I would like to associate myself with Rich's sentiments here: On 3/3/16 10:28 AM, Rich Sbardella via Callers wrote: The kind of gig that makes me feel like I'm bringing new good into the world is this kind of gig, which for me is usually more often people with some kind of historical interest (Civil War, Regency, academics at the Dickens Universe conference). Get people who think they can't dance to try it and enjoy it - I feel like that's fulfilling my mission. That's sometimes hard work - and in some ways easy, because you don't have to make up a new program for every gig - and it requires close engagement with the crowd and continual attention, but is' quite rewarding. On an entirely different front, I've had some pretty great nights leading English with great bands whose strengths I know when I make the program / pick the tunes and when I know what level the dancers will be at and push them just enough; there's a huge collective high and I've also gotten to deploy all my artistic judgment and make an evening that's just how I wanted it - I had the fun of planning a menu with an intention to delight and watching the meal get eaten. I've also really enjoyed leading contras for mixed crowds where the more experienced dancers were good at sweeping in the newcomers. Doing that kind of a night where the music's good and communication with the band is easy and my read of the floor is really working - it kind of feels like Mickey Mouse in "Sorceror's Apprentice" before he realizes he doesn't know how to stop the brooms from carrying water, during the early euphoria. But those things - dances for dance hobbyists - while I think valuable, are mostly helping people have a kind of fun they already know they want to have. They're fun to do and fun to plan, but I don't think they're as big a contribution to general happiness as the dances for non-dancers. -- Alan