I am hesistant about hard coding the dates. Depending upon time of year they could permanently lock out cities in warmer climates which would be unfortunate. It could also permanently lock out people who have consistent conflicts at certain times of year.

For picking dates, the way that I think we did it last year seemed to work well. Once we narrowed it down to about 4 dates, we had a poll where each person picked their first choice, second choice, and so on, and there was also a "Which dates can you not attend?" question. We gave each date one point for each last place vote, two points for second-to-last, and so on, and then subtracted a point for each person who said they could not attend that date. Most points wins.

It's the narrowing down that causes a lot of angst. The need for flexibility is why I suggested hard-coding three dates - we could go up to 4, and use the preferential voting we used last year.

Frankly, I understand that there will always be scheduling issues and a need to change things up, but we need a system better than our current dartboard method.

It's the narrowing down that causes a lot of angst.

I thought that worked out OK this year -- didn't we start out with a "Which of these dates could you attend?" poll, and that got it down to five or so?

including Oracle.

Oh good lord.

If one date is too scary, then I definitely think that two or three should be decided on.

It's the narrowing down that causes a lot of angst. The need for flexibility is why I suggested hard-coding three dates - we could go up to 4, and use the preferential voting we used last year.

Or what Juliana said.

This would alleviate the frustrations that come up every year. If we had, for example, one May date and two June dates hard coded, we could basically include dates used in previous F2Fs without feeling like we're re-inventing the wheel every year.

(Yes, I'm including the May option in there because we still had great attendance at May F2Fs and I'd like the chance to actually attend one again. Some day.)

One May and two June, or two of each, with a proscribed preferential voting mechanism as the first step? I think that's a great idea.

Aside from the cost, the date is the deciding factor for most folks - well ahead of the city - so that works too. If we can settle on a date early then we can judge what cities work best for those.

(Yes, I'm including the May option in there because we still had great attendance at May F2Fs and I'd like the chance to actually attend one again. Some day.)

May dates definately had their perks. I'd like to see them back in the mix as well. I know it makes it tough/impossible for some teachers, but it opens it up to some other people. We should all be able to get a turn eventually.

A May option would be of the good.

Could we look at early May, for May dates? Would maybe kill two birds with one stone since it would be cooler for those who like that and won't be right on top of finals and graduation for those with kids or who work in education.