There are two points I'd like to make here: 1. A lot of callers will get "rubbed the wrong way" if you give them any guidelines or requirements whatsoever. Callers getting "rubbed the wrong way" is probably the only way to make sure that they are paying attention. Look at the issue of squares at open, public, contra dances. I have had one caller who bristled when I informed him that our Board has an on-time start policy. It's good for callers to get "rubbed the wrong way." It builds character.
2. A policy of one mixer is not going to drive people to arrive late. The point is to make the first dances lively and fun with little or no walk-through. That can work with mixers or without. It is up to the caller to make it fun. If folks are arriving late it's probably because the callers are not starting on time. That would be the best policy to address that problem--with or without a mixer. As some of you know I don't see the point of using mixers at open public contra dances. The way I do it most of the evening is structured as a "mixer," even though it's all contras. I would call a mixer if that's how they want to do it, but I would be sure to announce it in advance to alert the regulars. I would also try to keep it short, lively, and lots of fun. I don't think it would cramp my style much. Just a thought, - Greg McKenzie *********** On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Brian Hamshar <[email protected]> wrote: > Reportedly it was the feeling of the board that mixers are the best way to > integrate beginners and thereby improve retention. Thus they feel it's a > good enough tool for potentially increasing attendance over time that they > felt they should codify it. I've never heard of a requirement like this > being enacted, although I understand that certain New England communities > tend to have one or more mixers at every dance. I'm afraid it'll rub a lot > of callers the wrong way. I'm rather certain it'll exacerbate the ongoing > problem here of experienced dancers showing up a half hour or more after > the dance begins (they're not popular with the regular dancers). What do > others think? > > Brian Hamshar > > > ________________________________ > From: Michael Fuerst <[email protected]> > To: Caller's discussion list <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, March 2, 2012 7:16 PM > Subject: Re: [Callers] Request about requests > > "... > new policy requiring callers to program a mixer " What was the > reasoning for this ? > > Michael Fuerst 802 N Broadway Urbana IL 61801 217-239-5844 > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >
