Re2: <VV> Convention Thoughts -- a contrarian speaks
burkhard at rochester.rr.com
Mon Jul 31 01:06:19 EDT 2006
And of course that is perfectly fine, Mike. Stuff goes right and
stuff goes wrong every year, and not learning from past experience
would be just plain dumb. If being constructive and effecting change
for the future is one's *real* goal, saying "everything sucked" (I'm
summarizing a couple other folks (not you) pretty fairly, I think)
isn't really the best way to go about it. The way to (politely)
express such thoughts in a constructive manner and maybe try to drop a
compliment as well. Surely, the experience was not entirely miserable.
The idea is to keep *improving* conventions -- not scaring off
potential hosts clubs and future attendees. Whom would that benefit???
What ultimately should come out of sensible dialog is perhaps a
reranking of convention site "desirables" --> Maybe "Feature XXX
should ALWAYS be present, even if YYY and ZZZ have to be sacrificed a
bit". In most areas, the "perfect" car-club friendly hotel for such a
large event does not exist and there are quite few that are even in
the running for hitting most of the (believed) important items.
Something has to give. Constructive feedback helps CORSA and future
host clubs try to better understand what (most) people find essential
and what (most) people consider "nice, but sacrificable".
mhicks130 at cox.net wrote:
> Just because you label complaints as "gripes" doesn't mean they're not valid complaints. There were some legitimate issues with the
> hotel and convention.
More information about the VirtualVairs