I certainly agree that the participation in the face-to-face meetings is indeed more costly. For leadership positions (as you call them) such participation is indeed important.
On Jul 29, 2012, at 2:02 PM, Glen Zorn wrote: > On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 13:28 -0700, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: >> >> > >> > Do you think that corporate domination of "open" standards development is >> > OK? >> > >> >> The barrier for participation is low since there are no membership fees, >> etc. > > For participation, yes, all that is needed is an email account; if one wishes > to attend meetings (just the main ones - let's ignore interims), the bar > rises considerably. The chances of dominating a WG or attaining a leadership > position in the IETF are very close to zero without meeting attendance. I > spend about 10% of my gross income on travel, meeting fees, etc. for IETF > meetings; I don't consider that to be trivial. >> >> Nevertheless, those who participate in standardization efforts have to spend >> their time. > > And somebody's money: I spend about 10% of my gross income on travel, meeting > fees, etc. for IETF meetings; I don't consider that to be trivial. > >> So, typically those who participate for a longer period of time need to have >> some incentives. These incentives often come from working for a specific >> company. >> >> We cannot force anyone to participate in any of our working groups. In the >> OAuth case we have lots of other people participating but they typically ask >> questions and provide implementation feedback rather than trying to steer >> the standardization work. >> >> Ciao >> Hannes >> >> PS: Eran was also working for a big corporation, namely Yahoo. I could >> imagine that Yahoo also had some incentives to pay Eran for his >> participation in this work. >
