[Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers
In Louisville, the group advertises which terminology the caller will use per each dance. There may be dancers with strong preferences who choose to attend or not based on that information, but I suspect most are flexible in that metric. The choice is the caller's, the organizers just want to know how to advertise it. Jerome Grisanti ___ Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net
[Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers
I want to highlight what David is saying, here. I think it's a different standard to gauge by when a community is _trying out_ new terms. While I agree a long-term "caller's choice" doesn't best serve a community, I do think that a transition / trial period does make sense. And as long as terms are published in advance, why not? Best regards, Julian Blechner On Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 5:41 PM David Kirchner via Organizers < organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > I call in a community where the majority of callers use ladies/gents > terminology, and I am pushing the envelope by using positional calling. We > also have a caller who occasionally visits from elsewhere who routinely > uses larks/robins and probably would choose not to come at all if they had > to use ladies/gents. I think Don's point makes sense in communities where > this has been a contentious issue. But here, nearly all dancers seem to be > willing to roll with whatever as long as the calling is good quality. > Organizers stepping in and making an across-the-board decision that > enforces terminology would probably stifle the process of innovation, > rather than encouraging it. > > David > ___ > Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net > To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net > ___ Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net
[Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers
Jeff, My intention wasn't to start a big "Is Positional better or worse?" thread. Instead, my goal was to use a simple example of why lumping in Positional Calling as a generic genderfree role term choice may be another version of "leaving up the role terms to the caller" - which is the subject of this thread. For many organizers, it may only be important to distinguish between gendered vs non-gendered calling. For other organizers, lumping positional and Larks/Robins together is still pushing that responsibility from organizer to performer. There's no "correct" answer, but I don't think we can just assume that contrasting different types of genderfree Calling doesn't belong in this topic. Best regards, Julian Blechner On Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 1:10 PM Jeff Kaufman wrote: > Meta: this thread is on whether series should avoid "callers choice" > for roles; can folks who want to get into whether positional calling is a > good idea for contra start a new thread? > > Jeff > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:01 PM Julian Blechner via Organizers < > organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> For what it's worth, I went to a dance where a caller chose >> role-name-light dances, and had this interaction with my partner, a >> college-age dancer who's reasonably experienced. We were just in hands four. >> >> (Small talk ensues, then unprompted:) >> Partner: "The second dance I got confused by something the caller said. I >> can't remember what exactly." >> (Dance had us in Long Lines, for a Larks allemande left.) >> Caller: "Left hand dancer with the left hand free ... allemande left" >> Partner: "That was it." >> (Next move is the same role does something else, again the caller chose >> to not just say "larks") >> >> Unless one is censoring one's repertoire severely, even dances with basic >> things like "one role allemandes after a long lines" which is in a >> bajillion dances, can get so much more wordy. And, if the dance has a few >> people need prompting mid-dance, there's no simple way to recover if you're >> avoiding saying a role name. >> >> So, I'd suggest any organizer who is considering allowing positional >> calling take the time to understand the ramifications to what that actually >> means. >> >> In dance, >> Julian Blechner >> >> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 9:28 AM Rich Dempsey via Organizers < >> organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>> In Rochester, NY, where our policy is "gender neutral calling", which >>> includes both positional and larks/robins terminology, I haven't noticed >>> that any dancer cares about the distinction. The real point for our dancers >>> is clarity and economy in teaching the dance so we can start the music. >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:20 AM Joe Harrington via Organizers < >>> organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>> How do you feel, in a gender-neutral series, about leaving the decision of larks/robins vs. positional to the caller, so long as it's declared and publicized in advance? At least in some areas, there are not enough positional callers to have an all-positional series. Thanks, --jh-- On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 12:32 AM Lisa Marie Lunt via Organizers < organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > I think it's important to listen to what Don Veino just wrote. Don is > both a caller and organizer. It's not fair to put the responsibility for > choosing role names on the callers. It's the organizers' responsibility to > make decisions about our dances. > > Lisa Lunt > She/her > Jamaica Plain (Boston) Gender Free Contra Dance > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2023, 4:17 PM Don Veino via Organizers < > organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> As a caller and organizer, this is a hot button topic for me. Please, >> if you are organizing a dance, take responsibility for this decision and >> make it clearly public to your participants in advance. I understand you >> may be uncomfortable making this choice and possibly want to "please >> everybody" by leaving it to the caller but that just sets up the worst >> dynamic for all. >> >> My take is that the dance's organizers *own* the culture and >> implementation policies of their dance. If you would not leave it up to >> the >> caller to decide to do swing dance instead or declare the admission is >> half >> off for a given event, then you shouldn't leave such a topic to them >> either. >> >> "Traditional", Larks/ Robins, positional - alternating per event, >> whatever - make the determination and let the people coming know in >> advance. >> >> I personally will no longer accept bookings from a dance that doesn't >> have a stated role term policy. I will call with the terms stated (or >> decline the event). I had a booking for a longstanding dance which >> changed >> from decades of "Traditional" to "Caller's
[Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers
I call in a community where the majority of callers use ladies/gents terminology, and I am pushing the envelope by using positional calling. We also have a caller who occasionally visits from elsewhere who routinely uses larks/robins and probably would choose not to come at all if they had to use ladies/gents. I think Don's point makes sense in communities where this has been a contentious issue. But here, nearly all dancers seem to be willing to roll with whatever as long as the calling is good quality. Organizers stepping in and making an across-the-board decision that enforces terminology would probably stifle the process of innovation, rather than encouraging it. David ___ Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net
[Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers
TBF, the couple of dances who book me and are caller's choice on role names ask me to make the choice in advance and announce it on the calendar, which I think fulfills the requirement. For the contra I'm an organizer for - Palo Alto - our default since our return from the pandemic is larks and robins but we say "yes" if callers say they want to do positional and we don't usually announce *that*. If no role name is used I don't think we have to announce what role name we're not using. -- Alan From: Don Veino via Organizers Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 12:25 PM To: Lisa Marie Lunt Cc: organizers shared weight Subject: [Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers Thanks for the support, Lisa. Of course, I'm just one opinion on this subject, but it comes from experience on both sides. My primary concern is actually for the dancers - I'll quote a bit I wrote to an off-list reply: My point is: being unclear about what dancers should expect on such a contentious issue, before they arrive at the dance, will ensure that somebody is surprised/ disappointed/ angry when the decision is made "on the fly" - I've seen dancers storm off the floor in such situations. It's unfair to stick the caller in such a charged situation from the start. But more importantly, it's unfair to the dancers who may be traveling a distance for anticipated fun. And, ultimately, the organizers end up having to deal with resultant issues anyway - in my opinion it's better to just address it up front. -Don On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 12:30 AM Lisa Marie Lunt mailto:lisal...@gmail.com>> wrote: I think it's important to listen to what Don Veino just wrote. Don is both a caller and organizer. It's not fair to put the responsibility for choosing role names on the callers. It's the organizers' responsibility to make decisions about our dances. Lisa Lunt She/her Jamaica Plain (Boston) Gender Free Contra Dance On Sun, Oct 29, 2023, 4:17 PM Don Veino via Organizers mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote: As a caller and organizer, this is a hot button topic for me. ___ Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net
[Organizers] Re: [External] Attracting young dancers
Hi All, On the subject of attracting young dancers. In Sept. 2022, we started a campus contra dance from scratch that's based in the Honors College of the Univ. of Central Arkansas but is open to everyone in the school. Countervailing winds include: no prior dance community nearby; students/univ. community who had never met contra/ECD; enthusiasm and educational and musical skills but very little expertise among our organizers; we're prohibited from advertising outside of our own college/department (I believe it's off-topic to explain why); we have little/no budget; contra dance is confused with "country dance" (e.g., "rodeo" or western line and square) and these have strong connotations for many people in our region. The dance is basically word of mouth. Us, the organizers, are a professor and me, her spouse (we're "old.") As a campus contra, the majority of dancers have been 16-22 but we've had some faculty and staff who are all ages but rarely come and a small number of older-than-22 invited guests from the community. I presented about the lessons we learned from our experience at NEFFA 2023. I hope to do a similar session again in 2024; please drop in on that session if it happens. Over the time of this project I've been talking to a lot of dance organizers of all ages about the challenge of, in essence, building a dance community, whether generally or that has a specific demographic. Our own case may not apply everywhere, but we prioritize fun, a relaxed welcoming atmosphere and live, groovy music with a solid dance beat. We call robins/larks, starting Day 1 of our first ever dance. We're a small dance (12-30), but the ratio is reasonable given the size of our university (13,000 students). I'll underline: we seem to be slowly but steadily growing. Students will sometimes bring little sisters/brothers/babysitting wards and friends from outside the school. If it's fun, they'll invite friends, if not, they won't. Obviously. Two examples from our dance. We anonymize the images of the dancers to maintain their privacy. https://youtu.be/52vtDQJ8cOU?si=Qzl92M4cmh4ty_OU https://youtu.be/M0tgcdXQC78?si=jI-xSv8D2XKE45i- My primary guide (but I believe I can speak for my co-organizer), given what I've learned by this point and with more learning still to come as we watch, listen and learn, is to give nourishment and space for "fun," play, experimentation, mistakes, no-judgements, and share the joy of learning, and the joy of moving to music. We try and nourish what we, as of now, see as the central point between all the dancers which is shared weight, shared caring and kindness, and grooving to the music. For a community contra, a success story I ran across, during this time of seeking other case studies, comes from Philly. I played (with Box and String) at the Philly dance last May. That night, there was a wonderful range of ages and the organizers of that dance may have valuable knowledge to share. I was told that that diverse group had become the norm. That dance, in short, is a fun one. The feeling of fun is attractive to all ages. Best fall wishes, all. Rob - - - - - - - - - - - - Robert Matson Cell: (917) 626-2675 On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 4:48 PM Joe Harrington via Organizers < organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Sorry, another very long one. As many readers will know, I started a > college contra group and an in-town group in Orlando just as the pandemic > was starting. There had not been contra in Orlando for a number of years > before, but there is a nice dance about an hour's drive from here that gets > 50+ dancers every month. It's got a fairly relaxed tempo that's accessible > to many older dancers, but a few younger dancers go. My goal was to make a > Northern-style dance that was attractive to and largely populated by > energetic dancers, many of whom might be roughly college-age, as was the > case in the dance I learned at in 1987. Being a professor, I started on > campus, literally just months before the start of the pandemic. The whole > story is long and littered with great examples of what went wrong and > things to learn from. Here are some takeaways. > > 1. Non-dancing just-out-of-high-schoolers think of dancing as a > pre-romantic activity. Two students and I put on an open-to-the-public, > very decorated, pop-rock contra dance party on campus. It was heavily > advertised, with a website, posters all over campus, announcements in > student activity socials and email lists, Facebook, Discord, Instagram, > Reddit, Meetup, Tiktok, local arts calendars, tabling, enticing graphics, > you name it. It's amazing what you can line up in over 2 years of not > dancing! It was free to students and baited with tons of free pizza in the > heavily trafficked atrium we were dancing in. We got 35 dancers! But, > just 4-5 students. MANY students entered the space, looked, turned around, > and left. When our student leaders (2 of the 4-5) chased them
[Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers
Thanks for the support, Lisa. Of course, I'm just one opinion on this subject, but it comes from experience on both sides. My primary concern is actually for the dancers - I'll quote a bit I wrote to an off-list reply: My point is: being unclear about what dancers should expect on such a > contentious issue, before they arrive at the dance, will ensure that > somebody is surprised/ disappointed/ angry when the decision is made "on > the fly" - I've seen dancers storm off the floor in such situations. It's > unfair to stick the caller in such a charged situation from the start. But > more importantly, it's unfair to the dancers who may be traveling a > distance for anticipated fun. And, ultimately, the organizers end up having > to deal with resultant issues anyway - in my opinion it's better to just > address it up front. -Don On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 12:30 AM Lisa Marie Lunt wrote: > I think it's important to listen to what Don Veino just wrote. Don is both > a caller and organizer. It's not fair to put the responsibility for > choosing role names on the callers. It's the organizers' responsibility to > make decisions about our dances. > > Lisa Lunt > She/her > Jamaica Plain (Boston) Gender Free Contra Dance > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2023, 4:17 PM Don Veino via Organizers < > organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> As a caller and organizer, this is a hot button topic for me. >> > ___ Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net
[Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers
Meta: this thread is on whether series should avoid "callers choice" for roles; can folks who want to get into whether positional calling is a good idea for contra start a new thread? Jeff On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:01 PM Julian Blechner via Organizers < organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > For what it's worth, I went to a dance where a caller chose > role-name-light dances, and had this interaction with my partner, a > college-age dancer who's reasonably experienced. We were just in hands four. > > (Small talk ensues, then unprompted:) > Partner: "The second dance I got confused by something the caller said. I > can't remember what exactly." > (Dance had us in Long Lines, for a Larks allemande left.) > Caller: "Left hand dancer with the left hand free ... allemande left" > Partner: "That was it." > (Next move is the same role does something else, again the caller chose to > not just say "larks") > > Unless one is censoring one's repertoire severely, even dances with basic > things like "one role allemandes after a long lines" which is in a > bajillion dances, can get so much more wordy. And, if the dance has a few > people need prompting mid-dance, there's no simple way to recover if you're > avoiding saying a role name. > > So, I'd suggest any organizer who is considering allowing positional > calling take the time to understand the ramifications to what that actually > means. > > In dance, > Julian Blechner > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 9:28 AM Rich Dempsey via Organizers < > organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> In Rochester, NY, where our policy is "gender neutral calling", which >> includes both positional and larks/robins terminology, I haven't noticed >> that any dancer cares about the distinction. The real point for our dancers >> is clarity and economy in teaching the dance so we can start the music. >> >> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:20 AM Joe Harrington via Organizers < >> organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>> How do you feel, in a gender-neutral series, about leaving the decision >>> of larks/robins vs. positional to the caller, so long as it's declared and >>> publicized in advance? At least in some areas, there are not enough >>> positional callers to have an all-positional series. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> --jh-- >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 12:32 AM Lisa Marie Lunt via Organizers < >>> organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>> I think it's important to listen to what Don Veino just wrote. Don is both a caller and organizer. It's not fair to put the responsibility for choosing role names on the callers. It's the organizers' responsibility to make decisions about our dances. Lisa Lunt She/her Jamaica Plain (Boston) Gender Free Contra Dance On Sun, Oct 29, 2023, 4:17 PM Don Veino via Organizers < organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > As a caller and organizer, this is a hot button topic for me. Please, > if you are organizing a dance, take responsibility for this decision and > make it clearly public to your participants in advance. I understand you > may be uncomfortable making this choice and possibly want to "please > everybody" by leaving it to the caller but that just sets up the worst > dynamic for all. > > My take is that the dance's organizers *own* the culture and > implementation policies of their dance. If you would not leave it up to > the > caller to decide to do swing dance instead or declare the admission is > half > off for a given event, then you shouldn't leave such a topic to them > either. > > "Traditional", Larks/ Robins, positional - alternating per event, > whatever - make the determination and let the people coming know in > advance. > > I personally will no longer accept bookings from a dance that doesn't > have a stated role term policy. I will call with the terms stated (or > decline the event). I had a booking for a longstanding dance which changed > from decades of "Traditional" to "Caller's Choice" after booking me, with > no heads up. I first heard of it when I started hearing from people > advocating for one or the other terms, as "my choice". The organizers > wouldn't make the call and the publicity was already out there. Bad scene > for all, not the way to set up dance joy. > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2023, 1:28 PM Sandy Seiler via Organizers < > organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > Currently terminology is the caller's decision. So it goes back and > forth from gendered to non gendered. That is not mentioned on the > website, > but I do know that at least one of our callers has requested that the > Lawrence board make a decision about it so the callers don't have that > responsibility and possible fall out from it. > > ___ > Organizers mailing list --
[Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers
For what it's worth, I went to a dance where a caller chose role-name-light dances, and had this interaction with my partner, a college-age dancer who's reasonably experienced. We were just in hands four. (Small talk ensues, then unprompted:) Partner: "The second dance I got confused by something the caller said. I can't remember what exactly." (Dance had us in Long Lines, for a Larks allemande left.) Caller: "Left hand dancer with the left hand free ... allemande left" Partner: "That was it." (Next move is the same role does something else, again the caller chose to not just say "larks") Unless one is censoring one's repertoire severely, even dances with basic things like "one role allemandes after a long lines" which is in a bajillion dances, can get so much more wordy. And, if the dance has a few people need prompting mid-dance, there's no simple way to recover if you're avoiding saying a role name. So, I'd suggest any organizer who is considering allowing positional calling take the time to understand the ramifications to what that actually means. In dance, Julian Blechner On Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 9:28 AM Rich Dempsey via Organizers < organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > In Rochester, NY, where our policy is "gender neutral calling", which > includes both positional and larks/robins terminology, I haven't noticed > that any dancer cares about the distinction. The real point for our dancers > is clarity and economy in teaching the dance so we can start the music. > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:20 AM Joe Harrington via Organizers < > organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> How do you feel, in a gender-neutral series, about leaving the decision >> of larks/robins vs. positional to the caller, so long as it's declared and >> publicized in advance? At least in some areas, there are not enough >> positional callers to have an all-positional series. >> >> Thanks, >> >> --jh-- >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 12:32 AM Lisa Marie Lunt via Organizers < >> organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>> I think it's important to listen to what Don Veino just wrote. Don is >>> both a caller and organizer. It's not fair to put the responsibility for >>> choosing role names on the callers. It's the organizers' responsibility to >>> make decisions about our dances. >>> >>> Lisa Lunt >>> She/her >>> Jamaica Plain (Boston) Gender Free Contra Dance >>> >>> On Sun, Oct 29, 2023, 4:17 PM Don Veino via Organizers < >>> organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>> As a caller and organizer, this is a hot button topic for me. Please, if you are organizing a dance, take responsibility for this decision and make it clearly public to your participants in advance. I understand you may be uncomfortable making this choice and possibly want to "please everybody" by leaving it to the caller but that just sets up the worst dynamic for all. My take is that the dance's organizers *own* the culture and implementation policies of their dance. If you would not leave it up to the caller to decide to do swing dance instead or declare the admission is half off for a given event, then you shouldn't leave such a topic to them either. "Traditional", Larks/ Robins, positional - alternating per event, whatever - make the determination and let the people coming know in advance. I personally will no longer accept bookings from a dance that doesn't have a stated role term policy. I will call with the terms stated (or decline the event). I had a booking for a longstanding dance which changed from decades of "Traditional" to "Caller's Choice" after booking me, with no heads up. I first heard of it when I started hearing from people advocating for one or the other terms, as "my choice". The organizers wouldn't make the call and the publicity was already out there. Bad scene for all, not the way to set up dance joy. On Sun, Oct 29, 2023, 1:28 PM Sandy Seiler via Organizers < organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: Currently terminology is the caller's decision. So it goes back and forth from gendered to non gendered. That is not mentioned on the website, but I do know that at least one of our callers has requested that the Lawrence board make a decision about it so the callers don't have that responsibility and possible fall out from it. ___ Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net >>> ___ >>> Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net >>> To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net >>> >> ___ >> Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net >> To
[Organizers] Re: Dance Policy Decisions (e.g.: roles) Was: Attracting young dancers
In Rochester, NY, where our policy is "gender neutral calling", which includes both positional and larks/robins terminology, I haven't noticed that any dancer cares about the distinction. The real point for our dancers is clarity and economy in teaching the dance so we can start the music. On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:20 AM Joe Harrington via Organizers < organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > How do you feel, in a gender-neutral series, about leaving the decision of > larks/robins vs. positional to the caller, so long as it's declared and > publicized in advance? At least in some areas, there are not enough > positional callers to have an all-positional series. > > Thanks, > > --jh-- > > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 12:32 AM Lisa Marie Lunt via Organizers < > organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> I think it's important to listen to what Don Veino just wrote. Don is >> both a caller and organizer. It's not fair to put the responsibility for >> choosing role names on the callers. It's the organizers' responsibility to >> make decisions about our dances. >> >> Lisa Lunt >> She/her >> Jamaica Plain (Boston) Gender Free Contra Dance >> >> On Sun, Oct 29, 2023, 4:17 PM Don Veino via Organizers < >> organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>> As a caller and organizer, this is a hot button topic for me. Please, if >>> you are organizing a dance, take responsibility for this decision and make >>> it clearly public to your participants in advance. I understand you may be >>> uncomfortable making this choice and possibly want to "please everybody" by >>> leaving it to the caller but that just sets up the worst dynamic for all. >>> >>> My take is that the dance's organizers *own* the culture and >>> implementation policies of their dance. If you would not leave it up to the >>> caller to decide to do swing dance instead or declare the admission is half >>> off for a given event, then you shouldn't leave such a topic to them either. >>> >>> "Traditional", Larks/ Robins, positional - alternating per event, >>> whatever - make the determination and let the people coming know in advance. >>> >>> I personally will no longer accept bookings from a dance that doesn't >>> have a stated role term policy. I will call with the terms stated (or >>> decline the event). I had a booking for a longstanding dance which changed >>> from decades of "Traditional" to "Caller's Choice" after booking me, with >>> no heads up. I first heard of it when I started hearing from people >>> advocating for one or the other terms, as "my choice". The organizers >>> wouldn't make the call and the publicity was already out there. Bad scene >>> for all, not the way to set up dance joy. >>> >>> On Sun, Oct 29, 2023, 1:28 PM Sandy Seiler via Organizers < >>> organizers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>> >>> Currently terminology is the caller's decision. So it goes back and >>> forth from gendered to non gendered. That is not mentioned on the website, >>> but I do know that at least one of our callers has requested that the >>> Lawrence board make a decision about it so the callers don't have that >>> responsibility and possible fall out from it. >>> >>> ___ >>> Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net >>> To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net >>> >> ___ >> Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net >> To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net >> > ___ > Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net > To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net > ___ Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net
