Bill Sconce wrote: >On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:36:50 -0400 >Ted Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... > >>Point of protocol: should we plan on NOT holding regular chapter >>meetings that month? > > <>Having other schedules jerked around, thought, has downsides. > It's not too bad if only a couple of people show up at a chapter > meeting near the "regional" one because of ThursdayOverload. > But /ever/ having a new attendee show up on a chapter's appointed > night and find the library dark is unacceptable.
Surprisingly, I find myself agreeing with both Bill AND Ben, even though they both call for essentially incompatible meeting arrangements. My thoughts on the matter are that, with sufficient advance notice, even a list lurker won't be caught off-guard. 'Cause he'll go and check the WIKI, or he'll go and check the mailing list [it'll be one of the two, else how will he even know about the meeting, right?], and find out that the $MONTH meeting has been cancelled. Attempting to codify it into some sort of algorithm for meeting times would, indeed, be unacceptable -- but controlling meeting announcements both on -announce, and on the WIKI, would ensure that anyone who even kinda-sorta tried to get the right time/place would know what was going on. NOTE: I'm still not sure about cancelling local meetings for big ones. I guess I like obviously binary answers to questions, and I'm not sure that this is a black/white kind of issue. I suppose we could think of it like this: a truly big name (eg., Linus, Alan, Tridge, Maddog, whoever) wouldn't need local meeting cancellations, 'cause the whole world's going to show up, anyway. But smaller people -- even if they're really cool, but just don't have the marquee value -- you might want to cancel local meetings for. $.02, -Ken _______________________________________________ gnhlug-org mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
