Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 06/04/2017 17:04, Eliot Lear wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> 
> On 4/6/17 1:39 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>
>> On 05/04/17 23:43, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>> This stance quite plainly empties the word "mandatory" of its meaning.
>>> If you wish to remove the "mandatory" items and call them "Really
>>> Sooper Genius Important" or something (to indicate that they're More
>>> Important than the Important ones), I'm ok with that.  But they're not
>>> _mandatory_. 
>> +1, that class is not useful IMO, getting rid of it will help
> 
> I think we are coming quite close to it, and if that is what the WG
> wants, then your editor will happily comply (conversely if the WG wants
> to keep all the mandatory criteria as are, the same holds.  This is,
> after all, a WG doc). 
> 
> Based on the breakdown I mentioned there are only three Mandatory fields
> left.  One is that the community must have been consulted, the second is
> that there is enough space for the meeting, and the third is wheelchair
> accessible (this last as agreed in the room).  

It might have got lost in the noise that I suggested that there is actually
a fourth one: Enough *hotel* rooms in total (regardless of whether they are
in the main hotel, backup hotels, or budget hotels). But it's like enough
meeting rooms - there's nothing we can do if an extra 500 people
register the day before the early bird cutoff. 

    Brian

> The first is something
> that could be moved to Section 5.  The last is something that probably
> still needs some wordsmithing in order to be actionable by the IAOC. 
> That leaves "enough space".  I have attempted to rewrite it so that it
> is more clearly actionable.
> 
> The issue then is whether "Mandatory" means we have to cancel the
> meeting if, for some reason, the number of rooms comes up short.  That
> is- we signed the contract, and, well, oops.  We have more WGs that need
> to meet, because we didn't know how things would look N years ago.  It
> would be simply crazy to do so.  But the IAOC shouldn't PLAN for such a
> shortfall.
> 
> Eliot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mtgvenue mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue
>