From: Diva Las Vegas organizers (dlvorg@geekbabe.com)
Date: Sun Aug 16 2009 - 09:27:31 CDT
In this mailing:
Org List
This mailing
Name Tags and Makup Sessions
Golf, SOs, etc.
Large gatherings and hospitality
Makeovers, buffets, etc.
Name tags
Maps, walking, expense
Hospitality
Name tags
Administrivia
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Org List:
This is the DLV 2010 Organizational Mailing List (dlvorg@geekbabe.com)
Replies to this message will be forwarded to the DLVORG list and not
the DLV-Announce or DLV-Discuss list.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
This mailing:
Another early mailing, another long mailing.
Again, a lot of very good conversation on a number of topics.
The big earthshaking item is that funds have now been pledged
for name tag holders for DLV 2010, thus ending the need for
any creative fundraising and such.
. . .
Multiple submissions from some of you. Please don't be at
all afraid to do this!
I would >>REALLY<< like to hear more from the new volunteers.
I think it's very important that we get the perspective of
those who are new to volunteering and relatively new to DLV
on a number of these current topics.
Soooo, how's about it Angela? Kathy? Lori? Suzane? Tracy?
Val? Vivian? We would love to hear from you! :)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Name Tags and Makup Sessions:
Ginger writes:
>>Big Burning Question: Is such a donation appropriate,
>>realistic, and workable?
>OK you have convinced me name tags are essential! However,
>if we get into a donation from attendees to offset such
>cost as these we run the risk of having enough funds
>that the funds will have to be accounted for leading to
>a host of other problems and issues without going into
>detail.
Agree. For small funds, we are at risk of adding to the
complexity and creating more issues than we solve.
>Let's just let the organizers chip in a little. You can
>count on me for up to $100 or I'll bring a couple of boxes
>of name tags instead.
Thanks, Ginger! If you'll donate the tag holders, I'll
spring for the printing of the map/schedule.
Case closed! Done deal! Thanks again! :)
. . .
>Good idea on the make-up session timing.
>I'm going to get with Stacey at Bare Escentuals for a
>makeup session on Monday morning and then one after
>lunch. That way I can talk it up at lunch for those
>who have not gotten the word.
>I prefer main-stream makeup systems because they can
>be continued throughout the year. The ones done at TG
>services are typically very good and have some
>advantages, but it seems to me the product renewals
>would be hard if not impossible especially since cosmetics
>seem to be constantly discontinued and new ones introduced.
>We might also ask Stephanie Danderson (Williams) what she
>might do for us.
Stephanie is a very talented makeover artist. She has done
me over twice to the degree that those I have known for
years did not recognize me!
The only negative about Stephanie's work for this
particular purpose (getting help for newbees who need
help) is that she tends to use a lot of esoteric
products and techniques (shading, contouring, etc.)
which a beginner cannot possibly duplicate.
For the newbees who need help, I think they need the
techniques which they can easily duplicate and products
that are conveniently available.
>I think she is also using Bare Escentuals which can be
>purchased at at stores nationally as well as by mail
>order.
I really don't remember what specific lines she was using,
but at the time I seem to recall that she was using a
mix of various stage and street lines.
>I suspect we could also get the same thing at a MAC
>counter and still have a contact or two from my MAC
>days.
>Want me to work on this for say Monday through maybe
>Wednesday after lunch?
Yes, please. I think it's a great idea and I think we
need to push this during the first days of DLV.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Golf, SOs, etc.:
Susan R. writes:
>Thank you and congratulations Kimberly Kael.
. . .
Golf:
>Golf courses don't like to send out group of less than 4. Perhaps
>we could find a less crowded golf course. It might add to the
>enjoyment and they might appreciate our business more. I didn't
>play last year but the year before my foursome was blessed with
>the golfer who got the highest score. We were told to speed up.
>What is a scramble format?
IANAG (I Am Not A Golfer) but they way I understand it is that
all in the foursome play their next shot from the vicinity of
the best shot out of the foursome, thus evening the playing
field and speeding up play.
Golfers, help me out if I appear to be on drugs or something.
. . .
SO gatherings:
>The discussion about SOs is fascinating. I was at last years
>SO lunch. Soon after we sat down, Bob asked if anyone had any
>questions or had anything that they wanted to talk about.
>I wish that this discussion had come out at the event. I
>appreciate the perspective and opinion of the traditional SOs.
>I'm jealous of your husbands. Some of us have never found that
>kind of support. I know that my attendance was not traditional.
>But I"ve made a couple of very good SO friends and have learned
>from them.
>My memory of the SO event is that of a lovely lunch. Good food.
>Good company. Good conversation.
>In my few years of involvement with DLV, I sense that it started
>as a mostly female SO/CD husband group. That's probably why the
>SO gathering withered out. DLV has never been about support
>groups. If I suggested a lunch to discuss this topic, I would
>hear Annie say" You're opening a can of worms."?
Actually, in the very early years, DLV was solo attendees only.
We didn't see a single SO that I can remember until 1999, when
we did get 3-4, IIRC.
Our first (intended) SO activity (lunch at Caesars) was 2000,
but only one showed up!
It was about those years (1999-2000) when what I would call
the "classical crossdresser" became the predominant demographic
of DLV.
>If there is a desire to have an SO only event or a couples
>only event, I think that we should try them. If they don't
>work out, they will die of their own accord.
. . .
Hiking:
>I like Bob's idea of a hike. We might have an easy hike and a
>more challenging Red Rock Canyon hike.
>Yes Annie, I'm willing to help. I'll talk with Bob about it.
Then do it! :) Thanks. :)
My hunch is that a less-strenuous recreational hike will get
more traction than something more rigorous. We've had various
proposals for such things as rock climbing, but those never
have gotten much support at all.
The outdoorsy things that our people seem to prefer are those
where you ride there, get out and look, and then get back in
the vehicles and ride to the next stop. I know there was not
much interest in getting out and walking in Valley Of Fire
and nobody seemed to be interested in the 1/2 mile or so
easy hike to Golden Canyon in Death Valley.
In any case, we haven't done anything outdoorsy at all for
a few years now, and I think that's a big hole that needs
to be filled.
. . .
Opening and closing gatherings:
>I think that the Blue Ox is perfect for our opening night.
As I've said countless times before, I think the Blue Ox
is a unique venue which can be close to ideal for one of
our maximum-turnout activities.
It is comfortable enough for all but the shyest of the shy.
On the other end of the spectrum, it's mainstream. There
can be no argument about that (but some still try). :)
Now, disregarding those on both extremes (those scared of
their own shadow and those who would never be caught dead
in a safe bar) and concentrating on the majority of the
attendees ...
It's a nice place! It's a fun place! They love it!
It has good food, reasonably-priced drinks, and has an
atmosphere conducive to socializing and mingling. It's
clean, comfortable, and in good repair.
It covers the needs and wants of the vast majority of our
attendees dead center!
Sure, the shy newbee will be scared to walk in. (That's
what Big Sisters are for!) Likewise, some may poo-poo it
because it's not right out in the middle of things, but
I don't think it's too much to ask to encourage those
types spend 2 hours or so there for the benefit of the
program as a whole!
>Last year we cut out the DJ. This event is a chance to meet
>and talk.
>We don't need entertainment.
Agree! For our larger gatherings, particularly those at the
beginning of the event, Quality Social Time needs to be the
theme.
Venue managers seem to think that we need and want some
kind of entertainment. I also think that venue managers
think that if there is some kind of entertainment, it
will encourage us to stick around longer and consume
more from the bar.
The more I think about it, the more I think that Blue
Ox is as close to a perfect venue for an opening mixer
type of thing as we can get.
No, I don't think it's time to kill it just yet.
. . .
>Will the Sunday start eliminate the pre-Diva gathering.
No way! Our people ALWAYS want an early start!
When DLV has started on a Sunday in the past, there's
always been a Saturday evening pre-DLV thing.
>Or should we have that on Sunday and the large gathering
>on Monday?
I think it's up to discussion and strategy as to when we
have the first official large gathering, and how many of
the max-attendance functions we have in total this coming
year.
Any further comments on this? One big one only? Two? More?
>I like the Bahama Breeze when we have the back room.
By "Back Room" I assume you mean the room(s) off to the
left as you enter, where we were in 2007 and 2009.
I like that one too.
I've also looked over the numbers for BB, and did some
rethinking of what I said earlier about BB having run its
course. It's still highly rated. 4.36, 4.56, 4.60, 4.41
for enjoyment and 4.73, 4.72, 4.76, 4.65 for comfort over
the four years we've used it. That's very consistent! The
decrease in BB attendance between 2008 and 2009, about 15%,
can be easily attributed to the larger overall difference
in attendance between the years.
. . .
>I don't understand the clamor for more mainstream events. As
>Annie pointed out, the majority of our events are mainstream.
As I've said, this past year I asked a few people some
questions along this line, listened to what they said,
read between the lines a bit, and I think I do finally
have a good handle on the dynamics of the issue and why
we get the cacaphony of "Mainstream Mainstream Mainstream"
on each survey.
Next year at DLV, remind me, and I'll sit down one on one
and share the details.
My question in the previous mailing was purely rhetorical,
to emphasize (to the members of the "chorus" and to their
audience) that we are indeed primarily mainstream in
orientation.
We are clearly the most mainstream-oriented of the major
TG events and have been since our early years.
>At the events considered more safe, there are always groups
>heading out somewhere else. Dancing, live music, etc. I've
>seen some of the newbies go out from there into the REAL world.
I would go as far as to say that one purpose of DLV is to
help the attendees get more of a footing out in mainstream
public.
>I like the idea of having some events such as dancing more than
>once. I, also, have found a conflict in choosing which event to
>attend. Of course that means that we have a full schedule of
>events, which is a good thing.
I have a feeling that Kimberly Kael will be placing dancing
at Paris on the schedule two or more times. If there's the
demand for this, I see it as a Good Thing<tm>.
. . .
Primary hotel:
>A main hotel might be a good idea also. The ladies would be
>hanging at the bar and would meet informally (without needing
>an organizer). Rides would be easier to arrange. Although I
>wonder if we should eliminate the rides program. This is a
>big city and we schedule events all over.
I'm going to be bringing up a couple motions for raising the
question on primary and/or only hotels. I'm just waiting for
things to settle a bit. :)
As for ride sharing ... {sigh!} ...
If someone wants to make a motion to eliminate our ride share
program, period, I will not try to fight it.
Ride share is something that nobody seems to be happy with!
The more I think about it, I'm agreeing with those who
think we're at risk, liability-wise, if we do any more to
facilitate ride sharing.
I see that nobody is jumping up and down, waving their hand,
and saying "ME! ME! ME!" to the suggestion that we appoint
a Ride Share Coordinator.
I think it's worth a TRY to do our simple ride share list
with a request to ask for cell phone numbers, but I have
a sneaky feeling that those who need rides will gladly
provide the phone numbers, but those who have vehicles
will be hesitant to do so. The only way we can find out
for sure is to try it.
To all: SURE you don't wanna volunteer to be our Ride
Share Coordinator? :)
. . .
Restrooms:
>I know that this is a situation that we'd like to avoid, but
>if a bathroom issue does come up, we could agree to use a
>men's restroom if management provided security so that none
>of us get hassled.
Let's see ... how do I put this ...
.. looking for just the right words to say here ...
.. oh yes ...
>>>OVER MY DEAD BODY!!!!!<<<
I may be turning into more of a total b*tch as I grow older,
but AFAIC the only acceptable restroom "arrangement", here
and now in 2009 and soon to be 2010, is full and equal access
with no stated restrictions!
If we accept anything other than full and equal access,
that which is given to other members of the general public,
we are admitting that we (TG's) are indeed second-class
citizens!
It is a two-way street, however. We must do our part if we
expect management and the public to do theirs! There's a
great deal of pragmatism in play here, a lot of dealing
with the real world, some give and take, some swallowing
of pride and ego, and even some consideration of those who
are closed-minded.
When we're dealing with a large group of our people who are
conspicuous in a very public area, all of us need to take
extra caution and do all we can to prevent incidents. The
simplest measures can be incredibly effective!
Things such as using a unisex restroom if it's available,
using the restroom in your hotel room if you are in your
home hotel, or finding a restroom in a part of the property
where our group is NOT obvious. If everybody just followed
simple guidelines such as this, over 90% of our restroom
incidents would not have occurred.
Besides ...
<wonk hat on>
We've had a good set of guidelines in force since 2003 which
cover such things as use of restrooms by attendees, and more
importantly for this discussion guidelines for activity
organizers.
Our Consolidated DLV Restroom, Dress, and Behavior policy of
August, 2003 states:
+DLV Restroom Policy and Guidelines
[deletia]
+Policy for Activity Organisers. This covers what the
+DLV Organisation group has agreed as our policy regarding
+restroom when organising activities.
[deletia]
+3. DLV Mainstream activities: Venue hosts should not be
+advised of the nature of our group and special arrangements
+should not be discussed.
[bobbitt]
I think this is a very good guideline. "Don't ask, don't
tell", and it's stated in the attendee section that we do
all we can, individually and collectively, to prevent
incidents!
And yes, you may have noticed that the author of this section
is not a native speaker of the American dialect of English. :)
<wonk hat off>
Everybody has looked over that document, right?
Everybody does know where to find it, right? :)
Sorry to steal your stage here, Susan. :)
. . .
Diversity and conduct:
>There is a wide spectrum of people in our group and many
>different kinds of relationships. I didn't see any making
>out at Mcmullan's. I'm sure that there were hugs and even
>kisses. If anything inappropriate occured, as the organizer
>I am open to discuss it with anybody.
>As Annie suggested the get a room comment usually makes
>the point. I wish that I could read the edited parts!
There really wasn't much, semantically, that was changed.
I really think that we need to focus on the behavior and
not on the people, or the roles.
There really should be no ambiguity as to what gestures
of affection are and are not appropriate in public. It's
very easy to differentiate between a congenial embrace
and foreplay!
. . .
>As an admitted non-techno, I ask you technos a question.
>Could there be a link from the event to the organizer
>He/she could explain the event and what to expect. Any
>questions could then be brought up on the discussion page.
I don't think this is a matter of setting up anything new,
but utilizing what we have more effectively. This could
be done by asking activities coordinators to summarize
their activity on the Discussion Forum, thus starting
a thread for that activity, and then encouraging the
masses to ask away if they have any questions.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Large gatherings and hospitality:
Susan R. Writes:
>I think that the final large gathering should be on the last
>night. We could make it more enticing. Excuse me if I missed
>something in the mailings, but I didn't know that there was
>going to be a DJ. He was good. We might even engage a classic
>rock band to dance to. I know that would mean that we'd have
>to charge or take up a collection.
Ok {squeeeeekkk - mark on chalkboard} one on record for a big
last day thing. :)
The entertainment was unexpected (as was also the case in
2007) and appreciated. It was a nice touch. I think it may
be that they have someone in the stage area of that room
on most of the weekends anyway.
>I don't know if that would work but my point is to make it
>bigger. Something that people will want to stay for.
I'm all for bigger! The bigger the better, and the more of
our in-town people that we can capture, the better!
One thing I am gonna question, however, is if any kind of
entertainment, even a live band, will capture more of our
people or retain them at a large gathering.
At the risk of over-generalizing, our people seem to love
large-group QST, but prefer their entertainment in smaller
group settings.
. . .
Circulating:
>Ladies let's shop. I've seen jewelry stores that sell
>necklasses with names on them. We'll start a trend and
>wear them at next years DLV.
Oh yes, the "Sex And The City" necklace. :)
I've looked, but I have yet to find those with either
"Dionysia" or "Fnordia" on them. :) :) :)
It would be my preference for it to become "socially correct"
at DLV to wear a DLV name tag, but for those who refuse to
wear them, this may be an option.
Please be thinking on a possible way to promote this.
. . .
>We all tend to gravitate to familiar faces. We should reach
>out to the newbies. But the newbies should reach out to us.
>Sometimes when I see a person standing alone, I think that
>they don't want to be approached. There are a lot of friendly
>wonderful people in our group. Approach us.
I think this needs to be another two-way street. We need to,
individually and collectively, reach out to the newbees, and
the newbees have an equal responsibility to reach out to us.
. . .
>Most of us have been subject to the rude remarks. I've
>found that the best thing to do is muster up you're
>dignity and ignore them. They're not worth your time
>and energy. I'm proud of who and what I am.
It's not only TGs who get hassled by guys who have more
testosterone than brains. GGs get it too, just ask. They
learn to deal with it. We learn to deal with it too.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Makeovers, buffets, etc.:
Susan R. writes:
>Glamour Boutique and Studio Lights do make overs.
I don't really know about what services that Studio Lites
offers, nor of their price ranges.
Now don't take me wrong on this next part. Amy and Stephanie
are both talented artists and do command and deserve their
going rates, but they are both priced out of the threshold
of affordability for many of our attendees.
A few years ago a LS inquired to me about instructional
makeovers. I suggested both Amy at Glamour Boutique and
Stephanie Williams, an independent. She checked out both.
The response to me was a very clear "I CAN'T AFFORD
THOSE RATES!"
I volunteered to accompany her to something like Dillards,
but the LS was not very enthusiasic about it.
That's why I was glad when HNS announced that they had a
$70 instructional session.
The more I think about it, the more I am encouraged by
Ginger's planned sessions with the vendor in FSM.
>I'm sure that we could get a Mary Kay rep who would
>love our business. I got some of my first make up tips
>from one. Watch what they do. Ask questions and learn
>to develop your own style.
We've actually had MK sessions as part of DLV. They do
not, however, generate that much interest. We even had
to cancel one in 1999 just due to lack of interest.
We've also had a few attendees who were MK reps bring
some items and sell them at times.
The one thing about the MK makeover sessions is that
unless the MK rep is licensed to practice cosmetology
in Nevada (or whatever state) their involvment in the
makeover has to be limited to "do as I tell you but I
can't do it for you" instruction. That's what a few MK
reps have told me.
If you (or anybody) know a MK rep who would want to
gain some DLV business, please let us know.
. . .
>I am grateful to every volunteer who organizes an event.
>I don't think that any of us should be pressured to do
>anything more than we already do. I'd like to see the
>percentage of organizers to attendees rise every year.
Diva Las Vegas would not be around if it weren't for
those who have stepped forward to help out!
I think DLV has to have the highest percentage of active
volunteers of any of the major TG events.
Looking back at the "thanks" item from the LFM in 2009,
I count 33 unique names who were involved in coordinating
activities, over 20% of our attendees!
All we've ever asked is for each volunteer to coordinate
or assist with one nontrivial activity. That's it! That
spreads the workload around and hopefully nobody gets
burned out. Some do more, and it's appreciated as well!
Now, if I may digress for a few sentences here ...
DLV volunteers are unpaid, and in many cases unthanked for
their work! Speaking very freely, the DLV volunteers take
far more bullsh*t from some of the attendees, and yes,
even from some of their peers, than they should ever be
expected to take!
Those who bitch about things that are not "just so" or
exactly to their liking are forgetting that we are not
professional event promoters. We are volunteers doing
this in our spare time, often times with our own out of
pocket funds, and -- as many forget -- it's our vacation
too!
I think we earnestly try to keep our bases covered and
run a smooth event, but for something this large, and
complex, little rain will fall!
This is not limited to DLV, other volunteer organizations
have this issue too.
Maybe a reminder to this effect in the LFM may be in
order.
Thus endeth the sermon! :)
. . .
>I too long for the good old days when we were all younger
>and the mob ran Vegas. But it's still the best place for
>DLV.
>I read somewhere about certain inalienable rights. Life,
>liberty, the persuit of happiness and the right to bitch.
>There are cheap buffets in town. The Paradise buffet at
>the Fremont downtown is excellent and around 7.95. The
>station casinos generally have reasonably priced buffets
>also. I'll look into it when I get back to Vegas.
>I like the opening and closing day large events. I
>consider them must attends. This year we had a
>relatively large event at Trevi, mid-week. I didn't go.
>I'm not big on Italian food and it was a bit pricy. But I
>like the idea of a mid-week large affair and heard that it
>was well attended. Would it conflict with some of our
>smaller events?
I think that Trevi is a good example of what a mid-week
medium-size dinner can be. For Trevi, I think the attendance
will be self-limiting due to price and, as you say, the fact
that not everyone cares for Italian. This could actually be
a Good Thing, since we were very close to the limit of how
many Trevi was willing to serve from their regular menu.
>People will object to any manditory fees to cover expenses.
>But an overt plea for donations might be appropriate if it
>comes with an explanation of where the money is going. Any
>accountants out there?
IANAA, but this appears to be a moot point for this coming
year, since funds have now been pledged to cover what this
collection would be used for.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Name tags:
Kate writes:
>Hi.
>I like name tags. Not the pin on type but the stick ons.
>They don't have to be stuck on an expensive chiffon or
>georgette dress but on a handbag or a wide handbag strap.
>Or even a forehead if that's your thing.
>Let me explain my reasons. I have attended 4 DLV's since
>2002 and I suspect not many of the girls would even
>recognise me or know my name as I am not a DLV icon by
>any stretch of the imagination. That doesn't bother me,
>it's just a fact but I like to know who I am talking to
>even if I met her 10 minutes ago and forgot her name
>already. (I'm over 60 so I am allowed to forget sometimes.)
>I am also a polite person and wouldn't likely ask a new
>aquaintance her name if I was supposed to know it already.
>Hence the neccesity for name tags.I know a lot of people
>are opposed to them so Don't wear one! but shy new people
>need to identify and I think that's important.
Thanks, Kate.
I think that we're converging on a group opinion that name
tags are a good thing to have (evil as they may be) and we
should encourage all to wear them.
I also think that (almost) all of the volunteers will be
willing to wear them regularly for the good of the group.
Is there anyone here who is unwilling to wear a DLV name tag?
I don't think we will ever agree on what type of name tag
is to be used, nor on what brand of beer is to be served.
Playing by the Golden Rule (he/she who provides the gold
makes the rules), Ginger will be the one selecting the
type(s) of tag holders for the coming year. We have the
right to advise Ginger on our preferences, of course,
but not the right to nitpick. :)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Maps, walking, expense:
Kimberly Kael writes:
>>I think the combined schedule/map is another necessary evil
>>for the smooth functioning of the event as a whole.
>I concur. People arrive with wildly varying levels of
>preparedness and this is something we can do that isn't
>that big a deal and makes life easier for everyone.
That's a very good way of putting it. :)
There is some busy work involved in preparing, duplicating,
and handing these out, but I think the effort is effective
in adding to the overall enjoyment of the event.
. . .
Bob wrote:
>>>I'm also planning on hosting a hike, for those interested
>>>in a little excersize.
Ginger replied:
>>I have tried having a walk after lunch, but very few if any
>>wanted to walk. One year we had one walker and after that we
>>gave it up. Maybe a one time thing would work and I'd like to
>>see it!
>I would also love to see another attempt to make this work.
>It was still on the schedule in 2008 and I was interested
>in joining the walk. I asked about it after lunch and was
>told that we don't really do that because nobody wants to.
>I wonder how many other interested walkers have missed the
>opportunity because "nobody wants to?"
>Admittedly it's going to be somewhat weather and location
>dependent, but there are some great places to take a
>stroll from (perhaps a window shopping walk through the
>Forum Shops?)
Here's what I suggest, Kimberly. Volunteer to hostess one
of the daily lunches. Pick a venue which easily facilitates
an after-lunch walk-off and plan a tentative route. Then
add another schedule item, a walk-off for your one daily
lunch and see how many follow you when you go out to take
the walk.
You can also (see above) pre-promote it in the Discussion
Forum.
If it works, it can be expanded, even informally during
the 2010 event. If it does not, it's a lesson learned and
nobody's really out that much.
. . .
Expense:
>>>>Are we pricing ourselves out of reach of the average
>>>>attendee or would-be attendee?
>>>Shows in Las Vegas are as expensive as shows in New York.
>>>They are probably cheaper in London.
>>As I look back over the years, I do think the DLV organizers
>>have been considerate of those who are on a tight budget.
>I agree and would caution against the idea that we can't
>do anything pricey because it won't fit everyone's budget.
>What we need are options that cover a reasonable range.
>Some people will want to splurge on a single evening, others
>will be looking to make the most of limited time rather than
>limited funds. "Something to appeal to everyone, all the
>time" would describe my ideal schedule.
I think we're already doing this as much as we can. We have
a good mix of affordable and upscale options from start to
finish.
. . .
>>1. Instead of personalized pre-printed tags, multiple copies,
>>a pre-printed tag insert without the name, filled in at
>>check-in time by either the attendee or the check-in
>This is the best compromise I've heard so far. Having
>to keep track of a ton of personalized tags has to be
>more work than having blanks and sharpies.
>My sole refinement is to suggest that we should have a
>"sample" tag to encourage people to print a large first
>name legible from a distance.
I like this idea. Have samples on display, both at check-in
and being worn by the volunteers.
And/or, get a volunteer who has particularly legible and
attractive handwriting to volunteer to write out some or
as many as the tags as is practical.
>We might even want to
>encourage other information - I think there has been a
>suggestion to include geographic information to help find
>people from your area. Letting people decide for
>themselves how much, or little, they're willing to
>reveal about where they're from would be much easier than
>trying to collect that information ahead of time.
I'm very unsure about encouraging additional information on
a name tag. I think it would be great if we can get most to
wear tags, period.
I'm not totally opposed to the idea, but I think the need
to indicate named has been established, and we may very
well complicate things if we get into other information.
>>These would not be as neat looking as the tags with the
>>pre-printed name. Appearance and legibility would vary
>significantly.
>Think of it as personalization! We're not some big
>corporate event trying to create an impression of
>professionalism, but a collection of individuals
>expressing themselves. We would probably need to
>overstock to account for people who want a second take,
>but with blanks that should be easy enough to accommodate.
This is true. If it's legible and visible, it then meets
all of the criteria.
. . .
>>2. A voluntary donation ($1 suggested) at check-in time
>>to cover the cost of the nicer vinyl tag holders. These
>That doesn't seem unreasonable on the surface, but we've
>seen how spotty collecting cash can be. Making change,
>dealing with people who have only plastic, etc. I think
>we might be better off adding a $1 tax on pre-paid events
>to cover costs like this (it sounds like this is what we've
>done informally in any case.) People who attend a bunch
>of events should make up the difference for those who are
>looking to keep costs to a bare minimum.
Again, this is covered for this coming year, making my
suggestion for a donation unnecessary.
Formalizing our financial structure is a major undertaking,
one I don't wish to tackle just now, maybe later, say in a
few centuries or so. :)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hospitality:
Kimberly Kael writes:
>>>Maybe in future might someone be on the lookout to welcome
>>>new people. They would be the one's off to themselves peering
>>>at the group waiting for the opportunity to join in. Some may
>>>find it rude to join in uninvited.
>>We should be doing this. I witnessed a lot of welcoming and
>>greeting at both our Monday and Saturday gatherings.
>I definitely saw people going out of their way to greet
>people at the beginning of events, but that tended to tail
>off as the event wore on.
>And you know what? I don't blame them. Are we really
>supposed to have the 100+ attendees at the Blue Ox
>memorized so we can tell the difference between someone
>who went outside to smoke or make a call vs. someone
>just arriving?
>I'm sorry, it's unrealistic.
>It's similarly silly to assert that someone should devote
>themselves to greeting newcomers and not be allowed to
>get engaged in deep conversations of their own that might
>be interpreted as exclusive. What part of "volunteers" do
>people not understand?
>So here's a suggestion: we could come up with a visible
>sign that someone is acting in a semi-official capacity
>and is someone you can approach to get introduced around.
>Most conferences use a uniform, a specific shirt color or
>something similar. We'd need a more fashionable alternative
>that we can mention in our mailings, maybe a silk wrist
>corsage? Something people would be willing to wear that
>stands out and says "talk to me!"
Any t-shirt shop sells those "Event Staff" shirts. (LOL!)
The simplest might be a second tag holder with "GREETER"
or "DLV Welcome Committee" in bold letters. I've had very
good luck with a "Ask me about Limo Tour tickets" tag.
Be thinking of (more) ways to clearly indicate greeters or
hospitality volunteers.
Ideas?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Name tags:
Kumiko writes:
>What is the purpose of name tags? You state:
>>1. They identify the individual, on sight, as a member
>>2. They tell or remind everyone of the name the
>>3. They add a certain degree of class and character
>>4. They can indicate to a merchant or vendor that a
>>5. They can serve as a momento or souvenir
>Reality is most attendees put it away and don't wear it
>throughout the whole DLV.
This is very true, and I think part of the solution lies
in encouragement to wear tags, starting at the top,
meaning all of us volunteers, myself included, need to
wear our official DLV name tags, consistently, and set
the example.
Is there anyone here who is unwilling to do this? Wear
a DLV name tag, that is?
>I don't see many others wearing one, and I am also guilty
>of not wearing it too. Wearing it outside of the DLV event,
>makes me a target to be read, so I don't wear it outside of
>a event, and forget to put it on during most events. Yes
>it does create holes and can damage tops.
I really don't think there's much risk of being read or
outed simply by wearing a DLV name tag. Tags and badges
are very common in Las Vegas. Our name and logo are so
generic that the naive observer is unlikely to infer any
transgender connotation by the name or tag alone.
Sure, the bartender at the Sahara casino bar may catch
on, but those in the general public probably will not.
>1. It cannot identify a attendee if not worn
>2. It cannot identify the name of the individual if not worn
>3. It doesn't add a degree of class if not worn -
>we've had negative comments when worn.
>4. I can see it used in this respect. A DLV business card
>would do instead of a name tag
>5. Agreed, yes its a souvenir.
># 4 and 5 - the tag is also in the purse and not worn.
True, tags fail to meet several purposes if they are not
worn.
>So by whats written above, the Name Tags have nothing to
>do with registration, yet its involved with "check-in"
>(See your #1 recommendation.)
>Then I read negative observations about attendees:
>>I don't think we can depend on the attendees, new or
>>returning, to do ANYTHING that requires printing, busy
>>work, on-line research, effort, or even reading! They
>>will not, consistently, do it! QED!
This was not intended as a put-down, but a statement
about how things work in the real world. Attendees have
different needs and different priorities, and as was
stated above, arrive in different states of readiness.
>We state a need for them, as a way to identify
>with DLV and a name as a "necessary evil"
>Then we also state very few wears one. Not many will
>print one on their own. Organizers will probably not
>create a name tags for their event. There is a real
>cost to printing them with no real reimbursement for
>the cost, and if there are multiple copies, there is
>a waste.
>When its suggested that the organizers take the lead to
>wear the name tags or as a alternative to create disposable
>name tag stickers for their event for that purpose stated
>in #1-2, and other reasons already discussed, you don't
think it will be done:
>>I think that organizers will not consistently follow any
>>proscribed policy regarding checking for attendee status
>>or distributing temporary name tags. Some may do it, some
>>will not. Consistently inconsistent!
>>Do we have a real need to check in and "check ID" at all
>>activities?
>Keeping track of attendees that sign up for a event and
>attend or don't attend isn't important? You ask for
>this information during or at the end of DLV for your
>statistics.
>The "check ID" was to create a DLV card instead of a
>Name Tag to be given at registration to be shown at each
>event to create a disposable name tag sticker
>to be worn at that event, since most will not wear the tag
>given to them at registration, and as a different way of dealing
>with name tags. It helps the organizer. Since there are names
>that can have variations in spelling.
>The check-in will notify the organizer that a attendee that
>signed up is there at that event and registered, and help
>the organizer know the new comers and help them feel
>more welcome if more attention to them is needed... as
>someone stated to do their part. I stated other reasons
>earlier. Its supported by statements:
>>"Newcomers have a responsibility to get to be known."
> At each event newcomers should be encouraged to wear name
> tags and a make themselves known to the organizers and
> official hosts or hostesses
>It was just a idea, and it sounds like it won't work so I'll drop
>this idea.
>You ask for changes, but yet you don't want changes that
>require complexity:
>>Also, I think we need to avoid anything that will further
>>increase the complexity of the registration/check-in
>>processes.
>Yet you suggest increasing the complexity by writing the names
>it in instead of just finding the name in the stack of tags,
>which would now require pens/markers, the cost of such
>items, keeping track of such items, pilfering that may happen,
>writing legibly, and we still have the cost of holders, and
>also the addition of collecting and holding money for supplies (ie $1)
>>1. Instead of personalized pre-printed tags, multiple copies,
>>a pre-printed tag insert without the name, filled in at
>>check-in time by either the attendee or the check-in
>>hostess.
>If no wants to or willingly wear it. No one wants to take
>steps to be sure attendees wear it, nor willing to do something
>so a name tag is worn, then why even have one?
>It seems there are alot of negatives versus getting the name
>tags to work
>It is too hard to do at 'crunch time', and expensive. I agree.
I think we may have to agree to disagree on what's more complex.
>From my perspective, walking down to Walgreens and buying a
5-pack of Sharpies is much simpler than printing multiple
copies of personalized tag inserts.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Administrivia:
This is the Diva Las Vegas 2010 organizational list.
One address for all items regarding this list, additions, removals,
changes, submissions, questions, etc.:
dlvorg@geekbabe.com <--- NOTE: all lower case
Diva Las Vegas 2010
Dates to be announced
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Archives of this list appear on the web at:
http://www.geekbabe.com/annie/org10arc/
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.
To send material to this list: Send submission as regular e-mail to
the address: dlvorg@geekbabe.com
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 16 2010 - 09:56:45 CDT