| Subject: Re: ivda function |
Author:
Tim
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 11:17:34 05/30/03 Fri
In reply to:
Trinity
's message, "Re: ivda function" on 00:42:27 05/30/03 Fri
Sam,
As far as I am aware, there is not a depth of ill-feeling towards the Offbeat. The suggestion was made because the following were believed:
1) That time was needed for the timetable (that is definitely true).
2) That reducing the number was not a good or fair solution, for a number of reasons (I don't personally agree, but that seemed to be the view of the GCM).
3) That 1:45 was long enough to put together a decent routine. This question was EXPLICITLY asked, and all the people there, including a number of universities very much attached to the offbeat, answered that yes, this was long enough.
As I've said above, if there are better proposal for achieving 1), then everyone will be open to them.
But this is NOT an attack on the offbeat, merely a practical way of finding time for other, more important events. Whilst Offbeat clearly is important, given the nature of IVDC it has to be lower down the list of priorities (see the discussion of 1.1.1).
Of course, some people don't like the offbeat at all, but they are in a minority, from the sounds of things.
>>this might be controversial but since I'm currently in
>>Canada I guess I'm far enough away for noone to hit me
>>:-)
>
>That's what you think, little girl.....>:-)
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 