Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was" Re: Hilton BA is Booked already?)
Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Thu, 17 December 2015 16:37 UTC
Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC43C1B2F71 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:37:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
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 SKko1QHoH_lK for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:37:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A882A1B2F70 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:37:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.99] (76-218-10-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.10.206]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tBHGbGub011862 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:37:16 -0800
Subject: Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was" Re: Hilton BA is Booked already?)
References: <076c01d138e7$0a68dba0$1f3a92e0$@olddog.co.uk>
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
To: ietf@ietf.org
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <5672E4BB.2050702@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:37:15 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <076c01d138e7$0a68dba0$1f3a92e0$@olddog.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:37:16 -0800 (PST)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/slAZ2SvtncxMr0keY_ualXV7VO8>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 16:37:18 -0000
> But it wold be useful thought experiment for them all to examine how their weeks would be different if they had a 20 minute walk each way each day. Effort to get decision-makers to have better empathy for the rank-and-file is certainly useful. The challenge is to make the effort practical and sufficient. By 'sufficient' I mean it has to cover enough of the core issues in ways that work. In this case, hotel choice is only part of the equation. Travel time and travel cost are two other major factors. So are additional costs, such as food in the main venue. (We had one main venue with reasonable hotel room rate but US$ 25 hamburgers...) To get better surveys, they need to be dramatically more carefully, in terms of question formulation, respondent selection and response analysis. This is not a new or unmentioned issue within the IAOC and meeting committee. What we currently do produces results dominated by well-funded, continuing participants who are highly experienced travelers; in effect, we get a tourism response from folk who are already likely to attend. Choices like BA or Sydney inconvenience essentially all attendees, in favor of goals other than getting work done. To date, there has been little interest in making the necessary effort to focus on requirements for being more inclusive. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net
- RE: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Adrian Farrel
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Stephen Farrell
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Dave Crocker
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Kathleen Moriarty
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Alia Atlas
- RE: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Christian Huitema
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Alia Atlas
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… John C Klensin
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Dave Crocker
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… John Levine
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Christian Hopps
- RE: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… MAISONNEUVE, JULIEN (JULIEN)
- RE: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Lou Berger
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Randall Gellens
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… John Levine
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… John C Klensin
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Eliot Lear
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Randall Gellens
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… John C Klensin
- Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was… Randall Gellens