Re: Oct 13 meeting is full, is everyone attending?

The meeting on Oct 13 is full, and there are 8 people on the waiting
list. If anyone on the "yes" list does not plan to attend, please update
your response.

Also, is there flexibility on the space at the venue at all?

Regards,
Jeff Davis

On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 11:48:40AM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> The meeting on Oct 13 is full, and there are 8 people on the waiting
> list. If anyone on the "yes" list does not plan to attend, please
> update your response.
>
> Also, is there flexibility on the space at the venue at all?

We can jam about 32 people into the space there, it being that
conference room at EZRez. I think that's about the limit.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 12:01 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> We can jam about 32 people into the space there, it being that
> conference room at EZRez. I think that's about the limit.

The meetup limit says 26 right now, should we increase it?

Also, maybe we should schedule an after event (e.g. at a bar) so that if
people on the waiting list are turned away, the trip to SF won't be a
total loss. That might generally be a good idea for any meeting with a
big waiting list.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

All,

We've increased the limit to 35, since we're expecting a high no-show
rate due to the weather.

--Josh

On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:18:22 am Josh Berkus wrote:
> All,
>
> We've increased the limit to 35, since we're expecting a high no-show
> rate due to the weather.
>
> --Josh

I can't see driving in this weather for 1.5 hours. Did you mean 'increased'.

Johnf

On 10/13/09 10:48 AM, John wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:18:22 am Josh Berkus wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> We've increased the limit to 35, since we're expecting a high no-show
>> rate due to the weather.
>>
>> --Josh
>
> I can't see driving in this weather for 1.5 hours. Did you mean 'increased'.
>

What?

--Josh

On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:51:50 am Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 10/13/09 10:48 AM, John wrote:
> > On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:18:22 am Josh Berkus wrote:
> >> All,
> >>
> >> We've increased the limit to 35, since we're expecting a high no-show
> >> rate due to the weather.
> >>
> >> --Josh
> >
> > I can't see driving in this weather for 1.5 hours. Did you mean
> > 'increased'.
>
> What?
>
> --Josh

I was just commenting on the statement
"We've increased the limit to 35".

Normally, I would have said
"We've decreased the limit to 35 due to the weather".
or something like that.

No big deal.

Johnf

> Normally, I would have said
> "We've decreased the limit to 35 due to the weather".
> or something like that.

No, the limit *was* 30, because we were expecting 90% turnout as we
usually have at EzRez when there's a waiting list. Now, I'm expecting
50% to 75% turnout. So "increased" is correct.

--Josh

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 13:02, John <jfabiani(at)yolo(dot)com> wrote:

> On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:51:50 am Josh Berkus wrote:
> > What?
> >
> > --Josh
>
> I was just commenting on the statement
> "We've increased the limit to 35".
>
> Normally, I would have said
> "We've decreased the limit to 35 due to the weather".
> or something like that.
>
> No big deal.
>
> Johnf
>

Let's say that given good weather, 23 of the original 26 people (~90%) who
RSVP'd yes would have attended.

Now, given the rain, let's say 15 (60%) might attend. The meeting room
still holds the same number of people, regardless of the weather. So Josh
has increased the attendance limit, hoping that if 35 people RSVP yes, the
actual number that show will be closer to 25.

Hello ,

Anyone driving from San Jose, whom I could catch a ride with?

Regards,
Michael Cheselka
650-488-4820

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:02, John <jfabiani(at)yolo(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:51:50 am Josh Berkus wrote:
>> On 10/13/09 10:48 AM, John wrote:
>> > On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:18:22 am Josh Berkus wrote:
>> >> All,
>> >>
>> >> We've increased the limit to 35, since we're expecting a high no-show
>> >> rate due to the weather.
>> >>
>> >> --Josh
>> >
>> > I can't see driving in this weather for 1.5 hours.  Did you mean
>> > 'increased'.
>>
>> What?
>>
>> --Josh
>
> I was just commenting on the statement
> "We've increased the limit to 35".
>
> Normally, I would have said
> "We've decreased the limit to 35 due to the weather".
> or something like that.
>
> No big deal.
>
> Johnf
>
>
>
>

John wrote:
> I was just commenting on the statement
> "We've increased the limit to 35".
>
> Normally, I would have said
> "We've decreased the limit to 35 due to the weather".
> or something like that

The limit is not coupled to the weather. They are independent variables.

The limit was increased because the event was over-subscribed and it
turned out the room could hold more people than Josh originally thought.

--
Peter Headland

Michael,

You should change the subject line. So, done:

> Anyone driving from San Jose, whom I could catch a ride with?
>
> Regards,
> Michael Cheselka
> 650-488-4820

John wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:51:50 am Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> On 10/13/09 10:48 AM, John wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:18:22 am Josh Berkus wrote:
>>>
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> We've increased the limit to 35, since we're expecting a high no-show
>>>> rate due to the weather.
>>>> ...
> I was just commenting on the statement
> "We've increased the limit to 35".
>
> Normally, I would have said
> "We've decreased the limit to 35 due to the weather".
> or something like that.
>
No. Room holds 30. Meetup.com limit was set for 30. Food calculated on
30. But....due to weather some who RSVP'd yes will not come so
Meetup.com limit raised to 35 in hopes of getting 30. Makes sense to me.

Cheers,
Steve

> The limit is not coupled to the weather. They are independent variables.

Actually, we *increased* the limit because we're expecting a high
no-show rate. And, in fact, RSVPs are down to 30 ...

--Josh

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Actually, we *increased* the limit because we're expecting a high
> no-show rate.
>

Yeah, I figured that out just after I hit "Send". :-( I was confusing
the limit on the room (which ISTR you did underestimate originally) with
the Meetup limit.

I don't see a recording of the last meeting anywhere? Do you plan to
publish one for tonight?

--
Peter Headland

Peter,

> I don't see a recording of the last meeting anywhere? Do you plan to
> publish one for tonight?

Yes, we do. Christophe has just been busy with paying work so hasn't
posted an archival copy anywhere.

--Josh Berkus

On Oct 13, 2009, at 1:01 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Yes, we do. Christophe has just been busy with paying work so hasn't
> posted an archival copy anywhere.

Indeed, from where I sit, I can see the progress bar of the movie file
uploading to the server...

--
-- Christophe Pettus
xof(at)thebuild(dot)com

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 01:04:04PM -0700, Christophe wrote:
> On Oct 13, 2009, at 1:01 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Yes, we do. Christophe has just been busy with paying work so
>> hasn't posted an archival copy anywhere.
>
> Indeed, from where I sit, I can see the progress bar of the movie
> file uploading to the server...

Kudos!

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate