2 ms·

I could not possibly disagree more. Conferences are almost always a split of local and non-local attendees. Forcing conferences to be exclusively non-local att

I could not possibly disagree more. Conferences are almost always a split of local and non-local attendees. Forcing conferences to be exclusively non-local attendees makes zero sense. It would be even more expensive, in absolute dollars and environmental cost, to have everyone travel to the middle of Nebraska. I know it's not your intent, but your stance here reeks of elistism, xenophobia, and othering. Extrapolating your worldview I don't know why a country hotel would, or even should, be accommodating. > don't organise conferences in places which are full of tourists already. This is absurd. Conferences are about people. Places with a lot of people will naturally have those people come together for events. Things that make a place attractive to live can also make it an attractive place to visit. Travel is so expensive it's almost crazy NOT to make the most out of your trip. Adding a day or two of tourism to a multi-day work or education trip is more than reasonable.

jaggederest 8y ago
It's funny, because I've actually been contemplating the total costs of having conferences in areas outside the SF bay, and it's probably net cheaper to have people fly to the middle of nowhere AND rent a hotel PLUS conference space, than it is to simply rent the conference space in SF. Cost of living has grown so large that it's almost cheaper to fly into SFO every day from a regional airport instead of renting a hotel room.
viraptor 8y ago
It's not a recipe for all conferences and it will not work for all of them. It's a response to a specific issue - conferences in tourist cities are expensive. Really large conferences are almost entirely non-local anyway. If you want to do work+fun trip, then a tourist destination could be great - but you have to be prepared to pay for it. (Or go to a nearby tourist place) If you want conferences for locals, they will always happen anyway. The rest of your accusations don't make sense to me. How can something for mostly non-locals be xenophobic? How is an expensive conference in a big city less elitist (who can afford to live there?) than one outside of it?
isostatic 8y ago
> Travel is so expensive it's almost crazy NOT to make the most out of your trip. And you’re worried about an extra $5 a night to pay for tourist infrastructure?

jaggederest 8y ago

It's funny, because I've actually been contemplating the total costs of having conferences in areas outside the SF bay, and it's probably net cheaper to have people fly to the middle of nowhere AND rent a hotel PLUS conference space, than it is to simply rent the conference space in SF. Cost of living has grown so large that it's almost cheaper to fly into SFO every day from a regional airport instead of renting a hotel room.

viraptor 8y ago

It's not a recipe for all conferences and it will not work for all of them. It's a response to a specific issue - conferences in tourist cities are expensive. Really large conferences are almost entirely non-local anyway. If you want to do work+fun trip, then a tourist destination could be great - but you have to be prepared to pay for it. (Or go to a nearby tourist place) If you want conferences for locals, they will always happen anyway. The rest of your accusations don't make sense to me. How can something for mostly non-locals be xenophobic? How is an expensive conference in a big city less elitist (who can afford to live there?) than one outside of it?

isostatic 8y ago

> Travel is so expensive it's almost crazy NOT to make the most out of your trip. And you’re worried about an extra $5 a night to pay for tourist infrastructure?