| |
Mike Walsh wrote:
> The decision I have come to is essentially this: NCLUG will welcome members
> under the age of 18 (maybe 16 but for now I am thinking 18) as something I
> am referring to as, for lack of a better term, associate or junior members.
> These members will be welcome at meetings (if we ever have any) provided
> some other law doesn't prevent them (like meeting at a bar or some other
> similar venue) from attending. The one caveat will be that these members
> will have to be "sponsored". A sponsor could be another NCLUG member or a
> parent or guardian and will have to be in attendance. This may create the
> "bored" chaperon situation but I am willing to try it and see how it works
> out. The allowance for a member to sponsor a younger member could also
> alleviate the bored chaperon without eliminating the accountability.
>
> Why allow younger members? Were it not for my son, I might not have ever
> gotten back into this hobby. I am not going to exclude him (he is five)
> from any events therefore all kids have to be welcome. There are a number
> of other adults (who are not active on LUGNET but lurk from time to time)
> who are interested in NCLUG solely because their children would be welcome.
> I see this as an opportunity to get more adults involved in our hobby by
> providing them an opportunity to do something with their kids. The way I
> see it there are a whole lot of closet LEGO enthusiasts who would be willing
> to get together for an event if their kids were involved.
>
> The whole subject of exceptions is (IMHO) a bad path to go down. All it
> will do is create popularity contests and bad feelings. Rules are much
> easier to enforce and defend.
This sounds like a good policy to me. The idea of a sponsor allows a
junior member to attend if they are able to convince at least one person
to give them a chance (and contribute sufficiently to the activities
that the rest of the members don't convince the sponsor(s) to rescind
their sponsorship). This does still leave things somewhat open to
"popularity contests", but much less so than having a whole organization
vote an individual in or out (and honestly, who would want to be at an
activity which no one else wanted you there?)
One interesting thing I just thought of on why NELUG may be going down a
different path with respect to youth members. NELUG is one of the few
groups which didn't start from a strong interest in trains (BayLUG is
another I think, I don't know about GMLUG, how closely tied to GMLTC is
it?).
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Age limitations
|
| FUT lugnet.org (...) Well I don't know about the other "True" LUGs but I don't think being a LUG as opposed to an LTC had anything to do with it. I think it mostly came down to the demographics of our group at the begining. Like Todd pointed out I (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nclug, lugnet.org)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Age limitations
|
| "Frank Filz" <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:Fx5tJo.F84@lugnet.com... [... snipped ... ] (...) so (...) I just returned from my parents house (Northern Virginia - I did make it to the LEGO Outlet, you just gotta like the scratch and (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.us.nclug)
|
258 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
