IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: voting system for future venues?

Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com> Thu, 25 August 2011 02:56 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45DB121F8B5D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:56:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.518
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xdZv2789Kt4S for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A1F921F8B5B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=presnick@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1314241085; x=1345777085; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc: subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:x-originating-ip; z=Message-ID:=20<4E55B9E2.4010406@qualcomm.com>|Date:=20We d,=2024=20Aug=202011=2021:56:34=20-0500|From:=20Pete=20Re snick=20<presnick@qualcomm.com>|User-Agent:=20Mozilla/5.0 =20(Macintosh=3B=20U=3B=20Intel=20Mac=20OS=20X=2010.6=3B =20en-US=3B=20rv:1.9.1.9)=20Gecko/20100630=20Eudora/3.0.4 |MIME-Version:=201.0|To:=20Eric=20Burger=20<eburger-l@sta ndardstrack.com>|CC:=20IETF-Discussion=20list=20<ietf@iet f.org>,=20Dave=20CROCKER=20<dcrocker@bbiw.net>|Subject: =20Re:=20voting=20system=20for=20future=20venues? |References:=20<20110822191708.652C721F8C19@ietfa.amsl.co m>=09<801FB726-F672-4F7F-8D9C-7ED37DB08672@cs.ucla.edu> =09<FE5EB7C9-C395-4B98-A0D4-8B2320F78C04@isoc.org>=09<669 98320DD3FCC5628E32634@PST.JCK.COM>=09<F74DDD2D-163A-4CBF- 99A5-E452CBB7C17F@isoc.org>=09<CE8FC485-DA54-491B-B57E-96 DA2FE835FC@network-heretics.com>=09<34E4F50CAFA10349A41E0 756550084FB0D55796B@PRVPEXVS04.corp.twcable.com>=09<E9A8F 486-2327-4F48-B21A-6155CF334F21@network-heretics.com>=09< 4E554C78.9000504@gmail.com>=20<tslr54a8v7s.fsf@mit.edu> =09<4E555B06.6000108@dcrocker.net>=20<tslmxey8sia.fsf@mit .edu>=09<1314218041.1973.204.camel@d430>=20<4E55655C.6030 502@bbiw.net>=09<15F4BD95-8858-4E47-896A-703A472412B1@net work-heretics.com>=20<7AE9A1D4-439A-4857-85BF-C1BED2FC430 9@standardstrack.com>|In-Reply-To:=20<7AE9A1D4-439A-4857- 85BF-C1BED2FC4309@standardstrack.com>|Content-Type:=20tex t/plain=3B=20charset=3D"ISO-8859-1"=3B=20format=3Dflowed |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207bit|X-Originating-IP:=20[1 72.30.48.1]; bh=+pXui57w4pUVdTkWkDf8GzKILbyDCGdvIPAEv4rPNAk=; b=JgMzIeYv3drOvar6uc/imbKbesHSGshbAhOxw5sPpAyEvbME87OJopvi E1Iy5LuTG9a1NDENMHrdHKDl0MidinxnSDK8lAgq4kUpDqd57kj2r8O1d DWtS5VpLYEezeN6NBnWCo+aznjT8Gd83Sxs7nOtsdpOVWPpgI4qtjN2bg U=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6448"; a="112759495"
Received: from ironmsg02-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.16]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 24 Aug 2011 19:58:05 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,279,1312182000"; d="scan'208";a="155504437"
Received: from nasanexhc05.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.2]) by ironmsg02-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 24 Aug 2011 19:58:05 -0700
Received: from Macintosh-4.local (172.30.48.1) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.48.2) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:56:37 -0700
Message-ID: <4E55B9E2.4010406@qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:56:34 -0500
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eric Burger <eburger-l@standardstrack.com>
Subject: Re: voting system for future venues?
References: <20110822191708.652C721F8C19@ietfa.amsl.com> <801FB726-F672-4F7F-8D9C-7ED37DB08672@cs.ucla.edu> <FE5EB7C9-C395-4B98-A0D4-8B2320F78C04@isoc.org> <66998320DD3FCC5628E32634@PST.JCK.COM> <F74DDD2D-163A-4CBF-99A5-E452CBB7C17F@isoc.org> <CE8FC485-DA54-491B-B57E-96DA2FE835FC@network-heretics.com> <34E4F50CAFA10349A41E0756550084FB0D55796B@PRVPEXVS04.corp.twcable.com> <E9A8F486-2327-4F48-B21A-6155CF334F21@network-heretics.com> <4E554C78.9000504@gmail.com> <tslr54a8v7s.fsf@mit.edu> <4E555B06.6000108@dcrocker.net> <tslmxey8sia.fsf@mit.edu> <1314218041.1973.204.camel@d430> <4E55655C.6030502@bbiw.net> <15F4BD95-8858-4E47-896A-703A472412B1@network-heretics.com> <7AE9A1D4-439A-4857-85BF-C1BED2FC4309@standardstrack.com>
In-Reply-To: <7AE9A1D4-439A-4857-85BF-C1BED2FC4309@standardstrack.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.48.1]
Cc: IETF-Discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, Dave CROCKER <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 02:56:54 -0000

On 8/24/11 3:55 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

> Sorry, but the vote on Quebec City, and the recent, follow-on 
> commentary are far more substantial and proportionally dominant than a 
> "vocal minority".

On 8/24/11 4:48 PM, Eric Burger wrote:

> 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.

OK, what follows is based on precisely one data point (i.e., me), but I 
hope you will see that it is therefore as worthy as these two claims 
about the community having "voted for Quebec City".

I pondered long and hard when I answered that stupid survey question. 
Because what it asked me was, "Which would you prefer, Vancouver, 
Quebec, or <I think one other North American place I can't remember>?" 
And I, stupidly apparently, answered Quebec. And it was stupid because I 
didn't think you were actually going to count as you apparently did. You 
see, I answered Quebec because (a) I like Quebec as cities go; (b) it 
happens to be a shorter physical trip for me than Vancouver; and (c) I 
happen to work for one of those companies who pays my bills, so I really 
don't care what the relative prices of hotels are.

But you never asked the question that I would have answered quite 
differently: "Which place is the most logical for the IETF to meet?" 
Because had you asked that, I surely would have chosen Vancouver over 
Quebec. It's a crapload easier for most folks to get to, they have 
facilities that have worked well for us in the past, and *I don't object 
to going to Vancouver over Quebec*. You see, if you start asking for 
objections as opposed to desires, I think you'll get much different 
answers. You'd certainly hear about objections to certain travel 
itineraries. You certainly hear objections to total cost profiles. 
Because the community is now weighted in favor of folks with corporate 
travel budgets, I suspect the "desire" answers are going to be much 
different than the "objections" answers.

Now, like I said, one data point. Maybe the vast majority of people not 
only wanted to go to Quebec, but thought it was the right place to go 
and would have objected to a choice of Vancouver over Quebec. But I 
don't think you are justified in claiming that without some additional 
data. And either way, I don't think "Where do you want to meet?" is the 
right question to ask.

There are a host of reasons that voting is a stupid decision making 
process. I thought we knew that.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email