Subject: dlvorg Some detailed feedback ...
From: Annie (annie )
Date: Wed Jun 20 2001 - 21:47:32 CDT
In this mailing:
Feedback and such
Tina's notes
CAT's comments
Administrivia
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Feedback and such:
I'm sending this out mid-week due to the length and volume of material
that has come in.
Sorry about the length of this. There are two very good and detailed
reports here that would be worthwhile to read in depth.
More has come in, and is ready for the next mailing, but I thought I
better clear the queue at this time. :)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tina's notes:
>>2. If N+I results in a conflict for more of our people, we could slide
>>the entire schedule back one day, beginning Tuesday evening and ending
>>with a big bang on Sunday evening.
>The last couple of years we've had big bang events on Sunday night, but
>not gotten huge turnouts. Much lower than Friday or Saturday night,
>sometimes even Thursday. So this year, I asked people who said they
>were leaving daytime Sunday why they were going (admittedly not a
>scientific approach, but at least I was asking people who actually
>attended, as opposed to list lurkers). Most said it was because they
>had to go to work on Monday.
There are some numbers on this in the next item. Cat's notes just
happened to come in before yours, so I answered an commented there.
>Although it does seem like a lot of people take vacation to come to
>DLV, they seem to come out to LV early in the week so that they are
>there for the early startup events like Keys and Goodtimes. They do
>seem to be good girls and go to work on Monday. Maybe we should quit
>worrying about the Sunday drop-off (or is it only me?) and just be glad
>that DLV has gotten big enough that we get enough people staying Sunday
>and Monday to still have a good time.
I tend to be concerned about any activity where we don't seem to get
what I would consider an optimal number of people. For this year, those
were the Saturday afternoon thing and the Sunday activities. Most of
the rest seemed to have a good turnout, or at least what was expected.
We had a mob for the dam tour. I would think a significant number of
them would have enjoyed Folies.
Since we had far more people at the Monday past-DLV thing than at the
Sunday things, I think a combination of $$$ and procrastination was
what was responsible for the smaller turnout. However, I still see
the Sunday activities as some of the most enjoyable ones, from my
point of view at least.
>Also, clearly, the girls staying over for N+I help provide a group of
>stay-overs (which is good), although it appears that their time may
>start to get taken up by the earlier start to N+I.
Yes, N+I is creeping back into the weekend and will most likely
continue to do so. The bulk of N+I, such as keynotes, exhibits, etc.,
is still concentrated in the Tuesday-Thursday range.
>Interestingly, it is my understanding that most of the people at the
>Sunday show and limo tour were not there for N+I, even though most were
>connected with the IT industry.
Thinking back, at least one other on the limo ride was doing N+I.
Not all IT people are interested in N+I. It's a very specialized show
aimed at the network people. Such people as mainframe and database
jockettes would usually rather go to some other kind of show.
>Also, this year at DLV overall, I saw
>more girls than ever before who were not IT industry people. This was
>great, since it means we're getting out to a larger audience.
>Personally, strictly for me, it doesn't matter if we start Tue or Wed,
>as long as we still do 6 nights.
I really don't think we will have any serious suggestions to make it any
shorter than it was this year. :)
>The key that cuts into the work week
>is staying that Sunday night. I do it because I want to.
I'm very open to either a Tuesday or Wednesday start. Assuming I get to
go to N+I next year, a Tuesday start would extend my trip a day, which
would probably be a good thing.
Those staying over for N+I (or just if they want to) always have the
option of getting together for some post-DLV activities.
<snip>
>>Again, daylight activities
>>had comparatively low headcounts. Lower turnout (by far) than on two
>>previous almost identical activities the two prior years. Is this just
>>a lack of interest, would they rather do other things during this
>>timeframe, or does this type of thing scare the hell out of them?
>I did a daylight thing at DLV in 01 for the first time ever in 3 years
>of attending. It as the first time I had made a conscious effort to be
>semi-conscious and get up that early in the day (and I was still a
>little late!). For me, it is strictly a sleep issue. I stay out each
>night till daylight (5 or 6 AM, Vampirella Lives!!) and I gotta sleep.
>And I'm often out with other DLV girls, so I assume they are in the
>same sleep situation.
>If the daylight activities are not a sacrifice (of sleep, personal
>time, whatever) to the people organizing them, then I would encourage
>them to keep doing it. I enjoyed it, as did everyone else who was on
>the shopping trip that I went on. Daylight events will never be as
>popular as night events.
>>+ 10:00pm Folies Bergere Tropicana
>>
>>Great show, but only fair turnout. I suppose the hoop-jumping requirement
>>contributed to this. Those who didn't make that jump REALLY missed a good
>>show and a very good time in a very classy showroom.
>Some people also complained to me about the cost of tickets. I've
>thought about that a lot, but decided that it is not really a serious
>issue. Candidly, given how far in advance it was announced, if you
>really wanted to go, you would find a way to save the money or work a
>weekend job. One 8 hour shift at minimum wage would have paid for your
>ticket.
I didn't think the show was out of line at all in price. It was
certainly not as spendy as S&R or "O". Besides, these were the great
front/center booth seats. I'm sure those seats back in the nosebleed
section were less.
It was, imao, announced well in advance and well managed.
>I feel that what people were really saying was that they had other
>priorities for their money, as evidenced by how much some of the
>complainers lost at the tables. And that's OK, because you can never
>please everybody.
>The majority of DLV activities are either free or
>very inexpensive, and we should keep it that way, but we shouldn't be
>scared of providing other opportunities to live en femme.
We've always tried to keep DLV affordable. I see such things as a better
show to be an option, but one that still is not out of range of most
of our people.
>Also, I truly believe that an unspoken reason for many people staying
>away from the Sunday shows is because they are "straight shows" with no
>T* connection. DLV provides a very safe and accepting environment for
>most activities, and that's a good thing, but we need to keep edgier
>activities for those who are ready for them.
We've been full-circle with this. We've had people comment that we
do too many FI shows and should hit more mainline ones. I know we have
people who shy away from the mainline showsdue to the perception that
we are not (as) welcome there. We spend money, we're welcome! :)
>>Do we want more exposure? Do we want to submit maybe a release to
>>such things as _Girl_Talk_, _Tapestry_, _Ladylike_, etc.?
>><snip>
>>I was queried
>>by one of the t* publications about doing a feature. I
>Sure. Good ideas.
I just dug out the contact info. I'll make a quick query and report back
probably next week. (This week's mailing is getting VERY long.)
>>The one thing that (still) bothers me is the amount of no-shows we get.
>>It seems like we get more than the mainline t* conventions, and this
>>year it was at an all-time high. I know we had a few people who had to
[snip]
>Truly, I believe that most of the no-shows are list lurkers who are not
>ready to go out in public or have no intention of ever doing so and are
>just living vicariously.
I do think many of them register doing so as wishful thinking.
>Also, do you think that the stock market drop, the IT lay-offs, and dot
>com implosions may have made at least 1 or 2 decide to play it safe
>financially?
I dunno. Those who did let us know they were not coming did not mention
anything along this line as a reason. I do know we had one person
present who was just laid off from an IT job.
The IT crunch (you know, those stories of the 6 figure database guru
now living in a van down by the river) seems to be regional in many
respects. In the upper Midwest, among other places, IT is booming (for
now --- knock on wood).
>>We still have people who, and I hate to use this word, refuse to dress
>>down.
[cut-paste]
>>What do we do, gang? Do we make DLV an evening-only thing, letting people
[whack]
>One thing I never want to see at DLV is a dress code.
I agree! IMAO, it's ironic that some t* groups have dress codes for their
meetings. (Anybody's ears burning? <vbfg?> :)
>I hate the term "dressing down", and the whole frumpy, dumpy image it
>conveys.
I'm probably the one guilty of using that term within the context of
DLV. I never intended it to mean to dress frumpy or dowdy. I intended
it more along the line of when in Vegas, do as the Vegans. (Does that
mean I can't have a steak? Or is a fish really a plant?) :) :) :)
>You can dress casually and still look quite stylish in the
>daytime.
I agree with this. Not to name names, but I will in this case, :) look
at the photos on the DLV website of such things as Margeth and Rhianna
on the Strip, and Julie in the mall. There is no way those people are
frumpy, but they are indeed dressed down.
http://www.geekbabe.com/dlv/dlv2001/people/img121.jpg
http://www.geekbabe.com/dlv/dlv2001/beyond/d01231.jpg
Nor do these people scream "tranny" as they venture out in the daytime.
>I'm really only aware of one real serious complaint about
>"inappropriate" daytime dress. I didn't see it, so I can't comment on
>specifics, but my general reaction is "get over it". Given the number
>of girls we had this year, that is a very good average.
>We want inexperienced girls to come to DLV. This means two things:
>1) assuring them that things won't be too wild so that they can be
>comfortable as they deal with their anxieties, and 2) not ostracizing
>girls who make a mistake. It's a balancing act. If someone is doing a
>strip-tease in the middle of the buffet line, feel free to walk away.
>Otherwise, quit kidding yourself.
It is indeed a balancing act, and a very complex one. Many of our people,
both newbees and experienced, want as little attention as possible.
We have to encourage and support those who don't yet have a style of
presentation and fashion, without turning into Fashion Cops.
>It isn't only the girl in the strapless evening gown at lunch that is
>drawing attention, it's the whole group of men in women's clothes.
>Most people are too polite (bless them) to say anything, but a group of
>DLV girls just isn't going to pass. Just relax, be a lady, and enjoy
>your lunch. 99.9999% of people have more important things to worry
>about then how you dress.
>Also, personally, I think we should encourage girls to dress up even
>more at night, although I thought that DLV 2001 was our best year yet
>for glitz and glamour.
Actually, I was impressed for the most part with the evening dress this
year. I don't think our people need much arm-twisting to put on the dog
for the fancier evening things. :)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CAT's comments:
>>1. Any final summarizing of DLV 2001.
>Wonderful, marvelous, stupendous! Great time with beautiful people!
>>2. Discussion of the length of DLV. Did we have the length about right,
>>do we need it longer, was it too long?
>Just about right for most.
>>3. Days of the week and timing. Did the Wednesday-Monday timeframe seem
>>to work, or should it be tweaked.
>Not being able to be in town for the Monday ending, I can only offer
>that what works best for me personally is to have everything within the
>same calender week.
>>4. General timeframe of DLV.
>The name says it all. Would it be the same if it was moved elsewhere?
Other than the first couple years, I don't think a serious suggestion has
been made to rotate it (ala Fall Harvest) or move it somewhere else. For
the record, iirc, those suggesting that it be moved were some of those
who did not attend at all.
>As stated above, I would be in favor of starting on Tuesday and ending
>on Sunday.
Be sure to stay involved in the scheduling discussions over the
next month or so, as this is one decision we have to make soon.
>>5. General activity comments, suggestions, etc. We want to paint in
[bobbitt]
>>+Wednesday: 5:00pm Pre-pre-dlv dinner Milano's
>Very enjoyable, friendly staff, wonderful food. Fun, relaxing start to
>DLV.
>>+May 2 7:30pm Pre-DLV get-together LV Lounge
>Pleasant venue for me to meet new people and mingle. I am thoroughly
>at home in this atmostphere, however, after the dancers started I could
>only last a short while. Since this was the first night, I would
>prefer being able to be in quieter surroundings that allow
>conversations to be heard.
>>+Thursday: 3:00pm Shopping, dinner, more shopping
>I did not attend. I just am not a group shopper.
>>+May 3 8:00pm Keys (piano bar) Keys Lounge
>My most favorite event! Nice club, great atmosphere and wonderful
>entertainment.
>>+Friday: 10:00am Air tours Henderson Airport
>Wonderful trip. Great views.
>>+ 5:00pm Dinner Sahara Buffet
>I was late, got there about at the end. It seemed to me everyone there
>was having a good time.
>>+ 7:30pm Welcome gathering Goodtimes
>Friendly place. Very good for conversation.
>>+ 11:00pm Dance Night Gipsy, et. al
>Wonderful dance club. About 20 were in attendance from my count.
>Several people who would said they do not dance, actually did and
>really seemed to enjoy themselves! Parking was a problem for some, and
>the renovation work made walking in heels on rocks an adventure, but a
>really fun time! Later crowd was very mixed and young. Alot of
>comraderie between everyone in the club.
>>+ 2:00am Sat Late Night Gaming Imperial Palace
>Low turnout might be that others like me forgot about it. We were
>having a great time where we were.
>>+Saturday: 12:00n Shopping and.. Start at Paris
>I don't know about past years, but there seemed to be quite a few who
>were still out and about at 4 a.m. Saturday morning. Could that have
>contributed. The 10 - 12 that I regularly was with did not appear to
>be very much into shopping while there.
>>+May 5 8:30pm Kenny Kerr And Friends Frontier
>A great time! Not the best show I have ever seen Kenny do though.
>Very warm reception before the show.
>>+ (Official group photo taken immediately after)
>I felt hurried to get to the spot for the photo. After sitting through
>the show I would have enjoyed being able to get a drink and stretch a
>little. It felt like the time table was very compressed. This may
>only be me as I do like to visit whenever I am around people new to me.
>It did seem that as soon as the photos wre done, everyone was gone.
It's my experience that when something like this is done, we have to
gather them together ASAP, or else they will scatter to the winds. If
we had said "ok, meet in the atrium in 20 minutes", I think we would
have had about half the people we did, if that.
>I know there were some going to RHPS who had to change, but most seemed
>to disappear completely. As this show was the big event of the night
>for most, and it was at a place very few if any were staying, some
>might have wanted to get out of the Frontier as soon as possible. I
>don't know how many left early Sunday, but that could have had a
>bearing also.
>>+ Midnite Rocky Horror Picture Show Paradise 6
>I loved seeing the good turnout, but the show sucked! It was the worse
>performance I have ever been to of RHPS.
It's not the worst I've seen, that one being elsewhere when a fist
fight broke out between two cast members, but it was defintely one of
the poorer ones i've ever seen.
It's sad, cuz this was the best DLV turnout for RHPS so far. In the
past, it's just been the RHPS fanatics and their drag-alongs.
>Did not attend any other events as I left Sunday.
>>6. Ideas for new and different (yes, "out of the box") methods of
>>promotion
>Without having a budget to work with, the methods to be used are
>definitely limited. I found out about it via a listing for t*event
>listings on a site.
... and those t* event listings have given us quite a few people!
>The pictures on the DLV page for 2001 seem to me to show a lot more
>"happenings" than other years. (I admit I may be bias since I was
>there for this one and not the others).
This is also the first year where we've had many photos submitted other
than my own. In the past, most of the photos that appeared on the web
were taken at the time I pulled out That Damn Camera<tm> and started
firing, which was often during the low points in the action.
I was very impressed at the quantity and quality of those that were
sent in.
>I had several friends who
>could not arrange for the time as they found out too late. As many as
>10 of my friends will be there next year. Word of mouth still is very
>powerful. It must be started early and repeated often though.
Yes, and that's why we need to have our schedule set far in advance,
so the word can get out and people can make plans.
>If
>everyone who attended brought one new person next year, would the event
>be able to handle the number. It seems to me that the question of how
>much do you want this to grow is very important.
For the first few years, the attendance doubled each year. Lately
there has been some leveling off. I, Tina, and a couple others had
an exchange about this last winter, and we agree the current model
will work up to 100 or so. This means we have at least a couple more
years before attendance becomes a limiting factor.
>I think that needs to be decided if not for next year, then certainly
>the year after. This event is at a place where the growth could start
>to become expotential.
I dunno. It seems to be leveling off. Most other t* events report more
or less the same thing, rapid growth the first few years, followed by
compression in growth.
>No matter what the answer to the growth
>question is, I would advise to grab the chance for an article in any
>publication that serves our community. This is a very unique event and
>one that deserves to be reported on.
>>7. Registration. Did you think the web form worked (better than e-mail)?
>It seemed to work great for me.
>>8. Yes, I guess we will, like it or not, have one more iteration of our
>>yearly endless-loop topics such as ...
>>a. Meeting room.
>To me this is a no-brainer! This is not a typical convention! It is
>to get out and have fun. The event locations are safe. If anyone is
>concerned about leaving a hotel, there are certainly enough of us that
>are willing to have them come to our rooms and get ready, or we would
>go pick them up at their doors.
>>b. Special Group Rates<tm> at an official hotel.
>I believe the set up as is with a couple of places noted to be friendly
>which are "unofficial" hotels worked fine. I have been going to Las
>Vegas 4 - 5 times a year for over 30 years and have not found better
>rates than the types listed in Annie's comments. In fact, several of
>the conventions rates are actually highter.
>I would be happy to talk to the Sahara about a set rate for DLV
>attendees when I am there in October or November.
Ok, and please report ASAP on what you find out. Thanks for
volunteering to take this on.
However (comma) I'll bet you dinner (how about Omaha Prime some
evening, I know it's well within driving distance for you :) that
the rates they will give you will either be to the penny what the
promotional rates such as the LA Times rates are, or else slightly
higher.
>However, when
>negotiating for a rate, the numbers have to be signifcant and deposits
>have to be into the hotel by set dates..ususally approximately 2 months
>prior to the event. I will proceed according to the feedback posted
>here.
For the events (both t* and non-t*) I've helped run, I've seen this
work a few different ways.
1. They give a special rate (usually token discount) as an incentive
toward bringing business their way. No deposit, no guarantee.
2. They give a special rate as long as you guarantee some number of
rooms will be sold. If they don't sell, you make up the balance.
3. They give a special rate and block so many rooms at that rate until
so many weeks before the affair. If those sell out, they may or may not
negotiate for more at that rate, if they don't sell out, they are then
released to the run-of-house pool.
There are many variations on the theme here ...
The hotels will also try to promote such things as meeting rooms (with
a cash bar), catered meals (with a cash bar), hospitality suite (with a
cash bar), etc.
Another thing that is possible, if anybody wants to do the legwork, is
that several airlines will give a token discount to groups (even as
small as 25 or so) who designate that airline as "the official airline
of ...".
>>c. GLBT bars vs. "straight" bars
>Whether we like it or not, at this time in the USA, our safest
>locations are the TGLB clubs. What support there is from outside the tg
>community comes mainly from the Gay and Lesbian communities. The
>"normal" everyday America still does not recognize that we exists.
>When we are fortunate enough to find establishments that are friendly,
>the we should certainly try our utmost to get some function there (i.e.
>Milano's).
>We should not abandone the people who have supported us when no one
>else will...as long as they maintain an acceptable atmosphere. If the
>LVL stays with the same type entertainment, it might be used as a
>"meeting place" before heading on to the night's agenda...or make it a
>late-night option as Annie suggested. Either way, we can still give
>back to the place and yet also send a message of how we feel about
>their present offerings.
>> * The one thing that (still) bothers me is the amount of no-shows
>> we get.
>Most mainline conventions have to be paid for. It is much more of an
>incentive for someone to follow through when they have a monetary
>investment.
I've been involved in running what you would call the mainline
conventions at times. No-shows happen to those as well. Some write with
an explanation, most simply don't show at all. In most cases, they
forfeit their registration, as well as in many cases nonrefundable air
fare, hotel deposit, etc.
The worst case I remember is back in 1975 when somebody took the bus
all the way from Oregon to the east coast, got cold feet, and got back
on the bus all the way back to Oregon.
More typical is somebody who bails out on the whole trip at the last
minute, one who travels but never makes contact with the group, and
those who register and attend maybe 1-2 activities and disappear,
never to be seen for the rest of the event.
Ya know, I feel bad whenever this happens. I feel sad for those who
miss what may be a life-changing experience. However, I just can't
get over that nagging feeling that we could have done something
better.
>To me there is no excuse short of an emergency for not notifying you
>when someone cancels though.
History has shown that those with true emergencies, family conflicts,
business conflicts, etc., will almost always notify us, even if it is
at short notice.
This year we did get a couple honest "I'm just not ready for this"
cancellations, as well as a few dog-ate-homework type of notes.
>From a planner's perspective, any cancellation message is better than
a flat-out no-show.
>>* Daytime dress...
>My views on this are most likely very slanted. I found most of the day
>time activity to consist of mainly shopping. I do not enjoy group
>shopping. I know most of the people I connected with also feel the
>same. Many times people did something during the day in dress, just
>not the group shopping route.
A few notes about what you are calling "group shopping". For the larger
places such as the malls, we went there as a group, but split up when
we got there. Some had specific things they wanted to look for, others
were hungry and wanted to hit the food court, still others wanted to
window-shop, look, and just get the flight hours of being out in a
real-world situation.
>Some opted to have brunch or late lunch, some when shopping on their
>own. I believe some of the newer people may actually feel more
>comfortable in small groups of 3-6.
>I also believe that some people
>were under the impression that dressing down meant having to go in tee
>shirts and jeans or shorts. I don't think that was the case, but
>several people I talked with felt that way.
I'm the one who has preached "dressing down" and I think everybody
knows why I've done it. I've always intend it to mean "not dressing
up", or "not overdressing". I've also implied with it the notion to
dress appropriate to age, height, body type, etc.
I'm one of those who prefers jeans and a t-shirt or casual top in Las
Vegas (or Omaha) during the day. That's my style, and it's typical of
other women of my age, height, and body type, in casual circumstances.
However, what works for me may not work for somebody else. For somebody
who thinks t-shirts are too boring, or even too boyish, there are lots
of cute separates and such which are certainly appropriate for daytime
wear in Las Vegas, or Omaha, or about anywhere. You *can* dress down
without being dowdy or boring. Look (again) at the photos of the two
on the Strip, and Julie in the mall. That is certainly not frumpy!
I'll repeat this suggestion again, to those who don't think this
(casual femme without being frumpy) is possible. Go to a large public
place where people are dressed casually, such as a theater complex,
shopping mall, park, sports arena, etc. Observe gg's who are your
approximate age, height, and size. Look at what they are wearing. There
will be a significant variety of styles and modes of dress. Yes, a few
will be frumpy, but others will be stylish. The one thing they will
have in common is that very few of them will be dressed "up" or
overdressed. These observations can be a baseline for developing a
casual style.
As I think back over the years, with some help from the photo archives,
in years two and three (1998 and 1999) it seems we had a greater
percentage of those whose style included a lot of casual en femme
dressing. Take a look at:
http://www.geekbabe.com/dlv/dlv99/goodtimes/
for some examples. Yes, you will see lots of familiar faces. :)
Everybody did dress up for the shows and such, but many were casual at
such things as the goodtimes get-together. The barhopping tour in 1999
had to be the event with the widest range of outfits. :) For a look at
the contrast, look at Densie and Michelle in the photo at:
http://www.geekbabe.com/dlv/dlv99/outnabout/d991208.jpg
Both outfits "worked" and were appropriate for the occasion.
Let me close this thought by making a statement and asking you (all of
you reading this) a question. For the first few years of DLV, it seemed
to me that our people wanted to dress and behave as (for lack of a
better term) "real women" in society, whether casual for a touristy
daytime activity, or dressy for an evening show. Is this still the case
today? Do our people still want to dress and act as other women do,
according to time, place, and circumstance, or are they more apt to
want to do their own thing?
Comments?
>Having not been to any DLVs before, did the night time activities last
>longer than other years?
For the first three DLV's, I clearly remember daylight before I finally
ended up in my hotel room after the Saturday evening activities. (For
2000, the only reason this didn't happen is because I was under
doctor's orders to "take it easy". :)
>I know we were usually out until 3-4 a.m. and most times there were
>approximately 20 with us until around 2 a.m. I do not think there
>needs to be a bunch of seminars, but I will make a suggestion along
>this line in my suggestions later.
>From a personal standpoint, the main reason I have never pushed for
anything early in the morning on Saturday or Sunday, is that I know I
will be sleeping in those days. (I am a night person who is trapped in
the body of a day person, not to rip off an analogy. :)
>>* Did anyone besides me have a sense that the most experienced girls
>>seemed to drop out as the week progressed?
>By the end of the week are you talking about Saturday, Sunday or
>Monday? By experienced are you meaning comfortable out in public or
>with DLV?
I took Tina's "experienced" to mean comfortable and confident out in
public. However, I'm hard pressed to name anybody who has been with
DLV for several years who has not built up a significant public comfort
and confidence level.
>Are there good numbers on how many had to leave on Sunday or Monday?
Looking at the registration information, of those who showed up, 8
indicated they would be leaving Sunday the 6th., and 10 indicated
they would be leaving Monday the 7th for a total of 18 (not counting SO's) leaving on
Sunday or Monday. A significant number, but not overwhelming. We did
have a good turnout on Monday evening.
>As the numbers in attendance grow, wouldn't the percentages for
>attendance for a particular event become less due to the diversity of
>the group being larger?
I do think our diversity is increasing, but I think almost all of our
activities are broad enough in interest to cover most points on the
scale.
>>* Blondes Rule:
>I agreed with this at one time..until I became a red head...now I know
>who the chosen ones are!
#include <old/rita_rudner_blonde_joke.h>
>Cat's Comments - (some repeats)
>1. Is having everything during the same calender week and running
>Tuesday through Sunday night better for more people?
For me, it doesn't matter, for DLV that is. Personally, when I take a
vacation I like to leverage the weekend and take a couple days on each
side of the two weekend days, but DLV is a special case.
Comments, ladies (gentlemen)?
>2. Is the use of LVL as a "meeting" place to move onto the night's
>activities or as a late night optional activity an accetable
>alternative to dropping it completele?
This assumes the Las Vegas Lounge will be the same next year as it is
this year. Two years ago, the LVL was a (red) townie bar which wasn't
making much money. One year ago the LVL was a nice neighborhood bar
(and sometimes grill) which had a t* theme, and was not making much
money. This year ... well, we know what it is, but we don't know if the
$$$ situation is what they want it to be.
My feeling is that it will most likely change by next year. If it does
and which way it goes has yet to be seen. We should probably re-address
this topic as we go into detail with the schedule early next year.
We do have some people who *LOVE* the LVL in its current state. I'm
sure there is a place for something like that on our schedule, just
not an event where people are primarily interesting in conversing.
>3. Was Michael Cagle as good as I think that it would be worth trying
>to schedule an event at whatever club he might be playing in?
Michael is a very charismatic performer. My feeling is he may very well
not be playing at Keys next year, but in more of a mainline venue. I
can see him as a warmup act to a headliner, or having his own part
of some variety show by next year, possibly even a featured lounge act
at one of the better Strip properties. Hopefully he will be in Las Vegas
next year.
But yes, he loved our people, and most everybody I talked to liked him.
>I would volunteer to keep in touch with his schedule.
Ok, consider yourself appointed the official DLV Cagle Watcher. :)
>4. Could the low turnouts for the day time activities and dressing
>down questions both be related to such reasons as:
> a. People in attendance at previous DLVs who used these events have
>become so confident with themselves they choose not to particpate
>anymore.
Those who attended seemed to be very mixed. Some were those who are
quite experienced, others were strongly toward the beginner end of
the scale.
> b. There is a larger percentage of attendees who have more
>experience and feel comfortable with themselves in day time activities
>already, so that the numbers would not stay the same as in past years?
I would think the percentage of the people who go to things like this
would remain rather constant over the years. In 1998 almost the whole
group went shopping on Saturday but fewer by count went to the shopping
and hopping thing this year in the same timeslot.
> c. Do more people believe that you will be "read" in large groups
>than in small groups? (No matter what mode of dress you are in).
I know this is the case. Large groups attract attention. For the
daytime activities I've coordinated, I've assertively broken up large
groups into smaller ones for just this reason.
> d. Are more people not as interested in shopping trips than in the
>past?
We had a good turnout for shopping on Thursday.
> e. Even though this is not a convention, are more people making
>choices on which activities to attend, and choosing to attend the
>evening ones?
> f. Is there more local Las Vegas attendees? Does that translate
>into less attending day time activities for various reasons?
I was about to write a couple sentences saying that we had the best
showing of local Las Vegas people so far (and we did) but I thought
I should check things so I would be giving you accurate info.
I went into the database and found some very hard to explain
numbers on this. We had 21 people register who said they were from the
Las Vegas area. One looks like a dupe I didn't catch before, so let's
call it 20. Almost all of them show "definitely coming". One is a
cancellation.
Now, out of those 19 remaining, I'm showing only 7 who actually made
contact and got checked off the list. I **KNOW** we had more than 7 local
people there, far more. I can name 2 right off hand who were there but
don't appear on the roster.
Looking at those who did not show, I do not recall a single name as
somebody being present, and I recognize a couple of them immediately
as being conspicuously absent.
Wow, that's 60% no-shows from the local Las Vegas crowd who registered.
They were made up for by those who showed up by tagging along or
crashing. (Historically speaking, t* events have the reputation of
being trivially easy to crash, but since we don't collect $$$, we actually
like it when we get crashers. :)
I guess I could speculate on why this is the case, but I'll wait for that
long rainy Thursday to do that. This mailing is getting too large as is.
But, to answer your original question, I would think the local LV turnout
at the weekday daytime events would be low, since most of them will have
9-5 jobs and few if any will be taking vacation to attend DLV.
>5. Registration, Fee, "Demonstration"
> a. Would asking for a registration fee only (say $5-10) help give
>a more accurate picture how many would be in attendance? Would it
>cause the number to drop?
My instinct tells me this would cause our turnout to drop, simply due
to the fact of another hoop-jump in the procedure.
I would much rather see a high no-show rate than to have people miss it
due to (excuse or reason) not sending in a few bucks.
> b. If a fee were collected, could it be used to rent a room where
>people could meet as an alternative to some of the planned day time
>activities? This could be used to help each other with makeup, hair,
>clothing, etc., or even have somebody come in and give a
>"demonstration" of techniques. (I will not use the S word).
If something is to happen along this line it will require a volunteer
to step forward to handle and account for the $$$. It also adds a few
logistical (and legal, IANAL) complexities.
I also have a sneaky feeling this could be a nightmare in regards to
those registering right before showtime.
>Well, I guess I have gone on long enough. I am not sure it took
>Margaret Mitchell this long to do GWTW.
And I'm not helping with my TWDG reply. <vbfg> :) :)
>Thanks Annie for a great time and for all your work.
And you're very welcome. :)
>Hope you really
>think about how big this thing could quickly become.
I've thought about this ever since our attendance more than doubled the
second year. It seems like only yesterday when our major transportation
issue was deciding whether to take one or two cars. :)
I think a lot of growth is still possible. I want to be sure, however,
that we don't dilute the atmosphere and meaning of DLV as we grow.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Administrivia:
This is the Diva Las Vegas 2002 organizational list.
Diva Las Vegas 2002
May, 2002, dates to be announced
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
One address for all items regarding this list, additions, removals,
changes, submissions, questions, etc.:
dlvorg@geekbabe.com <--- NOTE: all lower case
Please do not send binary attachments (photos, etc.) directly to the
list, as the list processor will not properly handle them. If you want
to send photos and the like, mail to: annie@annie.net
Archives of this list appear on the web at:
http://www.geekbabe.com/annie/org02arc/
To unsubscribe: Simply reply to this message with the word UNSUBSCRIBE
in either the Subject: field or the first line of an OTHERWISE BLANK
message body. The word "unsubscribe" (case is insignificant) should be
the only item in the subject field or the first line of the message,
justified to the left.
NOTE: WHEN UNSUBSCRIBING, THE FROM: LINE OF YOUR UNSUBSCRIBE MESSAGE
>>MUST<< HAVE THE SAME ADDRESS AS WHAT WE USE TO SEND TO YOU. IF IT
DOES NOT, THE UNSUBSCRIBE WILL FAIL, AND YOU MAY NOT GET A FAILURE
NOTICE. SPELLING COUNTS.
Please pay attention to the above. Many automated unsubscribe requests
fail for this reason.
To send material to this list: Send submission as regular e-mail to
the address: dlvorg@geekbabe.com
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Tue Jun 04 2002 - 07:48:23 CDT
