[eDebate] NDT Fees

matt stannard stannardmatt
Thu Mar 9 19:23:28 CST 2006


But see, remember, I have no sense of humor.

mjs


>From: "Josh Hoe" <jbhdb8 at gmail.com>
>To: "matt stannard" <stannardmatt at hotmail.com>
>CC: mancussp at muohio.edu, edebate at ndtceda.com
>Subject: Re: [eDebate] NDT Fees
>Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 20:15:01 -0500
>
>Certainly sorry to dissapoint you Matt,
>
>Personally, I thought the line about how the NDT would spend the money was
>kind of funny if you consider who would be at the party,
>
>Josh
>
>
>
>
>On 3/9/06, matt stannard <stannardmatt at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The last three posts by Gordon, Andy and Steve are reasonable, honest,
> > constructive, and non-sarcastic.  I appreciate them.
> >
> > If, as can be reasonably argued, there's no need for people to be
> > reactionary and fire off complaints on edebate about the costs 
>associated
> > with the NDT, it is equally true that there is no reason to answer those
> > or
> > any other complaints with dismissive sarcasm.
> >
> > The long-term aspect of this issue is simple: It is really, really
> > expensive
> > to attend the NDT, and even moreso when bringing observers.  Lamenting
> > this
> > fact is not tantamount to selfishness or utopianism.  It is also really,
> > really expensive to host the NDT.  A lamentation on the costs of 
>attending
> > should not be construed as an attack on those gracious enough to host.
> >
> > This is one instance where the "we're all in this together" cliche
> > actually
> > rings true.
> >
> > stannard
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: Steve Mancuso <mancussp at muohio.edu>
> > >CC: edebate at ndtceda.com
> > >Subject: Re: [eDebate] NDT Fees
> > >Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 19:46:07 -0500
> > >
> > >I have taken part in pretty much every side of this debate.  I've been,
> > >and continue to be, a consumer of the NDT, bringing teams and
> > >observers, and paying the fees.  I serve on the NDT Committee.  I've
> > >served on the Board of Trustees.  I've recently been a host of the NDT.
> > >   I was  a co-author of the most recent hosting document.
> > >
> > >The people who have written about hosts getting stuck with monumental
> > >food bills after the tournament (and these have sometimes been five
> > >figures) are absolutely right.  Our first priority has to be to protect
> > >our hosts.  And I know that is the exact concern that drives the high
> > >observer fees, nothing else.  The high observer fees are absolutely the
> > >result of very good intentions.  The people who look out for our
> > >finances do a fantastic job, and we owe them a great gratitude for
> > >their tireless service.
> > >
> > >I would also point out that these hidden costs add up quickly.  If
> > >every school has just one person who slips in unaccounted you are
> > >talking about a 10% increase in food costs.
> > >
> > >On the other hand, I strongly oppose the current inflexible fee system
> > >for observers.
> > >
> > >Not too long ago it was possible to buy observer food tickets that
> > >excluded the banquet(s).
> > >
> > >There are numerous people at the tournament who would gladly forgo
> > >eating at the banquets - and that's over half the cost of the observer
> > >ticket.  I have several people in my party who will not be able to
> > >attend the opening banquet.  Yet I am in the position of having to pay
> > >for their banquet meal anyhow.
> > >
> > >Further, I have two students who will be attending as observers who I
> > >would like to be able to have them admitted to observe the various
> > >awards ceremonies on Thursday and Sunday.  Is it really necessary to
> > >buy them $60 banquet meals for that to occur?
> > >
> > >I know that the rigidness of the system is in part driven by
> > >enforcement issues.  In the case where the host feels that the
> > >single-price ticket is the only way that meal lines can be enforced we
> > >need to error on the side of the host, absolutely.
> > >
> > >I know in this year's case the host supports variable prices for
> > >observer tickets.
> > >
> > >I wish we could find a way to offer meal tickets that excluded the
> > >banquet costs, and find a reasonable way to enforce it.
> > >
> > >Steve Mancuso
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >eDebate mailing list
> > >eDebate at ndtceda.com
> > >http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > eDebate mailing list
> > eDebate at ndtceda.com
> > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> >






More information about the Mailman mailing list