Subject:
|
Re: NELUG meeting report from 12/16/1999
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us
|
Date:
|
Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:13:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
775 times
|
| |
|
|
In message <FMw5p4.xL@lugnet.com>, "Eric Kingsley" writes: Our
> Connecticut members also were kind enough to bring along some 2000
> LEGO sets to the meeting. We all had a lot of fun looking at the
> boxes and checking out the models.
I'm thinking, "Yow! That's an awful lot of boxes! What did they
bring them in, a truck?"
> Overall it looks like 2000 is going to be a good year and a
> step in the right direction for TLC.
Oh, _model_ _year_ 2000. Not two thousand sets. Now I get it.
> 4. We are not a babysitting service - OK don't throw stone's here we
> know you don't need babysitters but once exceptions start being made
> this is where this can lead. We don't want to end up having parents
> dropping off their kids for a couple of hours and expect us to
> monitor them for free.
Quite right--as a parent (whose children have friends whose parents
may find an impromptu "play date" particularly convenient at times)
I can confirm that this is a very justifiable concern.
But at the cost of putting in my 2 cents _after_ the meeting (yes,
before would have been more helpful, but I didn't think of this until
reading the above remarks), it occurs to me that one reason I find
it difficult to attend NELUG meetings is the need to set up babysitting
arrangements for my own kids. Now these are the kids who have taken over
most of the LEGO in the house (though I've managed at least to keep them
from breaking up the LEGO Valdez entirely) but they are clearly much too
young (8 and 10) to be NELUG members.
What I wonder then is if under-18s could be permitted to _accompany_ a
parent who is a NELUG member, possibly with additional conditions.
Personally, this wouldn't be an ideal solution for me because my kids
would still limit my own participation, but it might be better than
nothing on occasion--and I suspect that one or two of those who are
asking for "junior" membership might be able to convince a parent to
become a NELUG member and let them tag along to meetings. This may
sound a little peculiar but it does have the advantage of making the
parent responsible for the child both in the legal and in a very
immediate practical sense, as well as drawing a firm line on formal
NELUG membership.
On the other hand, an absolute prohibition on the presence of
under-18s, would prevent me from ever hosting a meeting because where
would I send my kids off to at that hour? :-)
--
David A. Karr (karr@shore.net)
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: NELUG meeting report from 12/16/1999
|
| (...) I won't speak to the first issue, but we had some discussion about the second. Part of the problem is that it'd suck to have parent chaperones sitting around in the back of the meeting feeling bored. And really, it's not conducive to the kind (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.org.us)
| | | Re: NELUG meeting report from 12/16/1999
|
| (...) I would truly hope that someone hosting a meeting would be allowed to have their children present so long as they behave (which should be standard hosting protocol for ANY social event at a home - it's up to the parents if they want to allow (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.org.us)
|
Message is in Reply To:
10 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
