Subject: About cookies and refreshments cost and abuse

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:32:29 -0600

Hi,

I will like to make an observation about something that captured my
attention the last few meetings.

I frequently see in meetings people filling up their back-packs with drinks,
fruits and cookies. I'm not talking just about one extra drink. I'm talking
some times even about people leaving the meeting area after getting the
back-pack full in the afternoon break.

I will call this abuse towards the rest of us.

I don't think suggesting that we don't get the cookies and drinks or that
they should be paid as an extra, if you want them, is reasonable.

However, is clear that is a *VERY* important cost of EACH meeting, and seems
unreasonable to don't pay attention to this and to try to serve our real
needs, instead of being in the situation of over/underestimating that, which
brings to the situation of not having cookies for all of us.

So my suggestion to be reasonable and fair to all, will be to provide
together with our registration pack, a given number of refreshment tickets,
enough to cover the average needs.

If you consume those, you can buy as many extra as you need and pay for the
real cost.

Remember that is not only the cost of each cookie or drink, but the tax and
service charge. You can make your own guess about the cost if a bottle of
water cost 4-5 USD + tax + service (times 5 days, times 3 breaks a day,
times 1.400 people). This is what IETF pay for each meeting just for drinks.

Also I'm sure that in most of the cases if you need more than the average,
some of your colleagues will not have consumed all their own, so it will be
easier to get some more at no cost.

But clearly, abuse will not be paid by all of us.

Regards,
Jordi

**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit
Slides available at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Ned Freed <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:38:42 -0800 (PST)

> back-pack full in the afternoon break.

Um, how do you know this isn't a "designated fetcher" carrying stuff back to
some design team huddled over a table off in some corner somewhere?

This is not at all unreasonable - I've done it myself numerous times for groups
in the past and I've had it done for me several times. In fact earlier today
someone was kind enough to grab an extra drink for me, which I then
consumed on the spot.

> they should be paid as an extra, if you want them, is reasonable.

Agreed. I used to be less sensitive to needs in this area, but these days I
have to have a little snack to get me through or I start to feel sick. Having
everyone run off to fetch such things does not scale very well.

> enough to cover the average needs.

I suspect the handling of such tickers would cost quite a bit more than the
food it would save. But by all means price it out and see.

				Ned

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:05:11 -0600

Below, in-line.

Regards,
Jordi

> De: Ned Freed <[email-masked]>
> Responder a: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
> Fecha: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:38:42 -0800 (PST)
> Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
> CC: ietfietforg <[email-masked]>
> Asunto: Re: About cookies and refreshments cost and abuse
> 
>> Hi,
> 

I really doubt it. I think I can differentiate that at least in a majority
of the situations, for several reasons difficult to explain.

> someone was kind enough to grab an extra drink for me, which I then

Agreed, but he/she could get your ticket for doing it.

> food it would save. But by all means price it out and see.

Agreed, in may happen, but I think that can be negotiated with the hotel, so
doesn't mean an extra cost. I also have seen alternative models, such as
recently in APRICOT/APNIC, where you got the tickets and you drop them in a
box when you queue to get your food/drink. A waiter taking control of the
food logistics and at the same time about the "possible abusers" at every
food spot can quickly distinguish if something seems to be abnormal.

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:54:37 +0100

The IAOC will have a look at this issue.

     Brian

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 04:29:13 +0200

Hi Cyrus,

As I tried to explain in my previous email, in a recent event, they didn't
needed extra hotel staff, because they put a box where the meeting
participant drop his ticket in the row where the food is picked up. Then is
quite evident if you abuse, even to the rest of the participants because
you're picking up food several times and only had a ticket the first one.

In any case, its clear that if there is extra cost, it may not make sense
the balance between that extra cost and the food "not-abused".

However, what it is important here for all the participants is that we
realize as soon as possible that, since already at least a couple of years
ago, IETF is in need to try to reduce meetings cost and manage them in a
long-term planning which helps to reduce that cost. All what each
participant can do to help here, is very important.

I know that the new management is taking care of this and paying attention
to all our comments and inputs, and I'm sure they are already doing a good
job. All of us need to understand their decisions and make sure to help them
on whatever we can.

Regards,
Jordi

> De: Cyrus Daboo <[email-masked]>
> Responder a: <[email-masked]>
> Fecha: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:32:09 -0500
> Para: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
> CC: <[email-masked]>
> Hi JORDI,
> --On March 23, 2006 5:32:29 PM -0600 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
> <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
>> together with our registration pack, a given number of refreshment
>> tickets, enough to cover the average needs.
> 
> The problem with tickets is who do you get to collect them? Presumably this
> would have to be hotel staff - at which point the costs will go up as they
> would likely need to employ more staff to collect tickets in addition to
> bringing out new trays etc. That would probably lead to having to have
> fewer refreshment stations and result in longer queues to get those
> refreshments.
> 
> Something that might help with at least the estimation process that is
> currently done, would be to include a breakfast/break sign-up option on the
> online registration form. The form already asks about attendance at the
> Sunday reception, so why not extend that to the refreshment breaks?
> Obviously not everyone registers before hand (what is the percentage BTW?)
> but this still might be better...
> 
> -- 
> Cyrus Daboo
>

---

From: Cyrus Daboo <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:32:09 -0500

Hi JORDI,

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

---

From: Cyrus Daboo <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:32:09 -0500

Hi JORDI,

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 09:06:52 -0600

... warning, this thread involves "geeks trying to understand the real 
world" ...

My impression (from inside the hotel in Dallas) was that enough people had 
travel problems coming into Dallas, which included "travel problems 
returning from dinner in the West End to the hotel on Sunday", that even 
knowing how many people had signed up for breakfast before the deluge 
started wouldn't have helped that much. There were people who were "staying 
at the conference hotel" who couldn't even get to the conference hotel. I 
suspect, without knowing, that the adjusted estimates were lagging new 
arrivals by about one break for most of Monday and Tuesday.

Hopefully we won't need an Architectural Research Klub ("ARK") in Montreal.

I thought the same thing about Jordi's suggestion initially - "who would 
collect the tickets?", but his explanation ("no one, just the expectation 
that people put down a ticket when they pick something up") helped. If this 
could be tried for the price of five or six spools of "admit one" tickets at 
a wholesale store, maybe it's worth doing.

.. but suggestions like this can now usefully go to [email-masked], without 
setting off cookie discussions on this list...

Thanks,

Spencer

> The problem with tickets is who do you get to collect them? Presumably 
> this would have to be hotel staff - at which point the costs will go up as 
> they would likely need to employ more staff to collect tickets in addition 
> to bringing out new trays etc. That would probably lead to having to have 
> currently done, would be to include a breakfast/break sign-up option on 
> the online registration form. The form already asks about attendance at 
> the Sunday reception, so why not extend that to the refreshment breaks?

---

From: "Steve Silverman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 11:16:33 -0500

We could also simply tell everyone please take one pastry in the first
half of the breakfast hour or one cookie in the first half of the
"cookie time".  I would hope (but maybe this is naive) that if people
realize that the food is not infinite they will leave some for their
peers.  I think issueing tickets would be ridiculous.

Taking drinks for non-local consumption is another issue. I have to
admit, I like to take a bottle of water to drink in the meeting room.
Some hotels put water in the room. Some don't.  We do need to have
drinking water but it doesn't have to be bottled in most places.

The cost of food should not be blown out of proportion.  If one counts
airfare, hotel, food (lunch & dinner), and the value of time at the
meeting (don't forget the time preparing for the meeting), IETF
attendance is not cheap and the meeting fee is usually a minor part of
the total cost unless it is a local meeting.

We might try foregoing or limiting the cookies which would probably
increase the life expectancy of the attendees but
somehow I doubt this will be a popular suggestion.  :-)

In Paris, we switched to a late dinner  which was necessary in Paris
but we did this in Dallas.  Was this a general decision that I missed?
I prefer dinner from 6 - 8 and a night session where the local customs
support this.  This might also cut down the need for afternoon sugar
consumption.

Steve Silverman

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Spencer Dawkins [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 10:07 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: About cookies and refreshments cost and abuse
>
>
...

> > this would have to be hotel staff - at which point the
>...

---

From: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 11:25:31 -0500

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 11:16:33AM -0500, Steve Silverman allegedly
wrote:
> but we did this in Dallas.  Was this a general decision that I
> missed?  I prefer dinner from 6 - 8 and a night session where the
> local customs support this.  This might also cut down the need for
> afternoon sugar consumption.

Oh good, this isn't about cookies anymore.  I for one was against
using the Paris schedule in Dallas, but I came around quickly,
especially with the -- do I have to say it? -- late afternoon cookies.
I now think the new schedule is excellent and would like to see it at
all future IETFs.

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:36:37 +0200

Fully agree ;-)

Regards,
Jordi

> De: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
> Responder a: <[email-masked]>
> Fecha: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 11:25:31 -0500
> Para: Steve Silverman <[email-masked]>
> CC: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>

---

From: Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:34:21 +0100

> support this.  This might also cut down the need for afternoon sugar

I normally fly in from Europe and strongly prefer the later dinner -
not because I like late dinners - but because I prefer to have the
sessions before I fall asleep with jet lag.

- Stewart

---

From: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:05:01 -0800

> sessions before I fall asleep with jet lag.

I heard this comment in Dallas from several people.
It works in reverse when I fly to Europe from California.
(I'm ready to start WG meeting at 4am :-)

I think one's opinion of the new schedule has more to
do with whether you had any night sessions to attend
that your country of origin.  If you go to any night
sessions, the old schedule is awful.  If not, you don't
care so much.

> - Stewart

Andy

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:08:39 -0500

I strongly prefer the new dinner schedule, and I personally
don't think the theft of cookies is a serious matter.

My feeling is that the refreshments are for _us_, to use for _our_  
refreshment,
and if people feel they need a sugar cookie mid-way through a  
session, they should be allowed to have one.

If people are coming from outside the meeting to steal our  
refreshments, then that's a different matter.

Regards
Marshall

On Mar 28, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Andy Bierman wrote:

>>> missed?

---

From: kent crispin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 12:44:17 -0800

> don't think the theft of cookies is a serious matter.

The whole discussion seems mildly droll to me... :-)

> session, they should be allowed to have one.

IMO they should have as many as they want.  For real: Low blood sugar =>
Grouchy participants; grouch reduction is a useful goal in itself, and worth
the price of a few cookies... 

-- 
Kent Crispin 
[email-masked]    p: +1 310 823 9358  f: +1 310 823 8649
[email-masked] SIP: [email-masked]

---

From: "Brett Thorson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 21:08:59 -0500 (EST)

<pinch of salt>
I think it interesting that the great minds of the IETF are discussing in
depth something that is probably just slightly more important than the
outcome of this week's American Idol contest.  Oh well, here are my two
cents...

Cookies seem to be a scarce resource, so why not bring your own darn
cookies to the meeting, and you wouldn't have a problem.  Seriously, stop
by a local grocery store, and plop down $3 and buy whatever kind of
cookies make you the most happy.  Aggravation avoided.

Plop down another $3 and you now have a resource you can use to coerce
other people down your path of draft-ness.  Need to get a draft approved
by your AD?  Give him/her a cookie.

So if we want to go with the whole ticket route, I say as the IETF, that
we go for the whole solution (watch as I open another can of worms)...

Badges with barcodes.  We get a badge with a barcode.  Want a cookie,
stand in line, scan the badge.  Solves the problem of multiple cookies,
just grab everyone's badge.  Does it need a human?  Nope, just a loud
buzzer.  Oh, and to give a nod to the TAO of the IETF (I think that's the
document) you won't have people standing in front of the cookie table.

Move those badge readers to the doors.  You then make sure everyone has
paid their IETF admittance fee for the meeting.  Yep, there are people who
use the same badge and just show up.  You also eliminate the blue sheets
too.  No more signing your name, just swipe a badge.  You can then use
these statistics to see if many people tried to attend the same WG meeting
to plan agendas for next year.

Do I think cookies are an important problem?  Nope.
Do I think we should get scanned badges for cookies, and meeting room
admittance?  Probably not, but I think it would be cool.
Do I care when I have dinner?  Nope, I either bring my own snack, or I
just tough it out like the Internet Nerd Pioneer I one day hope to become.

Cheers

--Brett
</pinch>

---

From: Dave Cridland <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:59:53 +0100

> outcome of this week's American Idol contest.  Oh well, here are my 
There's several important issues here, not least that Cookies are 
deprecated, and we should be using Cookie2.

However, RFC2965 section 3.3.3 should clearly explain how to deal 
with the problems in general, and section 3.5 of the same document 
should help to explain the initial complaint raised.

Dave.
-- 
           You see things; and you say "Why?"
   But I dream things that never were; and I say "Why not?"
    - George Bernard Shaw

---

From: Carl Malamud <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 02:58:35 -0800 (PST)

> cookies make you the most happy.  Aggravation avoided.

That's a very community-based approach.  An alternative that may better fit
our institutional style is to use edible RFID tags in the cookies:

http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/nec-resonantware-tomorrows-future-tomorrow-008958.php

As a valuable extra, these are DRM-enabled.  And, you won't have to worry
about Richard Stahlman showing up at the meeting and scarfing down all
the cookies.

Carl

P.S. My $0.02: I have full faith in the IAOC and IAD resolving this issue
without our help.