From: annie@ivgate.omahug.org
Date: Mon Nov 14 2005 - 11:05:59 CST
First of all, nothing is a done deal yet. Our recent vote was just to
formally reconsider the dates and to let the Teeming Millions know
what's going on.
The default action is that the dates remain unchanged, should the
group here fail to approve a new timeframe by a 2/3 majority.
>The hotel rates for the current dates is between 200% to 400% higher
>than if we move the dates one week ahead.
This is my primary concern -- low turnout due to non-affordability.
Secondary concern, as I've stated before, the griping when people find
out they have to pay considerably more to attend.
I really don't think many of those here on this list realize how much
crap I catch when people aren't happy about DLV. Last year was the worst
by far, but if we would keep the original dates without inviting input,
I'm sure the griping would eclipse last year's.
>>If there was such a good consensus concerning the dates a few months
>>ago, why the discord now?
>The extra $700 more in hotel rates for the week.
I'm really not hearing too much of what I would call discord. The
comments from the masses, those who have commented so far at least,
seem to be in favor of a less expensive and less crowded timeframe.
>>I am concerned that if we reschedule now, this will not be the last
>>of it. Someone else I'm sure will object, and we'll go through this
>>whole mess all over again.
The standing rule that requires a 2/3 majority for rescheduling (more
than 3 days) is to prevent just this. It discourages frivolous motions
to reschedule, but does allow rescheduling when there is a very
siginficant reason to do so and when a supermajority of our organizers
agree.
>>I guess you can all do what you want to. I do feel that changing the
>>dates is a good way to run people off,
>"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"
I see a rescheduling as a lesser evil. I do value consistency, but
pragmatically, I believe more will be run off by high prices and crowds
than will be from a carefully-considered far in advance rescheduling.
For those of you who favor the original dates, and those who are opposed
to rescheduling, please feel free to nominate the original timeframe for
consideration and to second such a nomination if it is made. Also please
discuss the benefits of your preferred timeframe and what advantages it
has over the other one(s) proposed.
As of this time only one timeframe has been nominated.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 06 2006 - 16:16:53 CDT