Hash: SHA1
Ibrahim,
habib@ccny.cuny.edu wrote:
> See my reply within..
...
>>> >> 4)IEEE staff members are already paid by the IEEE. There is no need to charge the conference for their time.
>> >
>> >Where do you think that money comes from? We're the IEEE - we're paying
>> >when we use them. To use your analogy, why should other meetings,
>> >journal subscribers, or the general membership pay for a service that
>> >only conference attendees benefit from?
>
> I do not know what is your point here? I am very clear: The IEEE
> should not charge the conference "budget" for the IEEE staff time who
> help in registeration and other logistics support.
In your earlier post you argue that our conference should not pay for
journals, because we aren't all subscribers.
Well, why should journal or membership dues pay for the salaries of IEEE
members who support conferences, if they are not attending the conference?
I'm saying that *by your argument*, the salaries of those staff MUST be
paid when serving the meeting, but you seem to conclude the opposite.
We *cannot* benefit from IEEE staff without considering that we are part
of that larger organization, and we need to support that organization.
>>> >> 5) It makes a lot of sense to conduct meetings in research labs and universities as opposed to expensive 5 stars hotels.
>> >
>> >This is 4-star out of 5 in the US. The next step down often cannot
>> >accommodate a meeting this large.
>> >
>> >I agree that we should consider cost when selecting a venue, but let's
>> >not start with an assumption that research labs or universities either
>> >can accommodate us or would be less cost effective when considered as a
>> >whole meeting (e.g., including transportation, etc.).
>
> AS I said before, it should be fully investigated because it will save lots of expenses paid to hotels, specially food functions.
That's an assumption. In past meetings, what I have saved on food I have
spent on transportation either to hotels or to the banquet venue. The
*whole* budget needs to be considered when making this decision.
>>> >> 6) Food functions and social events could be eliminated. A single social gathering could be sufficient.
>> >
>> >Remember that these are also networking opportunities. Also keep in mind
>> >that it's not feasible to have 600+ people descending on small local
>> >restaurants in synchrony, which is why lunch has typically been
>> >included. Same for coffee.
>
> WHo said anything about a local restaurant?!!.
I was talking about not providing food at the meeting to save funds, FWIW.
> All Universities over
> the whole world have local dinning rooms for students and Faculty and
> attendees of a conference could simply use it and socialize and mingle
> there.
Well, you're at a university, and so am I. We recently hosted the
Infocom TPC meeting at USC on a Saturday - during homecoming - and
arranged for food boxes to be delivered for lunch. Yes, that can work
well, and IMO did. But that was on a weekend, and involved 150 people.
Give you're at a university, and you think this will work, let me ask
you to provide some evidence. Can you post dates when you think that
CUNY could host a Globecom-sized event, including room for, e.g., 100
students in dorm rooms, as well as rooms to support the Globecom tracks
with 50 people/room, as well as the plenaries, ***when school is in
session***?
The point is that we *can* change this, but not by making assertions. We
need to offer alternatives - specific alternatives, with realistic
capacity to support our large meetings. I invite everyone on the list to
post any details they can offer.
Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
iEYEARECAAYFAksdPXcACgkQE5f5cImnZrt21ACeIv9Zjy3r5sWAs1XtpkDae5ZM
ytwAn3PNHzLyjTQn1eAqZFVJ/LNpCyv3
=UPgI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Tccc mailing list
Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment