Re:

[Marshall Rose <mrose+internet.ietf.nomcom@dbc.mtview.ca.us>]

>      I'd like to recommend changing
> 
> "Members of the IETF community must have attended at least 2 of the last 3
> IETF meetings in order to volunteer. "
> to
> 
> "Members of the IETF community must have registered for and attended at
> least 2 of the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer."
> 
> in 2727bis.
> 
> There were a couple of folks who had attended but not registered and who
> volunteered to serve.  I took the decision not to allow
> this, broadly interpreting attendance to include registration.
> Registration is what is being checked to determine whether the
> volunteers are qualified.

i'm going to suggest the opposite. perhaps we should change it to:

> "Members of the IETF community must have registered for at
> least 2 of the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer."

the reason is that it's fairly simple to demonstrate that someone registered. it is problematic to determine if someone actually attended.

if i just show up, collect my badge, and get back on the plane does that count as "attendence". what if i'm there for one meeting, one day, or one week?

/mtr

ps: although i appreciate your inclusive instincts, if these guys attended and didn't pay, i think giving them the boot would be more appropriate. however, they get to slide by based on the wording currently in effect.