With all due respect, Mr. Chairman, a few points need to be made
regarding your last statements:
> One of the reason's we have associated PWG meetings with IEEE meetings
> was to keep travel down for people involved with both. This proposal to
> move the San Diego meeting at this late date causes those with overlap
> (EFI, Sharp, Kyocera, Lexmark, etc.) to now have an additional meeting
> added to their schedule. So while some can enjoy one less meeting, others
> have an extra one.
How many people will be attending both meetings such that it represents
a "majority" of PWG attendees? According to the San Diego Marriott list
of registered attendees, I can find only 1 person currently registered for
both meetings. (This does not, of course, include yourself, which would
make two persons.) Considering the many messages that have flown on the
wire over the last week or so on this topic, only the Kyocera representative
has spoken up.
What I don't understand is your logic regarding the number of meetings
involved. I proposed collapsing the San Diego AND New York meetings into
one, so those few IEEE/PWG attendees will still end up with the same total
number of meetings to attend.
Why does this fact seem to be ignored in your postings on this topic?
> So for the final time, there will be no change to the meeting plans for San
> Diego. (Yes, as chair of this august organization, I'm pulling rank.) Go ahead
> and make your reservations and get those non-refundable tickets.
Mr. Chairman, you might want to use a few more emoticons, lest someone
interpret your tone incorrectly.