Amy, that's exactly why I'm wondering from those of us on sharedweight who might be reluctant to reply. If there's not enough folks willing to post their information then it's probably not worth putting in the effort to create the document. I agree with you completely about the "pressure". There's a lot of push back on this list when we voice concerns and opinions. Personally I think we should be kinder with those who are responding. There are many people who don't reply on this list and I personally believe it's because of the "pressure" and aggressive replies when different opinions are raised. Donna -----Original Message----- From: Amy Wimmer <amywimmer(a)gmail.com> To: Donna Hunt <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com> Cc: jeff <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu>du>; Dave Casserly <david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com>om>; callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Tue, Jan 31, 2017 12:32 pm Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies" Donna, I can imagine a scenario in which organizers would be shy to share this information for fear of retaliation or pressure from those who want them to change their practices. Having received such pressure, personally, I am sure it will happen to others. I'm not saying all pressure to change is bad, but that some people don't like being pushed. It is a (smallish) issue around the term "gypsy" in my neck of the woods. -Amy On Jan 31, 2017 6:39 AM, "Donna Hunt via Callers" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: If we were creating a doc for attendance and opening it up to the "world of contra dances organizers" to comment why not add some other categories that we've been discussing? Linda Leslie suggested the Organizers group might have stats. I'm wondering if CDSS keeps any? When Jeff replied to my query about LGBTQ dances and groups using non-gender terminology I wasn't at all surprised to see the list (since I know most of those groups), but I was surprised to realize that there were no groups in other major cities throughout the country. Topics that might be on the Doc: Dance Organizations that use non-gender terminology Dance Organizations that have considered but decided not to use non-gender terminology Dance Organizations that have decided to use a non "gypsy" terminology Dance Organizations that have considered but decided not to use non "gypsy" terminology There could be a write in section where Dance Organizations could state which terms they use. I would request that the attendance be under 25, 26-50, 51-75, 76-100, etc. Or even increments of 20. There are several small groups in this country that survive with under 20 attendance and other groups where a drop in 25 dancers means serious financial hardship. Dave is concerned that groups might be wary about posting such information. Are there groups represented on this list that might NOT participate in this information gathering? Seems useless to even create the Doc unless folks are willing to post the data. Donna Hunt -----Original Message----- From: Dave Casserly via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> To: Jeff Kaufman <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu> Cc: callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Mon, Jan 30, 2017 4:12 pm Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies" What if we made a Google doc with more vague categories where dances could self-report their attendance? Something like, a column for the state where the dance is located, a column for 2015 average attendance, all done in ranges of 1-50, 51-100, etc, and another column for 2017 attendance, with the same ranges? I think that would be useful for purposes of knowing how many dances are suffering declining attendance, and where those dances are, but wouldn't give out enough specific information to make organizers queasy about publicly releasing data. On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Jeff Kaufman via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: For attendance, what I would love to see is dances making their attendance numbers fully public. Something like a googledocs spreadsheet that anyone can view where you put in attendance numbers. (I've advocated for this, internally to BIDA, for years (unsuccessfully). We do have a sheet like this, but it's not public.) On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Linda Leslie via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net -- David Casserly (cell) 781 258-2761 _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net