Re: Naming and shaming -- universitydancesport.com forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1], 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ]

Subject: Re: Naming and shaming

Author:
Karen

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 17:04:12 10/20/03 Mon
In reply to: Ian 's message, "Re: Naming and shaming" on 16:48:47 10/20/03 Mon

Oxford do not need to go and tie in their social dancers to come and do competitions for them. There are easily enough people at beginners trials each year.

Do I recall this correctly (or has this been changed) that beginners who first competed at the precious varsity match were also allowed to enter at warwick?

"eg rule that says Beginners event
>should be people not to have competed pre October. I
>read that as beginner level competitors only - ie if
>you're advanced you shouldn't enter, AND not competed
>before October. Oxford, to take an example, might go
>for the loophole and put all their "advanced social"
>dancers into the event - its bad spirit and they
>shouldn't do it

I assume the below is also true for Oxford (as Oxford seems to be the example frequently brought up by Ian), if their A-somethings are terrible at their opposite category. In which case, ignore my earlier post.

"PS similarly, if you think xyz-small-uni A-jive should
>>not have to do open A-tango, then the rules should
>>have some provision for that (e.g. SC decides on
>>application).
>
>The rules don't say that, but people don't object in
>reality if you really are absolutely abismal in the
>other discipline"

P.S.: Are great latin dancers really that terrible at ballroom? There have been some doing extremely well at tango before (Ellis and Indika, Dave and George...)...

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Great ballroom ok latin	Ian	17:09:07 10/20/03 Mon
On the subject of pedantry -- Pedant, 12:13:40 10/25/03 Sat