Re: [Mtgvenue] Comments on draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-02

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 02 November 2016 13:22 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1204D12963A for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 06:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 3usdtf97AT_D for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 06:22:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22c.google.com (mail-wm0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83D71129406 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 06:22:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id t79so37096627wmt.0 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 Nov 2016 06:22:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Nh+8Af2oi+d9zuzA4oLXkNF0rkR94wAb65z8HeOIZIw=; b=hni/nD4+nEFrDsK6db8KznwEnK7lU3xNsRknL2A15NUqR4oJRJApdDKll9cI3gWwqc BE3IoTMyXQUTfHy1dkIlxvnHsda2GovRl3ZCzJvKoZCn2ukH0Othutq31Zy4P+KNnqyg W6jkppI7k7ugG5vJd3EkWSwjWzAH/XB3nR5hKJaNOe36zVpIeQ44QDQK4U2GQY6ARc1k sd/r/Ew42RFtr+bnPYEYN8TYZkxE/Z4DbgqjaZUGmhfZoo4JdEvNSOuMLlwJuJTUjJeq sCFH6+B181bV9V1oZGYf098RujsAQgcaQMurh9CyDN6Wv1BhMbgqNUUX/UmrROl3toBm IFNw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Nh+8Af2oi+d9zuzA4oLXkNF0rkR94wAb65z8HeOIZIw=; b=QhhmK6SJEVnmtP9JdE5llK0TaIe9mq5cD3Ge9VUvffsi9e5CnEn5fv7xZBYCOGUfd4 Musrg2JhJ3LdzVwradH+swPWV5iK07qRDAWK6aPObSjW1Nya8lA71pcJCezf9Mg7XWe4 +2D4pTt+6egznk/7H/cCOoftkQaaHbVh583/aJvK8u8EM5g/1rFTUoJ7Z2JwriPFcChH m5xj3seDbFHOhr4zdVj8HX3OqO5tw1REwXMwONJiQUUgtT5PHo7pqK8+0H7cMKMg/2q5 UCOqd2mZsCxXelqQAosANJCCJywfzqwyVevi7YyRBQdl4lygyu7Amn7D6v7BSKgPFMxC kC7g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcOLRW0tS3oSQgwVHB6lVqfXloS/On0hlaQWesk+KYKaRklnY9xUeK2XkeHWx+DZA==
X-Received: by 10.194.106.135 with SMTP id gu7mr2802594wjb.153.1478092966336; Wed, 02 Nov 2016 06:22:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.24.248.112] (dyn32-131.checkpoint.com. [194.29.32.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 135sm3242313wmq.8.2016.11.02.06.22.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 02 Nov 2016 06:22:45 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\))
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8819739f-f775-b808-7e9a-d99c3a847557@dcrocker.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2016 15:22:44 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FDE25CA1-E9F9-4651-B189-2A357143A94B@gmail.com>
References: <E3C933A5-6141-437A-ABA9-CF881BC8149E@cooperw.in> <50f9aade-69aa-0f49-05a6-00c891f96070@dcrocker.net> <2fcf2945-094a-0041-a464-8965d0a472d2@gmail.com> <C86363C1-B427-4278-B325-C883C6DEB7D3@gmail.com> <7eb36108-79cc-a3f5-6c41-1d7e4b1b849e@gmail.com> <f7b3c9ea-de33-26d1-8f0a-3ce82860771e@dcrocker.net> <B7162C59-16C7-4885-8524-AC8BAAD3BAE7@amsl.com> <71BAE699-8A0A-4201-B3CD-D80FFB79945A@gmail.com> <8819739f-f775-b808-7e9a-d99c3a847557@dcrocker.net>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/5SY6aXhXRHwLy82nk-ysRCI_NRE>
Cc: mtgvenue@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Comments on draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-02
X-BeenThere: mtgvenue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IAOC meeting venue selection process." <mtgvenue.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mtgvenue/>
List-Post: <mailto:mtgvenue@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2016 13:22:50 -0000

> On 2 Nov 2016, at 15:01, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 11/2/2016 4:53 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
>> That is part of it. But there is also benefit, a huge one, in human networking. The difference between having scheduled remote meetings using tools such a MeetEcho and an in-person meeting is unscheduled meetings - two or more people can have a meal together or talk in the hallway on a topic of their choice at will. This possibility is maximized if they are physically co-located. When we are housed in a number of smaller hotels, this is still possible, of course, but it is not as accessible.
> 
> 
> As paradigm choices go, this is a major topic.  Potentially major in how it affects the tone of the IETF meeting and definitely major in its effect on the search for venues.
> 
> So I suggest we consider both the dynamics of the feature and the effect of alternatives.
> 
> By way of example:
> 
>     If an area has many, smaller hotels nearby, is the convenience of getting together hurt significantly?  Why or why not?

I believe that the answer to this varies significantly. I tend to leave my hotel room in the morning and go to the venue, hang around there until late at night, and only then go back to my hotel room. It doesn’t matter if the hotel room is upstairs or a 30-minute travel by city bus away (as it was in Quebec City).

Others don’t go to as many sessions as I do, so they’re more likely to either go and explore the city or go back to their hotel room. If their hotel room is far away, they’re likely to not return to the venue until the next day.

The distressing part is that belonging to the second group may be positively correlated with being a newcomer.  So all those productive getting together could be lost on the newcomers, who will only experience the IETF meeting as a series of formal sessions with presentations.

>     Also, how much more work would it be to arrange the same number of reserved rooms, but in a mixture of hotels.  (I believe we have some experience of doing this?)

I think we already do that, no?

Yoav