Re: [802SEC] Should we continue to meet in Hawaii?
This was my second 802 meeting in hawaii, the first
time I spent 20 odd hours in transit to then spend
4 days sitting in meeting rooms, only to return
on the red-eye with another 20 odd hour transit time.
This time I brought my family and we spent an extra
week afterwards. But, frankly, even for a "free"
vacation, it was a hell of a trek for them and we
broke up the travel over 2 days given the age of
my kids, so I guess I beat the 20 hour mark!
Overall, I come to 802 meetings to get too much work
done in too short a period of time. I care about meeting
space quality and availability and at least a few decent
restaurants in the vicinity. Frankly, I want locations
that are EASY to get to. I, nor my company do not
need to pay extra for a stunning property or location.
mike
"Stevenson, Carl R (Carl)" wrote:
>
> I also agree ...
>
> Carl
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bill Quackenbush [mailto:billq@attglobal.net]
> > Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 6:52 PM
> > To: Geoff Thompson
> > Cc: Tony Jeffree; pat_thaler@agilent.com; stds-802-sec@ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [802SEC] Should we continue to meet in Hawaii?
> >
> >
> >
> > While I am ignorant of meeting costs on the western side of
> > the Pacific
> > Rim, I am in general in agreement with the sentiments expressed by
> > Geoff, Tony and Pat.
> >
> > Please don't get me wrong, I greatly enjoy Hawaii as a vacation
> > destination and I enjoy Kauai in particular. The Hyatt
> > Regency Kauai is
> > a first class hotel. But our purpose is business and for
> > that purpose,
> > such venues are a "waste". A waste because we pay a significantly
> > higher rate and have little or no time to enjoy what we pay
> > extra for.
> > For those who arrive early, stay late or just skip some of
> > the meetings,
> > a venue like Kauai is a low cost or free vacation. For those who do
> > none of those, it is a waste.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > wlq
> >
> > Geoff Thompson wrote:
> > >
> > > Given the high costs of having it in Hawaii (and possibly
> > Japan) we could
> > > probably net people ahead by having it in Australia, New
> > Zealand or Korea.
> > >
> > > If we were really doing this in Hawaii for (1) business and (2) the
> > > convenience of folks from the Far East then we would be
> > having the meetings
> > > on Oahu. Let's not kid ourselves. we come here for the
> > resort factor,
> > > appropriate or not.
> > >
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > > At 08:24 AM 11/12/2002 +0000, Tony Jeffree wrote:
> > >
> > > >At 01:21 12/11/2002 -0700, pat_thaler@agilent.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>Colleagues,
> > > >>
> > > >>The original rationale for meeting in Hawaii was to meet
> > our Pacific Rim
> > > >>attendees halfway once every two years. We reached this
> > decision many
> > > >>years ago after an unsuccessful search for economically
> > feasible venues
> > > >>in Australia, Japan, etc.
> > > >>
> > > >>The previous search was done before the recesion in Japan
> > and neighbors.
> > > >>Also, there have been new venues constructed since then.
> > For instance,
> > > >>the IETF had a meeting in Yokohama at the Yokohama Grand
> > > >>Inter-Continental Hotel. There is a Pan Pacific Hotel
> > across the street
> > > >>for overflow.
> > > >>
> > > >>Given the costs of meeting in Hawaii, the SEC should
> > investigate the
> > > >>possibility of meeting on the West side of the Pacific
> > instead of in the
> > > >>middle.
> > > >>
> > > >>Pat
> > > >
> > > >I agree.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Regards,
> > > >Tony
> > > >
> >
--
Michael Takefman tak@cisco.com
Manager of Engineering, Cisco Systems
Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
2000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
voice: 613-254-3399 cell:613-220-6991