Subject: dlvorg Moving forward ...
From: Annie (annie)
Date: Sun May 19 2002 - 11:51:57 CDT
In this mailing:
Org List
Moving forward
Participant followup survey
The touchy subject again
Administrivia
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Org List:
This is the DLV Organizational List (dlvorg@geekbabe.com) Replies to this
message will be forwarded to the DLV ORG list and not the main DLV list.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Moving forward:
I would like to move on with wrapping up and analyzing anything we need to
before we shift the focus to planning DLV.
In particular, I think we need to hear from all of you who were activity
coordinators in regards to how things went with your activities, like
what went right, what went wrong, what we need to do if we want to
repeat your activity, etc.
Also, any general summing up regarding things as the length of the
event, facilities we used for activities, lodging, dining, etc., our
logistics and procedures, and whatever we need to discuss as a followup
to the DLV 2002 event.
I figure in June we'll have our annual call for volunteers, and I
daresay we will then have quite a few more joining this list. So, if
anybody has anything that they think we should cover before the influx
of new volunteers, it would be good to cover it now.
As far as looking ahead toward the next few months, I think we should
plan to have any DLV 2002 business wrapped up by the end of June, and
from that point on go forward toward DLV 2003.
Again, I think we should plan any major changes -- those that need to be
made with a meat cleaver rather than a scalpel -- early in the game.
As we've done the past 2 years, I think we should have a preliminary
decision on the dates and the length of DLV ready to present to the
general DLV audience on August 1, allow a one month discussion period,
and announce the dates as official on September 1.
Comments, ladies?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Participant followup survey:
Yes, I know I'm behind on this. {spank-spank}
I would like everybody in the DLVORG group to please pull up the URL:
http://www.geekbabe.com/dlv/dlv2002/dlv2002survey.html
... and look it over for a number of things, including:
1. Spelling, grammatical, lexical errors. (Yes, I know I alternate
between first and second person a number of times.)
2. Technical errors. Does it fail to load, fail to display in your browser,
etc. I've tested it with Netscape, IE, and Opera on the peecee and various
Unix platforms. (If it barfs on your system, please let me know the OS and
browser you are using.)
3. Any omissions. Yes, I know it's long, but I want to be sure we're not
leaving something out that we want to be tracking.
It's not gonna hurt anything if you fill it out and click the SUBMIT
button, but your answers will not be recorded yet. You're probably going
to get a whole bunch of cgi debugging output now.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The touchy subject again:
>>It happens everywhere. It even happens between geekoids and booth
>>bunnies (or booth boys) at Networld+Interop.
>And if some Booth Bunny offers sex for money, she would be out of the
>show and in Jail before she could pull her pantyhose up. They don't
>put up with anything like that over at the Convention Center.
Very true. They do want to keep the reputation of those shows clean.
. . . . .
>Annie, consider this angle. It might not be they're doing it for
>money, but more for the ego-trip, what I mean is that they are
>feeling more natural, sexy, feminine, desirable, if men will
>pay real money to have sex with them. Kind of a self-validation?
>What do you think?
Uh, I dunno. Different perspective, I admit. This still doesn't make
it any more acceptable, to me, anyway.
. . . . .
>I will be happy to talk to the girl involved about the presumed
>solicitation in case she is ever thinking of coming back to town during
>Diva week but not without any facts tho.
>Could you get the girls who complained to give me specific details of
>what they overheard and the circumstances of the incident they are
>reporting? This way I have something tangible to approach her with.
>If you would not mind moderating they could send them to you first so
>as to remain anonymous to me if they wish or you can give them my email
>for direct contact.
Here is the way I would like to see this handled ...
I don't see any useful purpose of any accusation, investigation, lengthy
discussion, he-said she-said, etc. I really don't think it's our job to
do that.
I wanna see this issue put to bed (bad choice of words) as quickly and
as quietly as possible.
Going back and forth with the people in question and those who observed
it would generate a lot of heat and very little light.
I would like to see the people who are in contact with the two
individuals in question let them know, in no uncertain terms but
without accusing them of any prior misconduct, that whether or not any
such activities occured at DLV 2002 or in the past, and whether or not
these two were involved, that these acts will not be tolerated in the
future, period, no discussion, no negotiation.
And for the record, I'm not accusing either of these people of anything,
I'm just reporting what I've been told to you, the DLVORG group, and
adding my personal thoughts and feelings.
Let's just consider what happened to be water under the bridge and move
forward. However, let's get the word out that if people want to turn
tricks, to stay the hell away from DLV.
I would like to see the energy in this group be focused upon following
up to what was a very great and memorable week for many people, myself
included, and go on and do such things as plan limo trips, swimming
parties, golf outings, etc., and not waste time and effort on that other
crap.
. . . . .
>>Point I am trying to make is that if such a thing went on I am sure it
>>was negotiated quietly between the parties involved versus the girl
>>yelling out "How much should I charge this guy to do me?" or something
>>like that.
>Sorry dear, that's just the point. It wasn't handled discreetly.
>It was far too much out in the open and too many DLV participants
>noticed it going on and found it distasteful.
>I have many t* friends around the country. Over the years, some
>(particularly some younger and prettier pre-op ts girls who transition
>without benefit of a college education and/or financial support) have
>had to work as escorts to make ends meet.
>It's a harsh reality out there. But I can guarantee to you that these
>girls had more class and discretion in their little finger than the
>individuals we're referring to displayed at DLV. There was a heavy
>element of "look at me" involved in this. This was a deliberate
>display of exhibitionism, poor taste, and incredibly boorish behavior
>that reflected badly on our group. And yes, I am a personal witness
>to some of this egregious behavior.
>There's going to be consensual sex of all varieties at DLV. There
>always has been. We've also always attracted attention from locals,
>for those girls who were interested. As we grow larger, there will be
>more tranny chasers attending from outside LV. That's OK too.
Any time people get together, intimacy is going to occur. It happens in
all societies, from the most repressive to the most permissive. It's
part of being human.
I don't think we have any need to try to control noncommercial sex that
goes on between closed doors. However, as you said, this was commercial
and was not very discreet.
>And we will continue to have a very significant number of straight
>male cross-dressers and (to a lesser extent) their wives. All of
>these groups have always gotten along at DLV, and I firmly believe that
>they will continue to get along.
One thing I've always liked about DLV and the people is that we are a
very diverse group. Everybody does get along, and they seem to respect
each other even though they may come from totally different planets
within this TG galaxy.
>But I do think that it is reasonable to say that no illegal activity
>(drugs, prostitution, etc.) will be tolerated by the establishments
that we patronize and therefore any indication of such will result in
>ejection from DLV activities by DLV event organizers (in other words:
>Annie, Tina, Aiko, Monique, Mindy, etc.).
>We invited you, and with sufficient words to bar bouncers and hotel
>security, we can un-invite you on the spot. We're trying to make sure
>that we have the right to use the public restrooms of our choice during
>DLV, while having a fun vacation en femme. We don't need this kind of
>illegal activity undercutting those efforts and ruining the reputation
>of a fine organization.
>I seriously doubt that the people we're talking about are even
>monitoring this conversational thread. I'm kicking myself now for
>sitting silently by and not speaking up directly to the individual I
>observed at the time early in the week when I first saw this starting.
>I would recommend that we prominently and repeatedly post warnings
>against illegal behavior in the mailings for next year, and then back
>up what we say with action.
We should probably discuss how we want to do this over the next several
months.
As has been brought up, we might need a general "Conditions Of
Participation" to let people know what is expected. Problem is that most
of our people (by far) don't need this, and those who do need it are the
most likely to violate it. As much as I hate formality like this, it may
be that we're just getting too big to do without it.
The only thing we've had along this line is a single sentence in the
FAQ, which reads:
+We ask that when you're with the group, you dress appropriate to the
+occasion and activity, and act as a lady or gentleman, whichever you
+prefer at the time.
Personally, I think that sums it up, but apparently it does not, perhaps
we need something along the line of "Blatantly illegal activities by
our participants or those in the company of the group will not be
tolerated."
. . . . .
Bottom line ... I think the best way to handle this one is along these
lines:
1. Those who are in touch with these two individuals, please pass the
word, without mentioning or accusing of any prior misconduct, that from
this day forward, that type of behavior will not be tolerated at DLV.
Period, no discussion, no negotation.
2. As we move forward with planning for DLV 2002, we discuss a possible
need of a more complete "conditions of participation" statement.
3. That we encourage everybody, both organizers and general
participants, to ask their tag-alongs to join the (dlv-announce)
mailing list and register when the time comes. This will not only
let the people know what to do if they want to join in on the slumber
party, but will let them know of the climate and culture of DLV,
and what is expected of them.
4. Move on, learn from the experience. Don't let this be a distraction
or a point of endless-loop discussion.
Comments?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Administrivia:
This is the Diva Las Vegas 2002 organizational list.
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 - 07:48:51 CDT