Greg -
I think you have hit on an important point. My experience has been that much of the
objection to a mixer is you ask someone to dance and the don't get to keep them as a
partner. Announcing the mixer in advance (the dance after this one will be a mixer) would
address this and, perhaps, make it more acceptable. This would then slot the mixer around
the 2nd or 3rd dance of the evening - which I think is fine. I don't want to start
the evening with a mixer when we have so many experienced dancers eager to help the new
ones during the first dance.
Mac McKeever
________________________________
From: Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com>
To: Brian Hamshar <bhamshar(a)yahoo.com>om>; Caller's discussion list
<callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 3, 2012 2:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Callers] Request about requests
There are two points I'd like to make here:
1. A lot of callers will get "rubbed the wrong way" if you give them any
guidelines or requirements whatsoever. Callers getting "rubbed the wrong
way" is probably the only way to make sure that they are paying attention.
Look at the issue of squares at open, public, contra dances. I have had
one caller who bristled when I informed him that our Board has an on-time
start policy. It's good for callers to get "rubbed the wrong way." It
builds character.
2. A policy of one mixer is not going to drive people to arrive late. The
point is to make the first dances lively and fun with little or no
walk-through. That can work with mixers or without. It is up to the
caller to make it fun. If folks are arriving late it's probably because
the callers are not starting on time. That would be the best policy to
address that problem--with or without a mixer.
As some of you know I don't see the point of using mixers at open public
contra dances. The way I do it most of the evening is structured as a
"mixer," even though it's all contras. I would call a mixer if that's
how
they want to do it, but I would be sure to announce it in advance to alert
the regulars. I would also try to keep it short, lively, and lots of fun.
I don't think it would cramp my style much.
Just a thought,
- Greg McKenzie
***********
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Brian Hamshar <bhamshar(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
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 <mjerryfuerst(a)yahoo.com>
To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
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
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers