|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
I disagree that we should begin to behave as a convention. It is our work as engineers developing international standards that brings participation from around the globe. The IEEE holds conferences around the world, not just in North America. If 802 needs legal or contracts help for international venues, we should be able to make use of the resources of the IEEE for this, not requiring a "sponsor" or host company that is local to the venue.
While we may have grown to a size that requires we begin to use convention facilities to house our meetings, I think that is an issue that the meeting planners can address on a session by session basis.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:58 AM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++EC Email Ballot+++ENDS 13 JAN+++motion to hold plenary sessions outside NA
Buzz and Roger,
More for the sake of
debate than because I support a specific position, I will put forth the premise
that as we grow larger we should in fact act more like a convention, and less
like a small committee of engineers. At what point do the financial
responsibilities become too much to reasonably expect companies to host an 802
session? Is it 1500 participants, 2000, or 10,000? I don’t know the
answer, but I think we have already crossed the line in the
There seems to be some
sort of premise that domestic meeting have less problems than international
meetings. I can’t remember a meeting in recent times that I would say ran
“smoothly”. Think of the planning leading up to the
Personally, I favor
setting up a circuit of places that have geographic diversity, and that we know
from experience to have good facilities. I don’t mind going back to the
same place say every 3 years. But some of those places I feel should be in
Europe, and some in
Anyway, I may change my mind on everything written above, but they are my thoughts at the moment.
email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Rigsbee, Everett O
Paul, I will vote NO on this motion unless the following amendment is made to the motion:
"Beginning in calendar year 2008 IEEE 802 will hold at least one full 802 Session (Plenary or Interim) outside of North America for those years in which a local host company or government agency agrees in writing to sponsor the IEEE 802 session and provide logistical support for obtaining acceptable hotel and service contract arrangements and coordinating with local vendors as required. Financial support for the Session would also be welcomed but is not required if contracted arrangements can be accomplished without violation of IEEE 802 fiscal responsibility guidelines."
Without the committment of a serious local sponsor, I think we are committing to do something that may damage both our reputation for effectiveness and our world-wide credibility. As Geoff pointed out, being an international organization has very little to do with where you hold the session, but what you do to facilitate participation by all who care to do so. If we make serious efforts to welcome and support participation from our non-US participants, we will continue to be viewed as a truly international organization for years to come. And if we also can hold some session in non-North American locations that will help too. But it is not a litmus-test for internationality. If we can get sponsors, we can do international venues. If they don't care enough to volunteer, then we should not have to suffer the consequences.
Let's encourage partnering with our non-US colleagues to make IEEE 802 a truly successful international SDO.