ry, seriously?

i can't stand audience based judging. especially if said judging is "applause wins" format.... because the position in which the applause is judged is completely positionally subjective (ie whereever you stand, it sounds louder or softer randomly)... not to mention the inconsistency of the makeup of the audience itself. i guess i'm scarred by the fact that often said audience applause judging is done where the audience is comprised of random people off the street, who wouldn't know what the f ck they were seeing if it kicked them in the teeth.

Quoted from "yes."
ry, seriously? i can't stand audience based judging. especially if said judging is "applause wins" format.... because the position in which the applause is judged is completely positionally subjective (ie whereever you stand, it sounds louder or softer randomly)... not to mention the inconsistency of the makeup of the audience itself. i guess i'm scarred by the fact that often said audience applause judging is done where the audience is comprised of random people off the street, who wouldn't know what the f ck they were seeing if it kicked them in the teeth.

I agree with Holly and I'd add that some people just clap loudest for their friends.

So I can't post from work, but I've been jotting responses and thoughts on and off through the day, trying to keep up, so forgive me if I back track a little. I've also purposefully skipped over stuff that doesn't matter anymore or has been clarified by someone else.

Quoted from "Double Down Dave"
I don't see the jump you made there. Because everyone can judge with their own eyes, text results from different judges are irrelevant? I'm confused with this statement, I'm not sure sure how you went from point A to point B.

Because everyone (not just those who attended the event) can see with their own eyes the quality of the performances rather than relying on someone s verbal or written description. I can tell you Skye and Frida came in first in the routine divisions at ALHC 2005 and ULHS 2007. That s impressive, but what does that tell you about the quality of their performance? I can tell you they were both awesome or that one is better than the other, but you re still relying on me to give you a value judgment. Same with a scoresheet for each event. Since Paulette doesn t allow filming and discourages people from posting videos online you wouldn t know the difference. Someone ignored her and posted their routine anyway, but you still don t know anything about the rest of field they beat and how they compared to them.

In the case of the ULHS, you can see their performance in relation to everyone else who competed. Sometimes in multiple angles. You can decide for yourself if the placement is deserved or not. Based on that decision you can put whatever stock you feel like in the quality of the event and the judges. You don t have that option with ALHC. (Most of the time) That s the kind of transparency that I m talking about, not just between the competitor and judge, but between the competitors, the judges, the event, and the community at large.

Quoted from "Double Down Dave"
The popularity of ULHS and it's formats are undeniable, and the fact that these formats have spread like wildfire is not in contest. Popularization of a dance does not mean innovation when an historical dance is simply copied from the original. As far as taking a "warm-up class" and turning it to a competition, if you'd like to attribute that to ULHS, go right ahead. I'd attribute it to any number of jam circles that formed when guys or girls couldn't find partners at social dances, and started doing Solo Charleston jams, but that's just me. I am happy that dance is spreading through any events that can get someone new through the door, though saying that Swing & Soul, Stompology, and any number of Girl Jams are the direct result of ULHS is again, a bit of a jump.

I knew I was going to get tagged for this after I posted it, but I was on the way out the door. I ve been watching the scene develop for a long time, as I m sure you have too. If you want to attribute the rise of solo dance to random jam circles as opposed to the ease of watching ULHS videos, online then by all means, go ahead. I ll give you that some events weren t a direct result of ULHS, even though I didn t say that exactly. However, if you want to deny any impact of ULHS on these trends, then I m going to have to go with Nicole s assertion about having your head buried in the sand.

Quoted from "Double Down Dave"
So ALHC is that bad? Or Skye and Frida are that good? Still not sure what you're saying here.

To the first question: Yes, that year (2005). (Although bad is probably too harsh a word. I ll go with my original description) To the second question: Most of the time.

Quoted from "Double Down Dave"
The lack of rules has helped competitors because they have to worry about less rules? I'm not sure anyone can argue this one.

Looks like Lucy did a pretty good job of providing the explanation, so I ll just pop in some actual examples. Paulette gets props for making adjustments for ALHC, but as Lucy mentions she keeps losing people along the way. Check out the number of couples competing in the Classic division at ALHC over the years:

1999-9 2000-12 2001-17 2002-11 2003-5 2004-5 2005-5 2006-8

That s why I say the quality isn t there between 2003-06. I d show you videos, but guess what? Can t find any online. We can talk about quantity though. Note that there were more Classic division couples in 2001 than there were in 2003-2005 combined. The chilling effect on performances is evident.

Random example: Jason Esparza and Vanessa Cobb originally came in first in the Classic Division at ALHC 2001. But Jason got too exited by the end of his routine and dropped to one knee during the final dip to end the song. The judges ruled it a violation of the no drops or lifts rule, and dq d them. What kind of lesson do you think observers got from that and the nine other dq s in that division that year? (BTW, this is an example of a tic-tac penalty.) Whatever it was, you can t deny that the number of participants drops by more than 2/3rds within two years when other events were growing.

That has changed. We got a diverse number of performances at ALHC last year, but the numbers in the Classic division (4 or 5 last year?) are still low compared to the high water marks in 2000 and 2001.

But there are still problems. Check out what happened to the Silver Shadows last year in the Team Division. Their routine that they performed at ULHS was only 2:45. There s a 3 minute minimum at ALHC. They contacted Paulette wondering if it could be changed since the majority of vintage swing songs don t last that long. She said it was too late to consider for last year s event, but suggested that they add a choreographed entrance which would be counted to the total time. Great, they edited the song to add some time and then made up the shortfall with their entrance. Creativity abounded. They did their routine and still got knocked down for a time violation because the judges didn t feel that their entrance was choreographed enough to qualify. (Too bad it s not available publicly for us to judge for ourselves.) They went out of their way to be creative with the rules, and got punked anyway. Guess who s not going to bother again this year?

But then this begs another meta question. How much credit should ALHC get for shaping that version of the Shadows routine? They obviously had one vision which they demonstrated at ULHS, but had to change it to conform to ALHC s standards. How creatively honest is it for any event to make that kind of direct demand on dancers artistic visions? Granted there are other unwritten factors at work at ULHS or any other event, such as the values of the people attending or the competitiveness between dancers. However I question the value of an event directly telling people what and how to dance instead of just letting their creative ideas stand on their own.

I ve already stated my case for the limitations of comps in general as creative showcases, but if you want to argue which is a better forum for expressing them, then I m going to have to go with ULHS. If the issue is what event quantitatively allows more creative freedom, then go back and count how many dancers have been penalized or dq d over the years at ALHC and ULHS and then compare the two. Let me know how that works out.

I guess I should add the disclaimer that even though I DJ at ALHC, none of my opinions reflect that of ALHC or Paulette. (We'll see if I'm still on the dj list after this thread.) Or ILHC or any other event that I ve worked with for that matter. Oddly enough, I ve never even been to ULHS.

Jerry

Quoted from "mouth"
Here are a few of the people off the top of my head that Amy has hired to judge in years past and if you don't think they are diverse then I don't know what to tell you: Lisa Wade Alan Parsons Margaret Batiuchok Lennart Westerlund Justin Zillman Jenn Salvadori Carol Fraser Maggie Moon Peter Strom Nicole Frydman Tena Morales Peter Loggins (snip) Please, please, please try to argue with me about the lack of diversity in opinions among this group. I'll just let you and you'll look awfully foolish.

I can't argue with the list of judges or the diversity of their thinking when they are judging. I'm not them. Nor was I in the room when they were judging. Nor can I, or anyone else who wasn't in the room when they were judging, tell you what they thought or even if they thought at all. You have us at a disadvantage, Nicole. You have been in the room, you know what they thought and what you thought because, if I read your essay on judging at ULHS correctly, you all discussed them.

However, I'd love to see a complete list of judges and the years they judged. I can't seem to find it on the net anywhere. It would be interesting to see who got paired up with who.

Quote
And that list doesn't include any of the MANY peer judges she's brought on to the panel. Each year she included them in the event they were chosen based on living in different regions and they each came from different perspectives and had different roles in the community (djs, pure social dancers, lower level competitors, to teachers and contest winners). Come to think of it, this is a great example of a brand new innovative idea that began at Showdown.

Very true.

Quoted from "mouth"

Quoted from "Double Down Dave"
While I am opposed to the judges not sharing what they are looking for as it doesn't really promote improvement in dancers, I am NOT opposed to judges discussing their results with one another and then making a decision. If their qualifications for putting one dancer in front of another is, "Well, he/she was more badass than you." I'm fine with that. I'd just like to hear it from their mouths.

Wait, you mean like sticking around and talking directly to competitors after awards, as well as post on discussion boards about our decisions after the event? Because we do that.

Cool. Where are those posts from the judges? I'd like to read them.

Quoted from "mouth"
Oh and please explain to me how a ranking list explains to a competitor what they need to work on to improve their dancing. All I know from that information is that so-and-so-judge didn't like me as much as somebody else, not why. So you have EXACTLY the same information as you do at Showdown. Only written down and posted on a wall.

...and kept for people to find years later when a discussion about judging pops up on Yehoodi.

next.

Quoted from "GuruReuben via yes."
Another ULHS change is in the contest music. Amy originally hired me because most music being played for big contests (at that time) induced groans from the competitors and was terribly inconsistent. In following years, Amy has slowly driven more and more live music into the contests. This year, the contests will be performed in their entirety to live music with only one exception, Team Division. Prelims, finals, and even what's traditionally known as the "Classic" division, all live music. The jury is still out on if this will be a positive or not (and I don't say that cause it lessens my roll, I near peed my pants in joy when she told me I didn't have to pick out contest music last year), but it's change, it's experimental, it's exciting and it's interesting. I think the move to New Orleans next year with its pool of potentially available musicians will make this change really shine.

Having just recently heard this, as in the past few days on this thread, this sounds like it would be pretty freakin' cool to see. Doing a routine to "live" music I've only ever seen done once... I'd love to see how this comes out. I guess I'll have to wait for it to be YouTube'd.

Quoted from "JSAlmonte"
I can tell you they were both awesome or that one is better than the other, but you re still relying on me to give you a value judgment.

Not you per se, but the judges.

Quoted from "JSAlmonte"
Same with a scoresheet for each event. Since Paulette doesn t allow filming and discourages people from posting videos online you wouldn t know the difference.

Did she stop selling videos then? Because as of this morning she was selling DVDs of all of her events dating back to 1998.

Quoted from "JSAlmonte"
I ll give you that some events weren t a direct result of ULHS, even though I didn t say that exactly. However, if you want to deny any impact of ULHS on these trends, then I m going to have to go with Nicole s assertion about having your head buried in the sand.

Any impact of ULHS? As in, ULHS had nothing to do with the current trend? I don't think I could deny that ULHS has had an enormous impact on the Lindy Community and all of it's competitive formats. After all, would I be here discussing all this if the ULHS were not an influence on Lindy Hop?

Quoted from "JSAlmonte"
The judges ruled it a violation of the no drops or lifts rule, and dq d them. What kind of lesson do you think observers got from that and the nine other dq s in that division that year? (BTW, this is an example of a tic-tac penalty.)

Thank you for that clarification, I'd never heard it called that before.

Quoted from "JSAlmonte"
...long silver shadows story... (snip) But then this begs another meta question. How much credit should ALHC get for shaping that version of the Shadows routine? They obviously had one vision which they demonstrated at ULHS, but had to change it to conform to ALHC s standards. How creatively honest is it for any event to make that kind of direct demand on dancers artistic visions?

ALHC should receive exactly no credit for that routine as it was choreographed for the ULHS. If ANY dancer wants to throw down at an event, and ignore the rules that have been in place since the event began... what did they expect? If they are going to choreograph a routine for one event that has one set of rules, and not (really) re-choreograph the routine for the next competition that they enter, they'll end up paying the price.

This begs another question, should competitions make special exceptions for name recognizable dancers? Should any of those name recognizable dancers expect special consideration? Just a thought...

Quoted from "JSAlmonte"
I ve already stated my case for the limitations of comps in general as creative showcases, but if you want to argue which is a better forum for expressing them, then I m going to have to go with ULHS. If the issue is what event quantitatively allows more creative freedom, then go back and count how many dancers have been penalized or dq d over the years at ALHC and ULHS and then compare the two. Let me know how that works out.

What event allows for more creative freedom? Well with the "anything goes" mentality sweeping the nation and all it's contests, I'm not sure anymore. Between ALHC and ULHS, I'd think that ULHS takes the cake on "creative freedom."

Please pardon the snipping of quotes, but this post would be entirely too long (if it isn't already) if I decided to keep complete quotes intact.

Great, now I get to go watch an episode or three of "Heroes, season 2". My brain hurts.

DDD

Quoted from "Addict"

Quoted from "yes."
ry, seriously? i can't stand audience based judging. especially if said judging is "applause wins" format.... because the position in which the applause is judged is completely positionally subjective (ie whereever you stand, it sounds louder or softer randomly)... not to mention the inconsistency of the makeup of the audience itself. i guess i'm scarred by the fact that often said audience applause judging is done where the audience is comprised of random people off the street, who wouldn't know what the f ck they were seeing if it kicked them in the teeth.

I agree with Holly and I'd add that some people just clap loudest for their friends.

Holly I'm talking specifically of big-time lindy events where there are no "random people off the street". Personally I think the audience at an event like ULHS is sophisticated enough to cheer loudest for the couple that clearly kicked the most ass. Maybe I'm being optimistic. Maybe it would be a problem if it was close. Then again, I'm not opposed to seeing couples KEEP dancing off until there IS a CLEAR winner.

It's organic, it's flexible to the moment, and there is really no better motivator to bring some energy than trying to get a crowd behind you. Have the judges tap people out until the final 3. Let 'em loose and then let the audience decide. Surely the judges could get 3 quality couples no?

i might be wrong but i think he refers to a foul that did not really affect the outcome. I believe this is a sports lingo. for example, in basketball the rule states that you can not make contact with a player while he/she is shooting. however, most of the time the referee allows some of the contact ( as long is at did not affect the out come i.e. if you just touched him on the leg). if a referee does call a foul on a such a play, it is known as a tic-tac foul.

To make things even more interesting, there's a discussion going on right now on one of the DJ mailing lists I follow. It's primarily a WCS list, and something that's been a major focus is whether swing music should be featured in their competitions.

Here is a letter from Gerry Zonca of the World Swing Dance Council about some things they've been considering. I thought it was an interesting counterpoint to the discussion here regarding rules vs. no rules.

Quoted from "Gerry Zonca"
I have had numerous general discussions with a number of Event Directors and Judges over the past several months regarding this subject. Here's a smattering of what came out of these conversations. I'm sure it will generate LOTS of opinions: Jack & Jill Division Strategy 1) Since WSDC mostly relates to Jack & Jill division points, perhaps standards can be more easily set there. Some people feel that the WSDC "could" or "should" be a sanctioning / governing body specifically for Jack & Jill divisions in order to establish "standards & practices" -- just like any formal organization does. If not, then you have little structure and only minor impact. What some felt was that the WSDC logo / imprimatur should be granted only to those events who follow established WSDC guidelines -- much like the JD Power or Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. In that spirit, the idea was to have an elite panel of deejays meet with Skippy, Annie and the WSDC Board to assemble an inventory of a couple hundred songs that everyone generally agrees has recognizable Swing rhythm (no Hustle, Cha-Cha, Hip-Hop, or Foxtrot). This would not be that hard. Our deejays know their stuff. This is what they do for a living and they could probably come up with titles really fast. Consensus would not be hard to reach. Based on this initial (and ever expanding list), deejays could draw from this pool of Swing songs when running WSDC sanctioned Jack & Jill competitions. That way, dancers who come up through the Jack & Jill ranks would learn the dance based on REAL Swing rhythms instead of the palette of contemporary music they often hear that does not really "swing" much or at all. It's kinda like Olympic figure skaters who once had to execute "school figures" as part of their 3-part score (figures, short program, long program). As a result of this approach, dancers would dance to nothing but real Swing rhythms right from the start -- which will give them better foundation. It would help them focus more on basic footwork, timing and quality of movement. Clearly, it's much easier to dance Swing to Swing music than to Cha-Cha. The dancer feels the rhythm and the body simply moves better. Those events that agree to this arrangement would get WSDC sanctioning. Points accumulated for Jack & Jill division competitors would be applied to their names so they could move up to higher and higher levels. There's your standard. 2) Even though each event director sets his own rules for competitions, in at least the Jack & Jill division dancers would dance to legitimate, polyunsaturated Swing music. That's good for the dance, good for the dancer and good for the WSDC in order to preserve the basic richness and flavor of Swing. We get strict at the ENTRY level and get more liberal as dancers gain skills and sophistication. But they will ALWAYS appreciate pure Swing as long as they dance. Here's some ideas regarding other divisions... A) Young America: No entry fees, 50 discount for weekend pass, free workshops all weekend. No monetary awards, only medals for Gold, Silver, Bronze, and Honorable mention. Free weekend passes for Top 5 placements to attend other Swing events that wish to participate in a joint-sponsorship of youth divisions. Theory / Philosophy --- No need to have little rugrats who lack sophistication in dancing be focused on money or fame so early in life. It should be about dance education, improvement and FUN. This will take pressure off of little kids, keep adults from becoming "stage moms and dads" by living vicariously through their children, and discourage misplaced early rivalry and ego. Most of all, it will help encourage participation at the introductory level and help grow the dance. B) Young Adult: Change to universal name of Rising Star Division. No entry fees, 50 discount for weekend pass, free workshops all weekend. No monetary awards, free weekend passes for Top 5 placements to attend other Swing events that wish to participate in a joint-sponsorship of youth divisions. Theory / Philosophy --- This will take pressure of kids and encourage them to participate, discourage early rivalry and ego and help teenagers focus on training / technique rather than on being cool. Most of all, it will help encourage participation at the developmental level and help grow the dance. C) Classic: No lifts, drops, aerials, or gymnastics. Just real dancing. Must be danced to what would generally be considered real Swing music. Forget about requiring a specific age of Swing content or penalizing for separation moves and other such things. Dance to what the music asks for. The more the dance is connected, the more the choreography follows the flavor of the music and the more it looks / feels like Swing, the higher ranking you get. Theory / Philosophy --- Let judges be JUDGES, not accountants or referees. Experienced judges KNOW when it's Swing and KNOW when the motion follows the music. D) Showcase: Anything goes. Any kind of music, any kind of move. No age Swing content. No minimums or maximums on lifts. HOWEVER, the more DANCING and the more SWING you do, the higher ranking you get. Again, let them DANCE -- knowing that tricks are not dance moves, but rather, "accents" to help interpret the music. Dancers should do moves that the music asks for. This division allows dancers to use other genres of music and dance WC Swing moves to it. Basically, it says that you are "showcasing" Swing moves to whatever music you wish and can use all the tricks you want but if you don't DANCE enough and if you don't do enough SWING patterns, your score will be downgraded. Again, we're basically saying, "Hey, don't tell us that a judge can realistically determine age Swing content in Classic or Showcase divisions for a couple moving at 115 bpm -- without the assistance of NFL Instant Replay. That's patently ridiculous." It might be much more practical and realistic to establish basic "general" guidelines and philosophies for each division, then let dancers DANCE and let judges JUDGE. Make judging less quantitative and more qualitative. The audience and judges BOTH know what real SWING dancing looks like and they know what really GOOD dancing looks like. It'll take care of itself. Theory / Philosophy --- Let judges be JUDGES, not accountants or referees. Experienced judges KNOW when it's Swing and KNOW when the motion follows the music. SUMMARY Let Jack & Jill be the "Basic Training" division that establishes, reinforces and preserves the flavor and philosophy of Swing. Set the standard there. Require dancers to dance to REAL Swing music in this entry level Social Division and then be more LIBERAL in Upper Level divisions where dancers have EARNED the right to "stretch the limits" and do "sophisticated interpretation" of music to varied genres. The Advanced / Professional levels are where real cutting-edge creativity is spawned and where the dance evolves. Focus on basics at the ENTRY levels, encourage entertainment at the UPPER levels. ... all these ideas have been tossed around for the past year in phone conversations I have had with many of the 25 event directors who are members of the USA Swing Dance Network. There are a lot of interesting ideas floating around out there. I just pulled out some of my notes and shared them with you and our deejay colleagues. Hopefully, it will generate lots of critical evaluation and perhaps elicit even more ideas and wisdom about each strategy. Let me know what you think. Sincerely, Gerry Zonca The USA Swing Net

I've skimmed the thread, so forgive me if I'm reiterating any points.

I never went to ALHC because it was good. I went because it was the only option.

NADC and the US Open were both great events during the same time period, but they're not lindy events. Because of this, you expect a certain formality of them due to the mixed nature. However, ALHC managed to always felt more stuffy and oppressive than those events, with a less professional feel. The rules and judging were restrictive, obtuse and archaic, and it felt overly formalized for an event that was supposed to be celebrating a street dance.

I've been once since the bitch slap to the face that was ALHC 2001, and its only gotten worse. when 17 of 24 couples were disqualified in the classic division, including the top scoring routines. When a MAJORITY of a division is not just docked, but completely disqualified based on overly restrictive and harsh judging criteria, you need to take a step back and re-evaluate your priorities. In addition, take 8am contest sign ups where people were literally camped out with sleeping bags to ensure that they didn't miss them, piss poor and inconsistent contest music choices forced upon the DJs, and the icing on the cake of Paulette on a mic trying to call out who is going in to a jam circle. It was bad, but there really wasn't any competition, so we all went.

The event wasn't good, ever. I might have thought it was at the time, but I didn't know any better. Now, thats not to say I didn't have a load of fun, but that was in spite of the event, not because of it. It was because of the people that were there that I enjoyed myself.

Now, in contrast, the first time I went to Showdown was because I heard it was going to be so awesome that it would be a mind blowing experience that blew my mind all over my face. It was exactly that, not just because of the people that were there, but because of the event itself. The atmosphere was electric, it felt fresh and raw, the competitions had more energy. The event was more fun than ALHC.

I'm seeing argument in this thread like events are mutually exclusive. It's not like we have to pick one event and not others. Most of us have the choice to go to several events a year. I could go to pretty much any event that I want. Now that I live about 2500 miles closer to ALHC than when I used to go, its even easier than before for me to go there, cheaper as well. Showdown doesn't enter the equation of that decision at all.

I don't go because, like many people, I think the event sucks. You can analyze, argue semantic differences, call me ignorant, I don't really care. People don't need metrics to measure their opinion.

Contests I'd like to see - kinda like the IRL car race idea where drivers all have the same car, I'd like to see different couples choreograph a routine to the exact same song as a competition. It would never work because the audience would die from boredom. We could increase the palette of song selections to 3 songs and you just don't know which one you will have to perform to, but that would lesson the likelihood of anyone entering a contest due to more work required upfront.

Babblyness that i don't have time to clarify. Contests and their relationship to Financial Rewards/Gains. Dance Competition vs Performance. Which is a show? Who will pay for it?

Artistry? Innovation? Can you innovate yourself out of what initially defined you? Isn't that how we have West Coast Swing? --R

Quoted from "Double Down Dave"
Thank you for your opinion, DJ! Based on what you have seen at all the events you have been to, do you have any constructive criticism for events on the whole? Any suggestions for what would make a better event? DDD

Stop sucking.

Quoted from "mity"
i might be wrong but i think he refers to a foul that did not really affect the outcome. I believe this is a sports lingo. for example, in basketball the rule states that you can not make contact with a player while he/she is shooting. however, most of the time the referee allows some of the contact ( as long is at did not affect the out come i.e. if you just touched him on the leg). if a referee does call a foul on a such a play, it is known as a tic-tac foul.

Pretty much. And it becomes a major issue when they do affect the outcome of the game. Sometimes you'll here fans say "let the players play" or complain when the game is decided by the refs or umpires making too many calls and disrupting the game rather than the players going head to head, even if there is some bending or breakage of the rules.

(This is what I get for using sports in a discussion with lindy hoppers.)

Jerry

Quoted from "JSAlmonte"
Not quite. Same performers and some of the same elements were used, but it was a different routine. Jerry

yeah, there were way more sequins. and the dancing was worse, if you can imagine that being possible.

(but teh funnay was better.)

I too have only just skimmed this thread. So forgive me if what I say is going to be a repeat.

I have gone to very few exchanges, and one reason I have not gone to more had been my experience with the majority of the events missing a certain comfort level I am accustom to.

I was very happily surprised when I attended a SoFlex event and found that every single event HAD that comfort level I need. I went there to attend a wedding, but was actually hi-jacked by the awesome events.

First, not only was the music spot ON, but every event had adequate seating, lighting, food and beverage availability. I am not saying that there should be a FREE buffet at the event (which the staff at SoFlex DID provide) But events should have a working kitchen and/or bar where a guest will not have want to leave a venue to fulfill their needs.

Now Hether goes above and beyond those needs at the Blues parties she hashes out. At late night venues, I would expect great music, proper seating, and a working bar... But she always seems to have a few short trays of goodies out for the peckish.

And when I go to a house blues event, I ALWAYS treat it like a pot luck and BRING SOMETHING!!! Shame on all of you who are invited to a HOUSE party and arrive empty handed! If you are not paying an admission, then contribute to the party in some way. THAT'S what helps make a kick azz party.

Slayer

LOL Sorry, I just have that burr in my saddle and I look for the chance to get that message across. :P

Quoted from "Double Down Dave"

Quoted from "DJLarkin"

Quoted from "Double Down Dave"
Thank you for your opinion, DJ! Based on what you have seen at all the events you have been to, do you have any constructive criticism for events on the whole? Any suggestions for what would make a better event? DDD

Stop sucking.

Thanks DJ... I can always count on you for insight.

You know as well as I do that I'm perfectly capable of providing detailed and insightful commentary, but why should I bother? You've demonstrated that you're unwilling to waver from your viewpoint, and nothing I say is going to change that. Its especially apparent after looking at your dismissal of the brilliant posts by Jerry, Nicole and Lucy. So, I took a different approach.

You really want my advice? Re-read what they have to say. Take it to heart.