GOL is based on the idea of sharing and trust, making Geneva a better and more-fun place to be.
that's a great start into a journey of mutual friendship and friendliness.

but as soon as something is free, people do not take it seriously, changing their priorities on the spot being too busy to …

another problem: e-mails with pseudo and no pics are a very easy, impersonal way to communicate a last-second drop out for any reason.
not cool.


someone suggested to pillory no-shows?
maybe that's a way to go, although it is not a very friendly one.


a couple of ideas (these are just ideas; some might go against the spirit of GOL)

- maybe organizers may rate no-shows, just like on e-bay where buyers may rate the sellers' quality. no-shows get the bad rating and have it incrusted into their profile. organizers may see if this person is serious or repetitively not showing up.


- there's a law in california: “three strikes and you're out!”
abusive use of pleading in court may result in loosing all rights.
i.e. someone who doesn't show up several times will loose all rights in participating in members' activities. (i don't think that's a way to go)


- charge money for the event (not really GOL-like). as soon as money is involved, people become more careful and will respect the events.
normally when we do have a special event at innercityoga (i.e. special guest, workshops,…) we do charge money. nevertheless, 10% of people will not show up. we are used to this.
if you are a professional, there's no problem with charging money for the service you provide, although most activities include private events, where it becomes more delicate to charge money.


- ask for a deposit: prior to the event, a deposit (25.– or more) will be asked for. no shows will loose it, participants will receive it back after thhe event. in this case the event would be free.


i am not certain if there's an appropriate method to prevent no shows:
being concerned by a “no-show” event, i'd think twice to repeat the experience, resulting in punishing the people who showed up.

good luck with finding a solution.


poweryogi, May 21, 2006 @ 18:28

Then it is only polite and respectful to inform the event organiser that you can't make it. There is no excuse even for those that have something come up where they can no longer make it to inform people that they cannot make it.

I think a rating like on ebay would be a very good idea

Simon
DJ_Symcard, May 21, 2006 @ 19:03

Sorry, I don't have the solution for the problem you are addressing (maybe just an idea, see bellow). But I'm looking forward if someone has. I have hypotheses on the reasons however.

I have indeed faced it several time as event organiser. Other related problems are "last minute cancellation" and "conditional booking". By this, I mean receiving a phone call when you are already at the event, or emails like "if it's raining / if my boss allows me to leave / if I'm not too tired /...(aka if I've got nothing better to do) I'll join". For a party in a club, it's fine, for a dinner at a restaurant, more or less all right, for a cheese fondue at one's place, very annoying. I had to call neighbours to join us for dinner once… which was fun and friendly finally :-D

Ok, we all know that we have busy lives. Shit happens. Unexpected events can occur. But I don't believe this is where the problem lies. I don't think asking for money could make a real difference either. It could event be worse. "They'll keep my money anyway, I'm free not to come" might be the overall answer to this.

My feeling is, most people don't show up because they assume their absence won't be noticed; a "so many other people will come anyway" attitude, so to say. Right, sometimes, an event is marked "FULL" very fast. Yes, many people were rejected. But no, they are NOT waiting to be called at the last minute to replace someone who just cancelled. Yes, among 20 people, 1 missing isn't that much. But if 10 persons choose to be that "one" at the same time, this makes a big difference. This should be explained and understood.

Second thing; most of us have grown up in a consumistic culture. We are used to consume goods and services selfishly for our own pleasure, "because we're worth it". Get and dispose goods as soon as we don't fancy them anymore. Zap from one TV program / place / project / job and even couple as soon as it's not cool enough. People might not realise then how much efforts it may take to put up some events, even "simple" ones, and treat GOL as a service among others. They should understand GOL is not a supermarket, but people voluntarily making up events for their own and other people's pleasure. Members should be aware of this BEFORE registering.

I am absolutely not in favour of a "bad point" system. Some people might have severe chronic diseases, elderly parents, hectic family or professional lives. Someone very valuable could then have to cancel 3 events in a raw, for reasons totally out of his control, but being very sorry about it and politely calling to say so. Another one could come to one event out of two, just because he doesn't care enough. Why should the first one be punished, and not the second ? Do we want GOL members banning trials ? I hope not.

Just an idea: a positive and friendly way to make people more reliable could be to send the list of registered members for a given event to all of them, prior to the event. So, people could see:
- that they are really expected to come (no "oh, I wasn't sure you got my message" excuses)
- how many persons are coming ("hum, I'm one out of 6, I should better go")
- who is coming ("Jesus, we've been wanting to meet each other for so long, I come for sure !")
- who didn't come. Some persons did ask me "why isn't XYZ here tonight ?". My answer was "I don't know. He registered and didn't cancel, it's all I can say". I guess this is enough "pressure" and "public shame".

Hope it helps.


PS: and as I know I have been doing some "conditional booking" myself in the past, I want to apologize to the persons with whom I've been doing so. My main problem is, I always believe I'll be able to manage with all my activities and save some time to come… and fail to succeed. Sorry again.
Hobbes, May 22, 2006 @ 13:37

and what about organizers who cancel at the last minute leaving all the others high and dry. i think that is even worse.
people plan to show up at an event and then it is cancelled.
( unless of course there aren't any participants at all )
epicure, May 23, 2006 @ 12:57

I guess that people who make countless efforts to put up an event won't cancel it unless they really have imperative reasons to do so. Don't you agree ?

Most people probably don't even relise how much it takes to put up an event. For some projects, the process goes though all of this :
- having the idea
- evaluating the feasability; looking for feedback on interest, ideas, team co-leaders, available structures, evaluating cost, etc.
- finding and setting a date, place and time
- posting the add
- registering people (optional or definitive), answering private questions and sending a confirmation email to registered members
- amending the fist post (never precise enough)
- rejecting latecomers
- getting some cancelations
- getting in touch back with formaly rejected members
- receiving numerous phonecalls form persons who have lost their printed email
- enjoying the event
- posting a review and pictures, answering questions and emails from people who attanded (congratulations, lost&found, etc)
- planning the next one !... :D

Don't take it wrong. All this is cool, enjoyable and rewarding for people how like to manage. No complain involved here. But, as a matter of fact, it's work too.

On the side, I sometimes felt ashamed for people attending dinners at private places who didn't offer to help collecting the dishes. Yes... it's a swiss thing. But c'mon, who likes being left alone in a messy appartment with dirty plates, glasses and cutelry all over ? This could prevent people welcoming others again I'm afraid.
Hobbes, May 23, 2006 @ 15:55

Easy for organisers, just like the airlines do... assume a percentage won't show up and plan accordingly.

Its easier for organises to plan this than to try get a site policy and the restrictions that apply in effect.

The site is a tool not a technical judge or jury system.
accxess, May 24, 2006 @ 14:37

which makes it hard to plan events given these huge swings.

And it's 100% true the site is not a judging system. But we do want that members who decide to join GoL and its community feel and act with some community trust, beyond just using a tool...


Nir Ofek, May 24, 2006 @ 22:41

Hi Folks

what about a simple generic template tag in every event posting that basically gets the message accross in a friendly way. i.e. please only book if you are willing to turn up hail rain or shine. Please contact the organiser if you can't make it, etc etc

my two cents

Cheers

Niall
Niall_OG, May 25, 2006 @ 15:59

Here's my stone to the building. How about if we could see on the member activities list ho is registered for the activity. So everybody will know who to expect to see. Then when the activity is over the activity master could just click a little box next to every one that showed up for everyone to see. The ones that did not show up get credited for not showing up on a secret counter. When that counter reaches... let's say 3 no show they get a kind e-mail from the GOL staff asking them for explanaitions. Without putting them on a wall of shame, but still monitoring them.

Basicaly I'm for the carrot instead of the stick. Reward the ones who show up and deal with the no shows on a private basis.

By all means money should not be involved in this matter. A good way to reward the very active members of GOL would be to give them free access to special GOL events.

Laurent
Laurent_68, May 26, 2006 @ 13:08

The concept of using a tag, or another reminder for members to show up, was tried and did not work. Organisers often send all planned participants a reminder mail, stressing it's important to show up. Still, despite this, sometimes many folks do not show up.

We need to find a way to build on members' sense of 'sticking to commitments', but at the same time finding a system that stops people from abusing the system...


Nir Ofek, May 26, 2006 @ 18:27

...and I think that for activities which anyway members would have to pay for (to cover the organisers cost), this would be a good solution.

We're still digging a bit more to undersstand if there are also other ways, and to understand how pre-paying will go with the GoL spirit we're trying to create.
Nir Ofek, May 26, 2006 @ 18:31

Let's say I want to organise a pasta party at my place next friday. Should I postpone it to next week so people have time to send me money on my bank account. Money I'll give back anyway, because I'm inviting them ?
Fair enough for realy cotsy events (massage courses, expensive wine testing, hotel booking, etc.), if really needed. But I guess - I might be wrong - that most noshows happen within free events like drinks out, dinners, spot activities, etc. Doesn't it ?

A public "who's going to be there" could potentially bring some poeple to do "cutie / handsome blokes hunting", instead of "nice event registering", don't you think so ? But registered persons should get the participants list together with their registration confirmation.
Hobbes, May 27, 2006 @ 07:50

organisers would get the choice if to pre-charge or not, cos - as you say - ensuring people show up is more important on some event types than on others.

We're not sure at all we will go this route tho - we're now trying to see what ideas will come up.

Nir Ofek, May 29, 2006 @ 14:15

If you're easily able to maintain a list of no-shows for events maybe this could be available to the organizers, so they could check their list of names against it and decide if they want to contact anyone with a poor attendance record.
Ellen, Jun 8, 2006 @ 12:24

Thanks Ellen - we're working on implementing this.
Nir Ofek, Jun 8, 2006 @ 16:57

I agree with the wait list option. Please, Please, Please don't be like the Swiss system where for every tiny mistake or wrong turn (that one cost me 230 francs!) you make you get punished. Simply allow 90 people to sign up for an event that only has 80 places. Almost always people cancel or can't come for unforseen reasons. Young professionals have to kiss up and work harder (ok, maybe not the UN people, he he he ). It's not because we miss out on purpose! You could also list names on the site of people going to the event. Allow an option to remove your name from the list so others can replace you to quickly fill up space.
nancy, Jun 25, 2006 @ 15:17

Thanks Nancy.

MOst organisers already allow for a 10-20% no show 'margin'. But there are 2 problems here:
- the no shows vary from 10% to 50%, so planning is extremly hard. Infact, no shows can actually ruin whole events.
- there are some members who are 'serial no shows', tending to always be the ones who register but rarely show up.

Any ideas on how to solve this are welcome.
Nir Ofek, Jun 25, 2006 @ 20:05

I think this idea of Hobbes is a really good way to go. It is positive for all the reasons suggested. I would personally never be so rude as to confirm and not show up but knowing who else was going to a specific event would make me more comfortable as far as knowing who I was looking for (event in a public place). As you say it would get the word around quietly as to who didn't show up.
Kola, Aug 28, 2006 @ 01:33