Re: Hotel situation

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

--On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 09:15 +0000 Stewart Bryant
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 04/01/2016 21:33, John C Klensin wrote:
>> (1) While it is clear that people who favor going back to
>> Minneapolis are in the minority of the Meetings Committee (at
>> least as they and the IAOC count votes), it is much less clear
>> that such people are in the minority of active participants in
>> the IETF.

> Minneapolis is really a metaphor for functional, works well
> for most people, easy to get flights and hotels, flight times
> not too bad, not regarded as a holiday trip at work, everyone
> is there to work.

> It does not have to be Minneapolis, but the utilitarian
> properties above, are in my view far more relevant than the
> IETF World Tour model we seem to have in place.

Agreed.  But Minneapolis is, in one way, not just a metaphor.
Especially as we start discussing "go back to the same places
every year" again, Minneapolis was a place we went to multiple
times and found successful (for the reasons you give).  Then we
stopped.  There has never been an explanation to the community
as to why we stopped, but there have been rumors that someone
had a bad experience (whether with the weather, the hotel, or
something else), vowed that we would never go back there, and
apparently was in a position to implement that vow.  Rumors like
that are unfortunate, but can be seen as symptoms of the
failures of the Meeting Committee and IAOC to communicate
clearly and openly with the community about these issues and
decisions.

     john