Re: [Nanog-futures] Admission for Committee Members

[Jimmy Hess <mysidia () gmail com>]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Jorge Amodio <jmamodio () gmail com> wrote:
> admission fee waived or reduced, all the rest MUST pay, even if you
> give a talk or serve in other capacity.
> As others said you are doing a "public service" to the rest of the
> community and if you give a nice and valuable talk you will get the

You know what I would suggest.   Give presenters who committed a sufficient time
in advance an option to have free admission, and an option to pay and donate
their free admission opportunity back.

Whether something is a "public service" or not is a matter of perspective.
Attending and paying admission is presumptively a public service also.
Should one interested in performing one public service be forced to
perform another?

Assume for the sake of argument, it's a more valuable service for a
person to present
than to pay admission,   because if there's noone presenting,  then interest and
attendance fall.

As long as you are not encountering abuses such as 'faux presenters'
just presenting
for admission.

Not all public service is free to the public.  Presumably there must  be some
motivation  for a speaker to present;  sometimes that is altruistic, sometimes
that is not.   If that motivation is free admission,   but for the
community their
service is still valuable, then who am I to argue with that?


One question you could ask... would the person even be there if they were
not giving a presentation?

If they would not, then making them pay to come donate their time sounds
like a proposition that is more adverse to the presenter.

In regards to 'fairness',  waiving admission for a presenter is not unfair, if
any attendee had an equal opportunity  for proposing to present;  those
paying simply did not avail themselves   or perhaps did not have a
meaningful thing to present....

> It will be really unfair for those paying (even if their companies do

--
-JH