[Chapter-delegates] Proposal for IETF Registration fee support for Chapters

[Jose R. de la Cruz III]

John:

I've never been to an IETF meeting, so my comments reflect my views from
"the outside".

You stated: "
*It occurs to me that there is a more basic reason why I'm sceptical of
this proposal: sending one-time tourists to IETF meetings is likely to be
counterproductive. There's one rather rudimentary intro session on Sunday,
and the rest of the week consists of nothing but highly specialized working
group sessions that are boring and incomprehensible unless you are familiar
with the technical topic and have read the drafts they're working on.  Even
for us regulars, sessions in areas far from our technical competence are
hard to follow.*"

I do not agree with your statement. First, you assume that people that
would participate in an IETF meeting under the proposed program would do so
as "tourists". Why? Second, you also assume that very few people have
the "*technical
competence*" to follow a meeting. Really? So only those currently involved
in a working group are "technically competent"?

I do think that allowing more people, specially from ISOC Chapters, to
participate in an IETF will encourage more involvement in working groups.
Even for someone who does not posses the "*technical competence*" to follow
a working group meeting, attendance might spark his/her interest in the
subject and promote an effective contribution to the subject. Furthermore,
attendance will most likely result in sharing the experience with other
local chapter members and encourage participation.

In my opinion, just because someone has never been to an IETF meeting does
not mean they are not capable of joining a working and contribute.

Just my 2 cents,

José R. de la Cruz
Puerto Rico Chapter

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 6:11 PM, John Levine <isocmember at johnlevine.com>
wrote:

> In article <CA+p3fvRw-mmXc4qwVoAsdb-rFP9B+8VcReNOipKCEuTrMuV=eQ@
> mail.gmail.com> you write:
> >1. One of the reasons why fellowship should be made available is to ensure
> >that Chapters start becoming proactive in IG spaces like IETF, ...
>
> But the IETF is about technical standards, not Internet Governance.
>
> >EG: I attended ICANN 57 with no prior knowledge ...
>
> Please see my previous note, which discusses why the IETF is not like
> ICANN.  I've been to too many meetings of both.
>
> I really, really, hope that people who are interested in this will
> watch or listen to some IETF sessions later this month to get a better
> idea about what it does.
>
> R's,
> John
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20170313/6ff535a3/attachment.htm>