I have had my registration fee refunded when I was a speaker when my employer was happy to pay. This frustrated me when the meeting had low registration and lost money. I'm fine with people getting it waived, but the idea of everyone showing up for a "roll-call" so they can get in free is certainly not the case. This is why I suggested the BoD would have the authority to waive the fee if recommended by someone else. The reason is less important to me honestly. Then again, the bar for giving a bad talk is really low. People can just put in that effort instead. Jared Mauch On Sep 1, 2011, at 6:12 PM, David Temkin <dave@temk.in> wrote:

Randy,

How is that "getting paid"? Receiving services in kind?

Don't know if you've ever done Habitat for Humanity, but you get a free lunch, paid for by those who have given cash to support the cause and not labor.

To bring it closer to home - we give our presenters a free admission - should we also stop that?

-Dave On Sep 1, 2011 3:27 PM, "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com> wrote:

...

i do not support getting paid for community service. a primrose path.

randy

On the flip side of this, many of our employers donate "our" time that they are paying us for in order for us to serve NANOG with nary a benefit. If you take just committee calls for the PC alone, this is 48 hours a year - a workweek. Perhaps they should feel that this donation nets them something.

it's "public service" not "public employment" randy

For context in this discussion, how many times have you personally accepted free registration in return for presenting?

no idea. i also think i was comped for being on the SC. like jared, i would have paid. randy

The SC did not receive comp registration any time while I was serving on it.

aha! sorry. my memory is not what it used to be.

I do feel the need to suggest that Dorian/Randy are on the mark here, most of these people would pay anyways.

as i said, if nanog has the funds, i would support general hardship support with a very low bar. randy

I agree that only those organizing or with a real need of financial support (folks from developing countries or from non-profit orgs or some students without substantial resources) could have their 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 recognition of the NANOG community and your colleagues, and we can put into consideration including a gold star sticker for your service. It will be really unfair for those paying (even if their companies do it for them or don't care because they have a mountain of cash) if there is a special benefit for some so they don't pay. My .02 -J

Two comments here: In the past a human would review and refund speakers if they paid. A nominal co-pay may be appropriate, even if it's just $10. Students qualify for lower rates last I recall as well. We are talking about a small number of people here, at most 1-2 per conference I suspect based on historical chats. Jared Mauch On Sep 2, 2011, at 11:27 AM, jim deleskie <deleskie@gmail.com> wrote:

If a members company is willing to pay anyway, then people always have the option of not accepting the free entrance. As for people 'hardship' cases, how ever you want to define it, there is no revenue loss here as they would be unlikely so spend $ to attend anyway if they had to pay.

kind of old-skool, but I figured that NANOG was a group of peers meeting to learn/share with each other. most of the time i would expect each particpant to pay her own way... under -limited- hardship cases, as a member, i'd be happy to have my dues contribute to a stellar speaker who is otherwise unable to attend. but that should be a rare thing. otherwise, i'd want the other members to occasionally pay for me to attend. IMHO. /bill On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 10:19:34AM -0500, Jorge Amodio wrote:

I agree that only those organizing or with a real need of financial support (folks from developing countries or from non-profit orgs or some students without substantial resources) could have their 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 recognition of the NANOG community and your colleagues, and we can put into consideration including a gold star sticker for your service.

It will be really unfair for those paying (even if their companies do it for them or don't care because they have a mountain of cash) if there is a special benefit for some so they don't pay.

My .02 -J

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

I support conference admission for volunteers who give their time to organize the conference, etc. (such as program committee members, steering committee members, speakers, etc.). I would not support other forms of remuneration or expanding the free conference admission beyond those directly involved in organizing and/or running the conference. Owen On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:12 PM, David Temkin wrote:

Randy,

How is that "getting paid"? Receiving services in kind?

Don't know if you've ever done Habitat for Humanity, but you get a free lunch, paid for by those who have given cash to support the cause and not labor.

To bring it closer to home - we give our presenters a free admission - should we also stop that?

-Dave On Sep 1, 2011 3:27 PM, "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com> wrote:

...

i do not support getting paid for community service. a primrose path.

randy

...

To bring it closer to home - we give our presenters a free admission - should we also stop that?

i am ambivalent. i think there is some sort of untested assumption that this attracts an otherwise unattracted resources we need.

otoh, committees seem to attract flies. i will not comment on their quality.

From personal experience-- volunteering through committee work is fairly easy when NANOG is an important focus for the employer/employing group. It is very very difficult if one's management has no interest in NANOG or its

Flies, ouch. Or maybe gadflies? ;-) products. For most of the time I was on the PC, I was also a full-time student, and needed the help of student pricing to fulfill my commitment to the community. Even with student pricing, however, travel and hotels each year would run into the thousands. Given a choice between supporting NANOG, or taking those thousands and increasing my support to my parents... once my term was up, the parents won. For all the griping and moaning that goes on, I do think that valuable work goes on at NANOG. I just can't afford to participate on an individual basis. That may or may not be a loss to the community. ;-) _kobi