Unannounced Mixers (Was "Request about requests") - Contra Callers

4 Mar 2012

Mac,  Thanks for your great response.

I'm afraid that most of those replying on this list have missed the point
entirely.  This is not about callers who "dislike mixers."  It's about
empowering regular dancers to partner with newcomers.

At open, public contra dances, I put considerable energy into integrating
the hall during the first half of the evening.  My unspoken contract with
the regulars is that I will make it fun and easy to partner with
first-timers.  This, consequently, often makes regulars partnered together
feel "left out" of the fun.

I also make it clear that all of the first-timers should be partnered with
regular dancers.  (I do this without words by "leading through
assumption."  This saves much time and many words while making it crystal
clear that the regulars have a vital role to play in partnering with, and
helping to integrate, all of the newcomers into the hall.)

Using this approach, it would be a violation of my contract with the
regulars if I were to "spring" an unannounced mixer on them after they have
put out the effort to partner with a first-timer.  This would send mixed
signals and I would risk losing the support of some of the most helpful and
cooperative regular dancers.

The point is to empower the regulars with information so that they can help
you to integrate the first-timers.

- Greg McKenzie

On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Richard Mckeever &lt;macmck(a)ymail.com&gt; wrote:

...
  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 &lt;grekenzie(a)gmail.com&gt;
 To: Brian Hamshar &lt;bhamshar(a)yahoo.com&gt;om>; Caller's discussion list <
 callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt;
 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 &lt;bhamshar(a)yahoo.com&gt; 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 &lt;mjerryfuerst(a)yahoo.com&gt;
 To: Caller's discussion list &lt;callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt;
 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
 _______________________________________________
 Callers mailing list
 Callers(a)sharedweight.net
 http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers