Kate, yep - prom onsite is at the top of the list to ask about. All part of the options - hence, gathering how people feel about it.

I'm not a math major, but the sum on this one seems simple enough: the lower the total cost per attendee, the higher the attendance percentage. Options. Options are our friend. As many as I can find.

What JenP said in regard to old hash. Not to re-hash anything but I'm pretty much in total agreement with what she said about last year.

New stuff: I'm flexible with prom being on or off site and I'm flexible with dates. Whatever allows for as many people as possible to attend, that's what I'd like to work toward.

Ok, here's my thinking:

I have, from my initial post, been proposing a "Hell, yes/Sure/No" ballot, which would be helpful in getting initial numbers. I think, if we do a ranking instead, we need to make sure it is possible to only vote for some of the dates/locations, so, if a person can't do one of the places, they can, essentially, vote "no" on it. My ideal solution would be the "Hell, yes/Sure/No" with the ability to vote for a favorite, in case there is a tie.

I also strongly think we need to hold off on making price-ceiling decisions until after the date vote, so we know how many people are still in the "planning on coming" crew.

Whatever allows for as many people as possible to attend, that's what I'd like to work toward.

I think we're probably all in agreement on this point.

It seems like either preferential voting/ranking or the extra verbiage that's been mentioned will help with that.

Debet, if you want help with drafting the ballot or reporting results, I'd be happy to jump in. All the horses in this particular race would be winners for me.

Thanks, -t, I may take you up on that.

What if we did run-offs? I brought this up last year too late so now I'm doing it nice and early.

If we're again split roughly four ways, maybe we could re-vote on the top two. That might give us a more accurate picture of what people can/will do.

Trudy, for sanity reasons, I'd rather do a single ballot to start out, unless/until we need a run-off. We can set a threshold for a run-off, if that would make people more comfortable?

Old school hip hop!

umm, no. I think the song has to be more than 7years old for it to be "old school"

Lyra, it's a good point and one I'd already considered (the exacerbation issue, that is). But the very last thing it would affect would be the food prep - my entire object would be ease and low cost.

not to mention that there would be a ton of buffistas, myself included, who could step up and assist. Hell, I'm planning to anyway.

I also strongly think we need to hold off on making price-ceiling decisions until after the date vote, so we know how many people are still in the "planning on coming" crew.

Nodding like a bobblehead, over here.

In terms of the location vote, I really have no preference in how it's done; I've got cities I love, cities I don't love, and climates the multiple sclerosis doesn't love (yet another hardcore no for NO last year for me - it's the top city in America neurologists tell MS patients to avoid for climate reasons). But I do like the idea of tiered voting, if it's at all close.

I think the song has to be more than 7years old for it to be "old school"

Consider the source...