[sigcomm] attendance policies for SIGCOMM-affiliated events

[Roch Guerin]

Scott,

Maybe I have not carefully read all the emails that have circulated, but 
I don't think I have seen criticism targeted explicitly at HotNets, 
which I think everyone has agreed has played a very positive role over 
the past few years.  And that certainly has not been the motivation 
behind any of the inputs I have made to the discussion.

As far as gratitude is concerned,  this seems to be a totally different 
topic, and maybe one that is worth its own discussion, i.e., are we 
doing enough to acknowledge people's efforts and contributions when they 
volunteer time and energy that ultimately benefits the whole 
community.   It is probably true that we don't, but I'll argue that this 
extends beyond HotNets and lumping the two together does not seem really 
justified.

So again maybe I am being myopic, but I've viewed HotNets as a catalyst 
for a discussion on the role and scope of limited-attendance venues, and 
not as the target of any specific criticism.   I'm neither ignoring nor 
dismissing your point, I just don't think that it is the case.

Roch

>> I don't think that anyone is disagreeing with the potential  benefits 
>> associated with small, focused venues such as HotNets, and  in 
>> particular of the positive role that HotNets has played over the  
>> past few years.  In that respect, I believe that the concerns that  
>> Scott expressed in his last email are not the issue.
>
>
> With all due respect, Roch, I think they are the issue.  My point,  
> which you are free to ignore but not to dismiss, is that this mailing  
> list has been full of criticism and back-seat driving, and completely  
> devoid of gratitude.  In an environment like this, few people are  
> going to step forward and take the initiative to do good things.   
> Given the level of hand-wringing over a handful of at-large invitees,  
> if I were on the hotnets steering committee I'd immediately take  
> hotnets out of SIGCOMM and not look back....