Just a reminder, the community VOTED for Quebec City. Backing up Dave here, the community repeatedly VOTES or, in post-meeting surveys, INDICATES (VOTES) for the sort of venues we have been booking.
Let me say it one more time: I have stayed at hotels for between one-half and one-seventh the price of the IETF hotel. Instead of griping about the IETF hotel, WHICH SEEMS TO ALWAYS SELL OUT, I save my money (it's my money!) and stay at the nearby hotel. Who cares if the IETF hotel is expensive, so long as I am not barred from visiting the bar? Speaking for myself (I am NOT on the venue selection committee - I'll let them speak for themselves), I would offer that one has to ask oneself what one is really asking the IAOC to *do*? We find venues that are all under one roof (check), have food near by (OK, Maastricht was a bomb, but we analyzed the root cause of that and it should not happen again), is relatively easy to get to for a not stupidly expensive amount of money (check), is relatively close to some critical mass of active IETF participants (check), and have options for people on a budget (check). Let's ask again: what is it you WANT? This is getting beyond Steve's "you cannot satisfy all of the people all of the time." On Aug 24, 2011, at 5:12 PM, Keith Moore wrote: > Maybe there needs to be some sort of voting system for future venues. > > You'd be eligible to vote if you'd attended an IETF anytime within the past, > say, 2 years - or if you were willing to commit to attending the one you vote > on if it wins. (say by putting down a deposit toward meeting fees). > > Instead of picking one venue, the committee would solicit bids from N (say > 3-4) different venues within a geographic region. The bids would include: > room cost per night in the conference hotel > room cost per night in each of some small number of alternate hotels > locations of said hotels and nature of transportation between there and the > conference venue > meeting fee for the entire week if that venue is chosen > other pertinent information (like what kind of food is nearby, what kind of > facilities there are in or near the venue for impromptu gathering, what kinds > of sightseeing opportunities there are, etc.) > The committee would survey attendees from time to time and tell the > prospective venues what kinds of criteria the attendees found important, so > they'd know how best to make their pitch. > > Every eligible voter would get one vote. There would be a strict deadline > for submitting bids, and a strict deadline for voting. > > That way, everyone could figure his own travel costs, factor in his own > willingness to stay further away for less cost, etc. > > Keith > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
