[kwlug-disc] New locations brainstorming

[R. Brent Clements]

I think that with any venue like the Heuther,  they are going to bump
us whenever they think they will make more money. Doesn't matter how
much we consistantly spend. I like the current plan, not entirely
because it is so close to us. And I am all for returning to Zeke's for
the wrap up

On 12/17/09, unsolicited <unsolicited at swiz.ca> wrote:
>
>
> Paul Nijjar wrote, On 12/17/2009 3:01 PM:
>> I do want to emphasize that I am not trying to shut down the
>> discussion around future meeting spaces -- even for January.
>
> I, for one, realize and appreciate that Paul. You've got us a rock,
> solid, place to be, if only as a fallback should a miracle not happen
> and a different place not appear. Thank you.
>
> I, apparently like others on the list, think we should give up on any
> other venue than yours, for January. Just not for February, and March,
> yet. I think time of year, season and family distraction, holiday
> space competition, and just simply negotiation / arrangement /
> coordination time requirements, make a new venue by Jan. 4 not
> worthwhile. Particularly if some poorly executed massive scramble has
> to take place. And, if memory serves, Jan. meetings have the lowest
> turnout in the year, or 2nd lowest, against summer.
>
> You have indicated this venue can be a backup / if nothing else pans
> out location, so let's use it at least once to provide a baseline
> against which other candidates can be compared.
>
> 	I agree we can't have a different location every month. But I think
> it reasonable to roll with at least 2 - St. John's for a baseline, and
> any well received candidate that surfaces in time for Feb.
>
>
> The only other location we could nail as quickly is to go back to the
> Huether, but nobody has stepped up to approach them. Heck, I have no
> solid sense from the list that they even want to go back to the Huether.
>
> 	I am told, paraphrasing, that the Huether would expect, say, 90% of
> attendees to drop some coin on them after the meeting. An expectation
> we evidently can't (not just don't, or won't) rise to.
>
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm also getting a sense that food /
> facilities on meeting site isn't particularly important to attendees
> that frequent the list. I suspect people are going to go elsewhere,
> regardless of facilities present, for a beer, a bite, and gossip. [vs.
> staying on site, food or no, in several small huddles around laptops,
> mentoring victims.]
>
> 	A consensus, either way, would be useful to qualify potential
> alternate locations.
>
> 	Also useful would be a consensus as to whether or not an after (or
> before) meeting 'help your neighbour' gabfest is desired. (So we know
> what to tell potential sponsors - 2 hours or 3, and 6 - 9, 7 - 10, 7 -
> 9, 6 - 10?)
>
> _______________________________________________
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org mailing list
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org at kwlug.org
> http://astoria.ccjclearline.com/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device