetings.  Which is why I attend.

+1

Whenever I read messages that advocate for switching to remote only
meetings, I have to wonder, are those people just not getting what I get
out of f2f meetings? I find the meetings invaluable for the reasons you
list above.

Thanks,
Chris.

>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
> On 4/14/17 12:38 PM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/04/2017 15:30, Michael Richardson wrote:
>>> Right, so this is why it's better for everyone to be remote.
>>
>> Except that the IETF funding model requires attendees to pay their
>> meeting fee.
>>
>> - Stewart
>>
>>