Quote:
...
However, having to wake up at 5:30-6:00 for a normal day of regional quals matches is silly, not to mention this rarely is early enough for us to get good seats.
...
|
Someone is going to wind up in the "good" seats and someone isn't. Are you saying that you want a process that ensures you get a good seat, that pushes someone else into a bad seat, and that doesn't involve you getting on line earlier than the person who will be enjoying the bad seat you think they should sit in????
You might not word it that way, but that's the net of it.
Please don't be the person who tells anyone right now that any group of ordinary spectators needs to have a few people rush in to claim and save seats so that the total group all sit in good seats when they arrive later.
Why? Because when you do that you are telling everyone else, including me, that their/my place is in the bad seats that aren't acceptable to you.
Who made the people in the rule-breaking group the special people who don't have to sit in those seats that aren't good enough for them, but are apparently good enough for the unwashed masses (the rest of us)?
That is the perception seat-saving creates in many, many, many people.
Chinmay said it well in his earlier post. That's the sort of thing that makes our beloved Jar-Jar Binks exclaim, "How rude!".
I agree that waking up at ridiculous hours to stand in queues is silly. I'm confident that most folks would endorse an improved method that made sense. FIRST could allocate seating by flipping a lot of coins, by drawing names from a fish bowl, by playing rock-paper-scissors, or by whatever other process might make sense.
In the future, however FIRST wants to allow the process to unfold is the process I'll follow; but right now the process is, "Don't save seats."
Blake
PS: If 2, 3, 5, 10, ... teams at an event habitually form a large group (a mafia?
) of seat-savers who manage to more or less equitably carve up the best/better seats at an event(s) year after year, or at multiple locations in one year; they shouldn't wear out their arms out patting themselves on the back for being gracious to one another.
At a 48 team event, those cooperative savers just told the other 46, 45, 43, 38, ... teams at the event(s) that those other teams belong in seats the savers are unwilling to sit in. They basically told all those other teams to suck it.
Again, that is the perception large-scale seat-saving creates in many, many, many people.