Re: Amalgamation: 2nd draft -- 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: Amalgamation: 2nd draft

Author:
Tim

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

Date Posted: 13:53:09 05/21/03 Wed
In reply to: Ali 's message, "Re: Amalgamation: 2nd draft" on 13:36:49 05/21/03 Wed

I have no problem with 2.8.1.5.2 or 2.8.1.5.3. However, I think the wording of 2.8.1.5.3 should be changed to place the burden of proof onto the member society wanting to enter couples into amalgamated teams. I prefer:

2.8.1.5.1 In the case that they have incomplete A,B,C or D teams, member societies may enter couples or individuals together as part of amalgamated teams. This shall be organised centrally by the standing committee. Couples or individuals should only be joined into amalgamated teams once the member society has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the standing committee that:
1) All reasonable measures have been taken to fill the incomplete team from within the member society.
2) The incomplete team has no chance of making a round in the second division (or better).
3) The couples or individuals applied on behalf of are part of an incomplete A,B,C or D team.

And I think we should add

2.8.1.5.4 No university may enter more than 16 couples in the IVDC team match.

And add to 2.8.1.5.2 The standing committee shall agree an appropriate name for the amalgamated teams with the member societies

>Just what we needed, another post!
>
>How's this for a draft? (please comment on the wording
>rather than the rules themselves!)
>
>2.8.1.5.1 One or more 'Amalgamated Teams' shall be
>organised by the hosts as part of the entry procedure.
>Team Captains may nominate couples or individuals from
>their Member Society for inclusion if all the
>following are true:
>
>1) they are, for any reason, part of an incomplete
>team (whether A,B,C or D).
>2) all reasonable measures have been taken to fill the
>team.
>3) the incomplete team have no reasonable chance, in
>the opinion of the Standing Committee, of proceeding
>through one round of division 2 (or better).
>4) the nominating university cannot enter four
>complete teams.
>
>2.8.1.5.2 Nominations shall be submitted on or before
>the Wednesday preceding IVDC, though later inclusions
>may be made at the discretion of the Standing
>Committee. The Standing Committee shall consider all
>nominations and select couples or individuals for
>inclusion in Amalgamated Teams. Where possible,
>amalgamations shall be made according to geographical
>proximity and shall keep members of the same
>university in the same amalgamated team.
>
>2.8.1.5.3 Members of Amalgamated Teams may not dance
>for their Member Society for the duration of the Team
>Match and all their results will count only for the
>Amalgamated Team. No amalgamated team's results shall
>count towards an overall placing.

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