The Board's feelings are totally speculative, and likely ineffective, although innocuous. Has the board set up some mechanism to very the efficacy of their decree?
Michael Fuerst 802 N Broadway Urbana IL 61801 217-239-5844 --- On Fri, 3/2/12, Brian Hamshar <[email protected]> wrote: From: Brian Hamshar <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Callers] Request about requests To: "Caller's discussion list" <[email protected]> List-Post: [email protected] Date: Friday, March 2, 2012, 11:44 PM 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
