Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: [802SEC] +++SEC MOTION+++802 Plenary network expenditures

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grow, Bob []
> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 9:23 PM
> To: Stevenson, Carl R (Carl); Paul Nikolich; Bill 
> Quackenbush; IEEE 802
> SEC; Paul Nikolich
> Subject: RE: [802SEC] +++SEC MOTION+++802 Plenary network expenditures
> Carl/Bob:
> I did vote to approve didn't I?

Yes, you did ... perhaps I should have recognized that, but
I thought it was obvious.

> I thought I was presenting 
> quick typical and bad-case analysis for how the fee was still 
> reasonable for a typical attendee.

My apologies ... I misinterpreted your numbers as questioning
the cost.
> While I personally appreciate the network access you talk 
> about below as much as you do, I don't believe the network is 
> there for members of the SEC it has to be justified for the 
> average attendee. 

I agree completely ... it was not my intention to imply that
the network was there (just) for the members of the SEC.

> I still receive occasional complaints from 
> some of my members that they can't (because of corporate 
> policies) or don't use the network. The number of attendees 
> using the network is increasing, and I believe now is 
> certainly in the majority, but as Bob pointed out, it isn't 
> universal.  
> Why did I pick 3 and 4 days?  3 days is what is required for 
> 75% attendance in some of the WGs and 4 is 75% for the other 
> WGs.  Though the original numbers were purely a SWAG, I 
> checked the average attendance for 802.3 registrants at DFW 
> and guess what, it was 3.16 days.  (I do recognize hotel 
> nights would be slightly larger because no one from 802.3 
> signs in on Sunday or Friday yet we are there using the network).

Thanks for the explaination.
> Have a nice weekend!

You, too.