From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Thu Feb 22 23:21:29 2001 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id f1MNIDU12032 for britdisc-outgoing; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 23:18:13 GMT Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f1MNIAh12022 for <britdisc-real@pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 23:18:10 GMT Received: from cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.173]) by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f1MNI0Y27017 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 23:18:04 GMT Received: from modem-81.aluminum.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.12.81] helo=ben) by cmailg3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.13 #0) id 14W4zm-0006WG-00 for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 23:17:58 +0000 Message-ID: <002501c09d26$bbf3a980$510c883e@ben> From: "Ben Ravilious" <ben@ravilious.net> To: "BRITDISC" <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> References: <E14VwYk-0002TU-00@virgo.cus.cam.ac.uk> <011101c09ce0$21d098e0$9e08c69b@peter> Subject: Re: Students & the Tour (was Tour Dates etc.) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 23:25:18 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk All, I could bore you all with how I want us to have individual membership, electronic voting, a proper newsletter, etc, etc but I won't. What I will say is that proper player representation is something that I have put my mind to and when I find the time I will share the subject with everyone. On the subject of the Tour fees, I'll come clean and admit that I was the one who first suggested the so called 'price hike'. The reason for this is because we are experiencing big problems with finding tournament hosts with the current Tour format and wanted to increase the incentive for people to run events. I proposed that rather than having tournament directors bidding to run an event for the cheapest price we should set a price and invite TD's to bid on the basis of having the *best venue and facilities for that price* This would have the added advantage of taking the heat from snipers like Paul Meaney off the tournament directors back and onto the BUF (who love that sort of thing :-). If however people perceive the BUF as some sort of profit-making outfit with a customer services hotline and £5 goodwill vouchers for annoyed customers then they really should stop watching Watchdog and start finding out more about how we work (or don't work). In fact it would be great if more people could contribute their considered time and opinion but usually it all goes quiet when I suggest this! Re Student discounts: The principle of making events cheaper for students is a perfectly reasonable one and indeed one I am proposing with the association individual membership fee. However, I'm afraid for the time being we have a messed-up 2001 Tour to run and need to run that before the longer term stuff can be sorted. One of the options with Chris Hughes' plan for dividing the Tour (which we shelved due to lack of attendees at the AGM) is to vary the prices across the divisions. This would mean that the generally non-student top division would pay more for a 'superior experience' and the lower divisions (*generally* where *most* of the student teams fit) would get the usual bargain events we're all used to. Please spare me the "how well the University of Central Studentshire did" rant - yes there are some great student outdoor teams around but they will *never* threaten the top eight teams just as there are no uni soccer teams in the premiership (bad analogy but you get the point) We are reaching a point here where the Tour has a conflict of interest between the top teams who want it to be the best event possible and are generally willing to pay extra to get it and the lower placed teams who see it as the only credible outdoor event worth attending but are not happy with paying extra. I've had brand-new novice teams asking about playing in the Tour which is madness and is certainly not what it was designed for. The Solution: Like it or not, we need some means of subdividing the Tour (or whatever events we eventually decide to use to rank teams in this country.) This might be based on regionalisation or it might be based on team quality. If people want to start a debate on *this* subject then brilliant - do us all a favour and express yourselves instead of sitting on your arses and letting someone else make all the decisions. Some of the older players with work and childcare committments might even like to discuss whether the principle of doing everything at tournaments is always the most suitable. I wonder how many people we lose purely because an event taking up a whole weekend is not practical. Another debate worth having.... We must agree on a system which acknowledges the commitment and higher facility requirements of the elite teams but *also* allows for more laid back 'recreational' teams with smaller budgets and less concern over commitment. And we must create a ladder of opportunity between all the levels of competition so that teams get to play at the most suitable level yet still have a crack at superior teams. To my mind a system of divisions with regular relegation and promotion between seems ideal. On the other hand some might argue that regionalisation would be better as it would encourage local growth and reduce travel distances. Please, for pity's sake, come up with some constructive ideas and opinions on how we should proceed. Ben (BUF Secretary) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Palmer" <jonathan.palmer@ic.ac.uk> To: <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Sent: 22 February 2001 14:59 Subject: Students & the Tour (was Tour Dates etc.) > Chris/Dora, > > I think most people appreciate the effort and time put in to the organizing > of the tour, and I agree that the level of representation at the AGM is > pretty sad, BUT on the issue of student participation in tour events I > disagree. Most of the student based teams (with the exception of Skunks and > RSB) play in the 16-32 and didn't qualify for Nationals. So your asking > these student teams to fork out 50 quid for a train ticket and find > accommodation for the night to go to the AGM to put their point across that > British ultimate is too expensive for students?? I don't buy that, britdisc > is a fine forum for these issues to be discussed it's easy and cost nothing. > > Secondly I don't remember Tour costs being an advertised topic of discussion > at the AGM, and on doing a brief scan of the britdisc archive I can't find > any mention there either. > > Thirdly, You have to have to have a team to get a proxy vote, so what are > newly forming student based teams supposed to do to get their point across? > Wait until the tour is over and go to the next AGM or try and get a sensible > discussion (not whining) on britdisc? > > Chris or whoever's responsibility it is what is your position on some sort > of student discounts? > > Jon Palmer > (DiscDoctors) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dora Kemp <dak12@cam.ac.uk> > To: <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 2:20 PM > Subject: Tour Dates etc. > > > > To everyone out there...take note. > > > > People seem perfectly willing to complain about Tour issues on email (such > > as the higher fees this year) where it is easy. But did anyone show up at > > the AGM where these issues were discussed extensively. No - despite all > the > > prior announcements about the meeting and active persuasion at the > Nationals > > themselves. With 16 teams at the Nationals only two were represented > outside > > the BUF committees and that included the hosting team! > > > > If people want to have a say in British Ultimate and make their say count > > then they have to make the effort and COME TO THE AGM! There are a few > > hard-working people out there desperately trying to run this show but > > without much encouragement or thanks from the rest of the community. > > > > Dora Kemp > > Strange Blue >