Hi Bruce:

Thanx for your thoughts. I'll be posting our decisions here, after we come to some conclusions at our July Board meeting.

Rob

>Hi, Rob
>
>Out of necessity, our meeting time and location have moved frequently over the past year or so. We have had the same quadary about how best to serve the membership. The opinions likewise have been mixed.
>
>No matter what day of the week is chosen for the "set" meeting time, it conflicts with certain members' schedules. So there's no picking an evening that works for everyone. It also makes booking the "super-speakers" more difficult, if not impossible.
>
>OTOH, when the meeting time/place change, the e-mail notice usually goes out only a few days beforehand, making it difficult for members to reschedule their lives around.
>
>Location has been an issue in our group for *years*. The Dallas/Fort Worth area is mostly contained in 2 large counties, but people live in the outlying 'burbs' too. If we move the location too far east, Fort Worth people don't come. If we move it too far west, Dallasites don't come. There was an attempt to have separate meetings in Dallas and Fort Worth a few years back, but that mainly served to double the effort necessary to arrange the program(s).
>
>I served as program chairman for the group last year, and have inherited the job again this year when the elected chairman moved to Washington.
>
>I know this isn't any help, but you asked for feedback, which is the reason for my post. I'm always interested in improving our group and presentations, so any suggestions are welcome.
>
>
>>Hi All:
>>
>>Posted this in User Group section a couple of weeks ago and only got two responses. Maybe you all can give me some more feedback from here...
>>
>>The San Francisco Bay Area Association of Database Developers (BAADD) has FP/VFP, Access/Office, Web Development and other SIGs, and is considering some re-structuring and changes in approaches to our monthly meetings. Currently we have fixed time frames for each SIG (ie: 1st-Thurs, 2nd-Wed, etc. each month), which doesn't always work for coordinating scheduling with 'high profile' speaker candidates who may be in the SF Bay Area for other reasons but that don't mesh with our schedule for the appropriate SIG. We also have occasional 'special' presentations that are thought to appeal to a wider audience than just a single SIG (such as recent presentations by Fabian Pascal and others).
>>
>>Some of us want to retain a fixed schedule, as a means of allowing the members and guests to pre-schedule known dates for attending events expected to be of interest. Others feel its easier to schedule events around the speakers, and just 'spam' the mailing list to let people know the latest schedule as it gets set up. The advantage of a fixed schedule also is that it 'encourages' the SIG leaders to make meeting/speaker arrangements on a monthly basis or as far ahead as possible. A non-fixed schedule gives us more flexibility, but may cost us attendance as people make appointments for dates that subsequently become one of the new 'floating' meeting dates. Another variation on the approach might be to get away from SIG-centric meetings, and just have general meetings for all SIGs that focus on overall technology areas like COM, Windows-DNA, OOP, running your own (consulting) company, tax issues, contract issues, copyright and legal issues, etc.
>>
>>The feedback received so far was: a) one person just responded that his user group has a set schedule. b) one person already a member of BAADD liked the current fixed schedule with occasional revisions for speaker needs.
>>
>>Anyone else have any thoughts on the Pros and Cons of all this? What does your local user group do and why (if known). Which approach (or some other approach) seems best to you? We really could use some more feedback on this.
>>
>>TIA for your feedback.
>>
>>Rob