Re: [Manycouches] AD review: draft-ietf-shmoo-remote-fee-04

[Mirja Kuehlewind <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lars,

Thanks! PR is here:

https://github.com/mirjak/draft-kuehlewind-shmoo-remote-fee/pull/31/files <https://github.com/mirjak/draft-kuehlewind-shmoo-remote-fee/pull/31/files>

I didn’t take some of the suggestion at the very end as I felt that would weaken the intended statements about not putting any requirements or restrictions on when to use the fee waiver. Further see two comments below about points that I didn’t address (yet).

Mirja



> On 8. Dec 2022, at 13:58, Lars Eggert <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> # GEN AD review of draft-ietf-shmoo-remote-fee-04
> 
> CC @larseggert
> 
> ## Comments
> 
> ### Section 1, paragraph 2
> ```
>     Remote participation for IETF in-person meetings has evolved over
>     time from email-only to live chat and audio streaming, and,
>     subsequently, to a full online meeting system that is tightly
>     integrated with the in-room session and enables interactive
>     participation by audio and video.  Due to this evolution, and because
>     most in-person attendees paid registration fees and this has been
>     sufficient to support the meeting, online participation has
>     historically been free for remote attendees.
> ```
> The meeting fees have never been sufficient to support the meetings -
> meeting sponsors and the ISOC support are critical. I think it may be
> better to replace the entire final sentence with simply "Online
> participation has historically been free for remote attendees",
> sidestepping all of this.
> 
> ### Section 1, paragraph 3
> ```
>     With the move to fully online meetings in 2020, however, there is no
>     longer a distinction between remote and on-site participants.  Since
>     IETF meeting costs and other costs still had to be covered, there was
>     the need for a meeting fee for remote participants, which risks the
>     removal of the free remote option.
> ```
> Would rephrase the last sentence as "Since IETF meeting costs and
> other costs still had to be recovered, a meeting fee was charged for
> remote participants, eliminating the free remote participation
> option (for a time)."
> 
> ### Section 2, paragraph 3
> ```
>     The principle this document states is simple: there must always be an
>     option for free remote participation in any IETF meeting, regardless
>     of whether the meeting has a physical presence.  Related events of a
>     meeting for which the IETF provides remote participation services and
>     are therefore part of the IETF's open process [RFC3935] are
>     encouraged to follow this principle as well.
> ```
> Suggest to rephrase the last sentence as "Related events collocated
> with an IETF meeting are part of the IETF's open process [RFC3935] and
> are encouraged to follow this principle as well.""

We discussed this and add this part to e.g. not require the social to have free remote attendance. Only if there is support for remote participants, this doc says there should also be a free option.
> 
> ### Section 3, paragraph 2
> ```
>     Online meetings can have lower costs than in-person meetings,
>     however, they still come with expenses, as do other services that the
>     IETF provides such as mailing lists, document access via the
>     datatracker or other online platforms, or support for
>     videoconferencing, e.g., with Webex accounts for working groups and
>     other roles in the IETF.
> ```
> Webex is not a good example, since it's an in-kind donation. We do pay
> for Meetecho, that would be a better example.
> 
> ### Section 3, paragraph 2
> ```
>     These and other operating costs of the IETF are also cross-financed
>     by income generated through meeting fees.  The intention of this
>     document and the principle stated herein is not to make participation
>     free for everyone, but to always offer a free remote participation
>     option that a potential attendee can apply for without any barriers
>     other than the registration procedure itself.  As long as the overall
>     meeting expenses are covered by paid registrations, sponsorships and
>     other sources of revenue, additional remote participants usually
>     impose very low additional expenses.
> ```
> "without any barriers other than the registration procedure" - this
> seems to prevent requiring fee waiver requests?

Based on discussion in the group, this was added to mainly say that non-paid participants have the same access to remote participation than paid remote attendees and not any restricted access or additional effort to join the session or anything like this. 

I personally think the process we have now is not great; it's not fully obvious to find and can still be a barrier. However, for this text I would say that's part of the registration procedure.

> 
> ### Inclusive language
> 
> Found terminology that should be reviewed for inclusivity; see
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/part2/#inclusive_language for background and more
> guidance:
> 
> * Terms `his` and `her`; alternatives might be `they`, `them`, `their`
> 
> ## Nits
> 
> All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
> address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
> automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there
> will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
> did with these suggestions.
> 
> ### Typos
> 
> #### Section 1, paragraph 2
> ```
> -    seen an increasing number of remote participants.  This increase can
> +    seeing an increasing number of remote participants.  This increase can
> +       + +
> ```
> 
> #### Section 1, paragraph 2
> ```
> -    better understand these trends the IETF started requiring
> +    better understand these trends, the IETF started requiring
> +                                  +
> ```
> 
> #### Section 1, paragraph 3
> ```
> -    With the move to fully online meetings in 2020, however, there is no
> -                                                                   ^
> +    With the move to fully online meetings in 2020, however, there was no
> +                                                                   ^^
> ```
> 
> #### Section 1, paragraph 4
> ```
> -    about the potential impact on both, those who regularly remotely
> -                                      -
> ```
> 
> #### Section 1, paragraph 4
> ```
> -    attend IETF meetings as well as people considering attending an IETF
> -                           --------------
> +    attend IETF meetings and those considering attending an IETF
> +                          ++++++
> ```
> 
> #### Section 2, paragraph 5
> ```
> -    and documentation and making them accessible over the Internet, it
> -        ---- ---   ^^        ^^^
> +    and materials and to make them accessible over the Internet, it
> +           ++ ^^^     +++   ^
> ```
> 
> #### Section 2, paragraph 6
> ```
> -    possible.  This document rather says that if remote participation is
> -                                      ^
> +    possible.  This document rather states that if remote participation is
> +                                     + ^^
> ```
> 
> #### Section 3, paragraph 1
> ```
> -    however, they still come with expenses, as do other services that the
> -                  -- ^^^ ^^^^^^^^
> -    IETF provides such as mailing lists, document access via the
> +    however, they incur expenses, as do other services that the
> +                   ^ ^^
> +    IETF provides, such as mailing lists, document access via the
> +                 +
> ```
> 
> #### Section 3, paragraph 2
> ```
> -    These and other operating costs of the IETF are also cross-financed
> -                                                      ^^
> +    These and other operating costs of the IETF are partially cross-financed
> +                                                    +++++  ^^
> ```
> 
> #### Section 3, paragraph 3
> ```
> -    the cost of free participation emerges to a signification factor, the
> +    the cost of free participation emerges to be a signification factor, the
> +                                              +++
> ```
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 1
> ```
> -    This document does not provide specific requirements on when to use
> -                           ^ -----          ^^^   ^^^
> +    This document does not offer specific guidance to participants on when to use
> +                           ^^^^           ^  +++++++++++ ^^^^^^
> ```
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 1
> ```
> -    participants, nor to any specific other restrictions like the number
> -                             ---  ----- -  ------ ^^^^^^
> +    participants, nor to any criteria, like the number
> +                              +     ^^
> ```
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 2
> ```
> -    It is expected that participants who have financial support to use
> -           ^^^ ^                                                ---
> -    the regular registration option will do so.  Paying a registration
> -                                   -----------
> +    It is encouraged that participants who have financial support use
> +           ^ ^^^^^
> +    the regular paid registration option.  Paying a registration
> +               +++++
> ```
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 3
> ```
> -    the number and percentage of free registrations used should be
> -                                                    -----
> ```
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 3
> ```
> -    published, as this will permit analysis of the use and change in use
> -                                                      ------------------
> ```
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 4
> ```
> -    As the principle defined in this document aims to promote openness
> -                                                               -- ----
> -    and thereby enhance participation, an increase in use of free
> -                         ^^^^^^^^^^^
> +    As the principle defined in this document aims to promote participation
> +                                                              +++++++++++
> +    and thereby enhance openness, an increase in use of free
> +                        + ^ ++++
> ```
> 
> #### Section 4, paragraph 4
> ```
> -    registrations stays stable and retains the projected needed income.
> -    If the number of paid registrations, however, decreases, this can
> -    ^                                  ----------
> -    still also have various reasons other than misuse, such as
> -    ^ ------- -----
> +    registrations stays stable and the needed registration revenue is realized.
> +    However, if the number of paid registrations decreases, this can
> +    ^^^^^^^^^^
> +    be due to various reasons other than misuse, such as
> +    ^^^^^^^
> ```
> 
> ## Notes
> 
> This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
> [`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
> individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT].
> 
> [ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
> [ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
> [IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Manycouches mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manycouches