From: Diva Las Vegas organizers (dlvorg@geekbabe.com)
Date: Thu Aug 27 2009 - 10:19:01 CDT
In this mailing:
Org List
Motion fails
Golf
Hotel
One primary hotel
Motion on the floor
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.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Motion fails:
No second has been received on the current motion for an
exclusive hotel. It's now been raised, considered, and
rejected.
I'm not at all surprised, or disappointed. We're now able
to say that this specific concept has been brought up and
considered when the topic comes up in feedback again.
The motion for a more/most suggested hotel appears below.
I've added two clarifications to this motion in response
to some on-line (below) and off-line concerns.
The motion is now up for a second. For those wanting a
non-exclusive "primary" or "more suggested" hotel, this
is your cue. :)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Golf:
Mindy writes:
>We have suggested a scramble format in the past and had a
>few of the regular golfers say they would not play at all
>if we did a scramble and very few supported the idea.
>As far as the slow play even if told to play 5 in a group
>any golf course will require that you keep up with the group
>in front of you. I was not there this year to make that
>point clear prior to starting play as I have every year in
>the past.
>Changing courses will not solve the problem and finding a
>course less crowded is not possible in LV. Also we would
>not find a course that would give us the low rates we have
>received in years past. A course change would likely put
>us in the $80 to $100 per golfer range.
>I would also like to see if some one could help me this
>year as I am not sure if I will make it since I am still
>not working.
Thanks, Mindy. We are counring on seeing you in April! :)
Comments, golfers?
Mindy will be requiring back-up help. By precedent, Edy and
Mardi have "first refusal" rights. Edy? Mardi? Anyone else?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hotel:
Jamie Renae writes:
>Since I usually stay in a Condo, I don't see where his would
>affect me, unless it was required to use a specific hotel.
>I would be VERY OPPOSED to anything like that.
I would be VERY OPPOSED to anything like that too!
I think it's unconscionable under our current model that we
would ever require attendees to stay in a particular hotel.
I don't think any "primary hotel" proponent ever intended
to make such a hotel a requirement.
In particular, it makes no sense for locals, who comprise
about 20% of our contingent.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
One primary hotel:
Kimberly Kael writes:
>>Do we have a second? Do we have discussion?
>Sorry, but I don't think this would be an improvement
>over previous years and I suspect it would lead to a
>significant drop-off in attendance. There's no way we
>can pick a hotel that satisfies the range of budgets
>represented by our attendees. Whether we intend it
>or not the selection of a sole hotel is going to make
>DLV seem less attractive to one end or the other of the
>spectrum.
>I really appreciate that we've gone out of our way to be
>inclusive and I think this is a big step in the wrong
>direction, perception-wise.
>I worry that even a "primary" hotel would have some
>of the same impact.
>I'd like to know as part of the discussion for those
>in favor: what would you hope to achieve with a single
>recommended hotel? Ride sharing? Collective meals in
>the hotel restaurant(s)? Bargaining power for room rates?
>The first two sound reasonable, but we've just abandoned
>our ride-sharing program and I can't imagine the group
>wanting to use the same restaurant over and over.
>As for room rates? Without committing to a block of rooms
>I dare say we wouldn't get rates as good as people can
>find online. So is there something else appealing about
>the idea?
Today's proponents of the primary hotel concept cite both
convenience and camaraderie as the selling points.
In previous years there was talk of such things as "blocking
off an entire floor", as used to be common with the larger
TG conventions, which did give more of a "dorm" atmosphere
and allowed some socializing in the halls. This was what
some of the attendees were familiar with at the time. I
really don't see this as a practical option.
Since we've now officially done away with our ride share,
program, I do see the advantage of a central hotel to
those without a vehicle. It places them in more of a
proximity to those who will be driving to the activities
and it also facilitates taxi sharing, for those who wish
to do such things.
As for room-rates ({sigh!} rewind-replay, been there, done
that) we are a small group containing very few who give
the casinos any major gaming action. We've been down blind
alleys chasing tails and following false promises. For the
major hotels, I really think the best we can do will be
the bottom-dollar web rates.
For smaller nongaming hotels, we may be able to negotiate
something IFF somebody takes the initiative to do so, such
as Nora with the St. Tropez.
As you say, our attendees have widely varying budgets,
from shoestring to lavish. There is no hotel in Las Vegas
which adequately covers the desires and the pocketbooks
of the majority of our attendees.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Motion on the floor:
<begin motion>
The DLVORG group shall designate one hotel as the "Primary"
or "Most Suggested" hotel for DLV 2010.
The selection of the primary hotel will be a separate ballot
measure in addition to the customary yes/no votes on each of
the nominated hotels. This ballot measure will consist of all
nominated hotels and the hotel garnering the most votes on
this additional ballot line will be named the "Primary" or
"Most Suggested" hotel for DLV 2010.
In the event of a tie, a run-off vote will be held with
the Project Manager voting only if the run-off round should
result in another tie.
This motion shall not be interpreted to in any way limit
the attendees' personal choices regarding accommodations.
This motion shall not be interpreted to require or to
authorize the procurement of common facilities (hospitality
room, etc.) in the primary hotel on behalf of DLV.
This rule shall apply only to the DLV 2010 event and not
carry forward to future years.
<end motion>
Do we have a second? Do we have discussion?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
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