[GTER] Cobranca ou nao do GT-ER

Roosevelt Ferreira roosevel at juniper.net
Thu Apr 11 11:30:00 -03 2002

Trecho do tread abaixo:

> There's always multicast and RealAudio ...

= = = = = = =

 >-----Original Message-----
 >From: Fernando Krahe [mailto:fernando at optiglobe.net.br]
 >Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 10:50 AM
 >To: gter at eng.registro.br
 >Subject: [GTER] Cobranca ou nao do GT-ER
 >Hash: SHA1
 >Tem um thread na lista NANOG questionando o destino da receita das
 >inscricoes. Algumas ideias ja foram discutidas na nossa lista. Abaixo
 >ha alguns trechos.
 >> >We used to pay $150 or so to attend NANOG conferences.
 >> > Why are we charged $300 now?  Where is our $150,000+
 >> >going?
 >> To be perfectly honest, I'm more than happy with the cost of the
 >> NANOG  conference.
 >> I get probably 2 or 3 invitations to "conferences" every week
 >> through the  post, and they're all the equivalent of $2000 upwards
 >> for a 1 or 2 day  conference. And these conferences are more a
 >> marketting hype, so will be  *heavily* sponsored by the companies
 >> who present at them.
 >> So, $300 for a 3 day conference, where it's stuff that's actually
 >> relevant  and useful to my job, and isn't just a marketting
 >> exercise by the vendors  who spam me with plenty of material
 >> anyway, is, in my view, good value for  money.
 >- -----
 >> Also, you must realize that not everyone gets hit with the $300
 >> charge.   Hosts and presenters get free admission, and students get
 >> a greatly reduced  fee.
 >> As other people say, this is probably the best value for your money
 >> of  anything else.  You get to hear what is going on, you get to
 >> put faces to  names (and voices), and you get to talk shop with
 >> others in your field  without all the "business" people around
 >> saying what you can and can't say.  
 >- -----
 >> It all depends on your financial status. I can think of quite a few
 >> very competent "industry" people who have been unable to attend the
 >> recent nanogs due to their companies either having gone under or
 >> being in the process of going under.
 >> But then again, there are already too many people who don't belong
 >> at a NANOG showing up and crowding the rooms because they didn't
 >> know what to expect. Keeping the costs slightly high does help both
 >> companies and individuals consider carefully if they really care
 >> about all the geekiness that goes on there, or if they are better
 >> off pursuing their "CCNA to be"   careers through some other means.
 >> Not being elitist, just being realistic  on what some people expect
 >> to get out of going to the conferences. This  isn't Defcon after
 >> all. :)
 >> So while I agree that it probably doesn't cost more then a few
 >> peoples time for a few weeks, and the money is probably going to
 >> fund other Merit  activities, I'm not certain that I'd want the
 >> prices dropped much lower.  Unless of course, they'd like to give
 >> discounts for people who have  attended many past NANOGs are who
 >> are now unemployeed. :)
 >- ----- Original Message ----- 
 >From: "Susan Harris" <srh at merit.edu>
 >To: "Richard A Steenbergen" <ras at e-gerbil.net>
 >Cc: "NANOG" <nanog at merit.edu>
 >Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 6:49 PM
 >Subject: Re: NANOG costs
 >> > Unless of course, they'd like to give discounts for people who
 >> > have  attended many past NANOGs are who are now unemployeed. :)
 >> Unfortunately discounts just aren't feasible - there'd be
 >> administrative problems and questions of fairness to other
 >> attendees (and to Merit, since our per-attendee costs wouldn't
 >> change.) Plus, we're not sure it would solve the problem,
 >> considering everyone's high travel and hotel costs.  
 >> There's always multicast and RealAudio ...
 >Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
 >GTER list    http://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter

More information about the gter mailing list