Re: Hotel situation

[Tim Chown <[e-mail]>]

> On 5 Jan 2016, at 13:28, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> --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

It would be interesting to know. It is, or was, a good meeting venue.

I’m guessing attendance is lower, and meeting fees matter more now?

Tim