On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 14:13 -0500, Mary Barnes wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Aug 3, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Mary Barnes wrote: > > > Instead, I think we should ensure that future venues have > adequate space for both circulating between meeting rooms and > for side conversations. > > > > Just to be clear: you would rather that we pay higher meeting > fees in exchange for that adequate space? > > [MB] Yes. [/MB]
Just to be even clearer, are you offering to pay those higher fees out of your own pocket or just to type a larger number into your expense report? > > > I suggest that you could cut the cookie budget if funds > really are the only reason this wouldn't be done. > > > > That is one way to pay for the extra space; it might not be so > popular in this particular crowd. > > [MB] Yes, I know it's not at all a popular idea (to reduce cookies), > BUT we have had adequate space at previous meetings for which we paid > the same meeting fee, so it seems possible to get space without > increasing meeting fees (and I thought Vancouver was selected as it > was deemed a very moderately priced venue for meetings). Note, that > we did get additional space on the 34th floor during the week (which I > assumed we paid for). Also, there was a block of rooms on the 2nd > floor that we did not use for our meetings. [/MB] > > > > > > --Paul Hoffman > >
