Re: winter indoor date planning

From: John Kagan <john_kagan_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 23:54:27 -0000

> OK, then, "Major League Baseball" is also "what we make of it"

Obviously. Major League Baseball is only "major" because we attend the games in large numbers. The huge player contracts, big stadiums, top advertising, container ships of bobble-head dolls – are all because the fans buy lots of tickets.

> and the sandlot game down the street is legitimately labeled "major."

If the sandlot game down the street happens to be skateboarding and BMX bikes, then yes, is it now "major" because we attend the X-Games in large numbers.

In both cases "major" is what we make it. The promoters would like it to be major. We make it major (or not).

From another angle: if someone is trying to host an event that requires a certain relatively large number of participants to break even, then it only makes sense that it be promoted as a major event and scheduled so as not to conflict with other major events.

The person with the daunting task of trying to host a big contest for the benefit of the Indoor community had better treat it as big. Calling it "major" doesn't guarantee a large turnout, but calling it "small" goes a long way toward making sure it is small.

> "Major event" ought to at least mean "used" before, if not also mean, "recognized by those concerned with this sort of event." Also should imply "Reasonably well attended by those concerned with such." Of course, it's all relative, and hyperbole has its place. For example, USIC is a "major" indoor contest. This not to suggest that non-major contests ought not be supported and advertised, and enjoyed. By all mean, please announce here, just tell the truth, please.

By that definition there would be no "major events", since all sites are unused, unrecognized, and not well-attended first. Kind of a reverse chicken and egg situation.

It would be great if all flying sites could be tested out and proven by a small group before they were offered up to the rest of us, but that's not always possible due to cost, etc. I suspect that may be the case here.

Interestingly, Don was talking about the PPCC, not the Springerville event. That was just mentioned as something he was scheduling around.

So, I'd suggest that it would be more constructive to ask, "hey, what's this Springerville event that someone is going through the effort to host for us?" than get irritated that the term "major" doesn't meet your personal definition (which doesn't match the dictionary def). It's hard enough to get participants. Just sayin'
Received on Fri Sep 23 2011 - 16:54:29 CEST