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

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lou,


On 4/11/17 7:12 PM, Lou Berger wrote:
> The text in question reads:
>
>     The economics of the Venue allow the meeting to be net cash positive.
>
> To make make it clear that it's not saying preserve the current model, how about:
>
>     The economics of the Venue allow the meeting to not result in a net
> loss.
>

What was said in the meeting, as I recall, was that even planning a loss
at ONE meeting is okay, so long as the IAOC can see their way clear from
a budgetary standpoint.  For instance, Jari was complaining about the
cost of going to Japan.  Maybe what happens (and I don't know if this is
the right thing to do) is that the IAOC decides to subsidize a meeting
with Japan from somewhere else.  Should that not be allowed, and should
the IETF community care?  And if we do, what precisely is it that we
care about?

Regards,

Eliot