[Organizers] Admission Table "Cash Register"?

[Jeff Raymond via Organizers]

Don't count on a free reader, the chip readers cost. Safer but slower, I
use my o!ld swiper, they can be found but any bad card is on you.
J
On Jun 9, 2016 7:39 PM, "Don Veino via Organizers" <
organizers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Thanks Koren, I'll give it a try. In a quick review it looks a lot like
> what I was working on myself, without obviously being 100% customized to
> our purpose. Happy to accept something that's done/tested now and mostly
> matches our needs and then put something else in place which takes the
> output the rest of the way.
>
> -Don
> On Jun 9, 2016 2:06 PM, "Koren A. Wake" <koren.a.wake at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm coming very late to this topic, sorry... but since I don't see anyone
> else having mentioned this, I wanted to chime in. The blues dance I now run
> in Seattle uses Square to track attendance and cash. It's simple to set up
> and our door volunteers seem happy with it. We charge a sliding scale and
> just have separate "items" for each dollar amount. When we used to have
> "regular" and "student" prices we had buttons for those as well, and a
> custom price item for donations. Square automatically tracks the number of
> each item sold, and the times.
>
> On a tablet (we use an iPad, and I would assume it works on an Android
> tablet as well), Square also does cash drawer tracking -- enter your
> starting cash, track transactions, and enter your final counts; it'll tell
> you whether you're off and by how much. It does not allow for cash drawer
> tracking through the phone app, though. I'm not sure why not, or whether
> they're going to add it eventually.
>
> And of course, Square allows us to take credit cards too, which has pros
> and cons but overall I'm very much in favor of it.
>
> Koren
>
> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 12:53 PM Don Veino via Organizers <
> organizers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Just in case there was any question, we have absolute trust in our
>> volunteers and have had no instances of door sitter cheating (a tiny
>> minority of dancers on the other hand... but I digress). The impetus for my
>> original investigation is solely operational efficiency - making it easier
>> for our volunteers and ourselves as organizers. It would be nice to
>> actually be able to dance at our own dances more often. :)
>>
>> On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Dan Pearl via Organizers <
>> organizers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>>> We operate on a basis of trust with our door-sitters and the mix of
>>> adult/youth varies during the year in unsurprising ways -- we just don't
>>> feel like we need to capture that information.
>>>
>>> 4. Any system can be compromised by crooked door-sitter.  They can wink
>>> at their friends and wave them in for no fee.  They could pocket some money
>>> and not click the tally counter or put a tick-mark on the paper.  Anything!
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Organizers mailing list
>> Organizers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/organizers-sharedweight.net
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Organizers mailing list
> Organizers at lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/organizers-sharedweight.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/organizers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20160612/6a86a202/attachment.htm>