Neu-Al Images wrote:
Actually it's large enough to do some pretty nice shooting there

You know, bringing in a backdrop and a couple of lights wouldn't be the worst idea in the world...

Neu-Al Images wrote:
I had a good time and it was nice seeing everyone.
The large private party room made for easy mingling and conversation so good call on that for sure. Actually it's large enough to do some pretty nice shooting there
Thanks again. Alex

It's been noted, and after we're there a few times I plan to talk to the management, see if they'd be ok with a backdrop and light being set up   A few others suggested it as well...

Great minds...

Windyphoto wrote:
You know, bringing in a backdrop and a couple of lights wouldn't be the worst idea in the world...

It is something we need permission to do though, and as I said, once we're there a few more times I plan on asking about it.  I can't imagine it being a problem, but you never know...

Caity B wrote:
Very cool about them willing to be our perma-location! Excellent indeed!

Yes   I'm quite pleased!

And again, I'll stress that there is to be no formal shooting (candids are fine, but no lights + backdrop) until I check with the venue after a few times we're there.  I'm not sure if that is ok with the venue, and I would prefer to talk with them after we've built a good reputation with them.

Rachel Jay wrote:

Yes   I'm quite pleased!

And again, I'll stress that there is to be no formal shooting (candids are fine, but no lights + backdrop) until I check with the venue after a few times we're there.  I'm not sure if that is ok with the venue, and I would prefer to talk with them after we've built a good reputation with them.

YES MA'AM!

Psycho Bitch wrote:
Canceling is better than just blowing it off...sorry I had a family issue...Not my fault. But if no one wants to "take me seriously" because I care about my family more than modeling...thats fine with me.

Not that it matters much as far as the meet goes anymore but I can vouch for Psycho, I've worked with her in the past and I know she wouldn't bail unless there was good cause.

Psycho Bitch wrote:
Canceling is better than just blowing it off...sorry I had a family issue...Not my fault. But if no one wants to "take me seriously" because I care about my family more than modeling...thats fine with me.

CJ Crave wrote:
Not that it matters much as far as the meet goes anymore but I can vouch for Psycho, I've worked with her in the past and I know she wouldn't bail unless there was good cause.

Nobody has said otherwise, Cory.

Greg Kolack wrote:
Can I suggest something?

These M&Gs are suppose to be a relaxed time and a social gathering. If someone wants to do some shooting and the management is cool with with it, that's great. But the point is to simply have a laid back time with everyone.

This thread is kind of turning into a bitch fest with different cliques of who showed and who didn't, who knew about it and who didn't, etc. I would like to think we are all above that.

While I can certainly understand frustration in people not showing up at the last minute - not meaning just models here - and I and I'm sure everyone else who comes appreciates Rachel's work on this, these M&Gs are not critical to our existance. As a friend of mine says - it's not brain surgery.

So I would like to suggest a fresh start - let's let go of the past animosities and look to the future. For those who say they are going to come and don't - individually we can note it the way we want, but let's rise above it and not act like some of the people do in the Soapbox threads.

As the saying goes..."Be nice - don't fight!"

Does that mean you're gonna pass when we schedule the pie fight at the next one?  I thought better of you...

::chuckle::

Gallery By Hal wrote:

Does that mean you're gonna pass when we schedule the pie fight at the next one?  I thought better of you...

::chuckle::

I didn't say we shouldn't act out our fetishes!

Greg Kolack wrote:

I didn't say we shouldn't act out our fetishes!

Whew- that's a relief.  You had me worried for a minute there... 

Rachel Jay wrote:
Here's the M&G schedule for a little over 6 months into the future:

http://racheljay.wordpress.com/mg-schedule/

Wow...

Greg Kolack wrote:
Can I suggest something?

These M&Gs are suppose to be a relaxed time and a social gathering. If someone wants to do some shooting and the management is cool with with it, that's great. But the point is to simply have a laid back time with everyone.

I agree.  It's less fun when one has to constantly be "on" and can't be socializing, talking about shoots, etc.  That was a huge problem for me at the event in Lake Zurich--I hardly got a change to talk to anyone I wasn't shooting with, because I was so darn busy shooting. 

Greg Kolack wrote:
This thread is kind of turning into a bitch fest with different cliques of who showed and who didn't, who knew about it and who didn't, etc. I would like to think we are all above that.

I'll agree with you on this as well.  I have nothing more to say regarding it... so moving on...

Greg Kolack wrote:
While I can certainly understand frustration in people not showing up at the last minute - not meaning just models here - and I and I'm sure everyone else who comes appreciates Rachel's work on this, these M&Gs are not critical to our existance. As a friend of mine says - it's not brain surgery.

Yes, you're right, it's not always models who don't show or cancel at the last minute.  That just so happened to be the case this time around. 

I appreciate the, uh, appreciation.  But you are right.  They're not critical... I mean, how long did we all get along without them?   But they're fun, they're phenomenal for networking, and are a great way for models to meet with photographers before shooting (something many suggest to do).  And I have yet to leave a M&G without at least one shoot offer

Greg Kolack wrote:
So I would like to suggest a fresh start - let's let go of the past animosities and look to the future. For those who say they are going to come and don't - individually we can note it the way we want, but let's rise above it and not act like some of the people do in the Soapbox threads.

As the saying goes..."Be nice - don't fight!"

I have actually had people request that the no-shows/cancellations be marked accordingly--the idea being that 'public shaming' would get them to show (or at least post that they still exist and apologize for not showing).  I've had people message me privately about no-shows as well.  I also know some folks take note of it privately. 

This was the first time I tried doing it, and honestly, I don't particularly like it.  Sure, it lets others know at a glance who showed and who didn't, but... I'm not sure it's the proper way to go about it.  I'm not sure what IS the proper way to deal with no shows, or how to get people to show up.  I wish I could say that turnout is on the rise, but it's not.  It wavers by event, it seems, which is rather frustrating for the geek in me.  Sure, it's great to have a group of regulars come out and have a few beers and some grub, but I imagine that that group of regulars is getting sick of shootin' the shit with the same old faces, and would like to see some new faces. 

Anyway, now that we have a regular venue, I'm not as tied down to this as I was.  Anyone can post a thread about it (all the info is on a page in my blog, which can just be copied and pasted), I don't have to go if I have something going on that weekend (which will likely be the case for at least 2 future events), and I'm not stuck feeling like an asshole if I book space at a venue for 40 people and 10 show up.

Rachel Jay wrote:
I have actually had people request that the no-shows/cancellations be marked accordingly--the idea being that 'public shaming' would get them to show (or at least post that they still exist and apologize for not showing).  I've had people message me privately about no-shows as well.  I also know some folks take note of it privately. 

This was the first time I tried doing it, and honestly, I don't particularly like it.  Sure, it lets others know at a glance who showed and who didn't, but... I'm not sure it's the proper way to go about it.  I'm not sure what IS the proper way to deal with no shows, or how to get people to show up.  I wish I could say that turnout is on the rise, but it's not.  It wavers by event, it seems, which is rather frustrating for the geek in me.  Sure, it's great to have a group of regulars come out and have a few beers and some grub, but I imagine that that group of regulars is getting sick of shootin' the shit with the same old faces, and would like to see some new faces.

I just don't see any reason to "shame" someone for not coming to a social gathering. It's different if it's a shoot, but it's a couple of hours to hang out with people. I think if we start pointing fingers and "shaming" people it will start to appear as an elitist event, and new people won't want to come, which kind of defeats the purpose.

I think you have to look at this in regards to models the way I look at internet models attitude toward modeling - it is an exciting thing for them to think about doing, but when it comes down to it, they really aren't fully (or even partially) invested in it, so they don't take it all that seriously. So why would they want to come to a networking event to meet a bunch or strangers when they ultimately aren't interested in doing it? Plus, in comparison, models are much younger than photographers, so the committment factor seems to be much less.

I don't know if there is anything that can be done to turn this into a mega-event. I personally don't mind seeing the old faces every couple of months. Which brings up another point - have you thought that by doing this monthly, may actually end up lowering the number of people who show up? My guess would be having it every other month may work better - absence makes the heart grow fonder!

Greg Kolack wrote:
I just don't see any reason to "shame" someone for not coming to a social gathering. It's different if it's a shoot, but it's a couple of hours to hang out with people. I think if we start pointing fingers and "shaming" people it will start to appear as an elitist event, and new people won't want to come, which kind of defeats the purpose.

I agree with you, and won't be crossing no-shows off anymore.  I do try to have an open mind about people's suggestions though... because despite popular belief, I really have no idea what the hell I'm doing

Greg Kolack wrote:
I think you have to look at this in regards to models the way I look at internet models attitude toward modeling - it is an exciting thing for them to think about doing, but when it comes down to it, they really aren't fully (or even partially) invested in it, so they don't take it all that seriously. So why would they want to come to a networking event to meet a bunch or strangers when they ultimately aren't interested in doing it? Plus, in comparison, models are much younger than photographers, so the committment factor seems to be much less.

Yea, I guess I'm not your average Internet Model, so I don't see things that way...

Greg Kolack wrote:
I don't know if there is anything that can be done to turn this into a mega-event. I personally don't mind seeing the old faces every couple of months. Which brings up another point - have you thought that by doing this monthly, may actually end up lowering the number of people who show up? My guess would be having it every other month may work better - absence makes the heart grow fonder!

It's an option to do it every other month.  The thing with doing it monthly is that it's easier to remember.  I can easily imagine getting angry emails from people that they showed up Saturday at 7 and no one was there OMGWTF?!!!!111 because they didn't read that it wasn't until the following month's Saturday. 

Of course, there will always be people who don't read...

For now, let's keep it at monthly and we'll see how it goes.  Maybe in the warmer months we go to every other month, so there's more shooting time for those who want to be outside till late.

Rachel Jay wrote:
For now, let's keep it at monthly and we'll see how it goes.  Maybe in the warmer months we go to every other month, so there's more shooting time for those who want to be outside till late.

Works for me.

Greg Kolack wrote:
I just don't see any reason to "shame" someone for not coming to a social gathering. It's different if it's a shoot, but it's a couple of hours to hang out with people. I think if we start pointing fingers and "shaming" people it will start to appear as an elitist event, and new people won't want to come, which kind of defeats the purpose.

I think you have to look at this in regards to models the way I look at internet models attitude toward modeling - it is an exciting thing for them to think about doing, but when it comes down to it, they really aren't fully (or even partially) invested in it, so they don't take it all that seriously. So why would they want to come to a networking event to meet a bunch or strangers when they ultimately aren't interested in doing it? Plus, in comparison, models are much younger than photographers, so the committment factor seems to be much less.

I don't know if there is anything that can be done to turn this into a mega-event. I personally don't mind seeing the old faces every couple of months. Which brings up another point - have you thought that by doing this monthly, may actually end up lowering the number of people who show up? My guess would be having it every other month may work better - absence makes the heart grow fonder!

You make some good points, Greg, but respectfully, I disagree as to the importance of these “social gatherings.” 

Yes, they are about kickin’ back and chillin’ with friends new and old while sharing food and drink and laughter, but they are also about networking and finding new people & faces to work with, for & learn from.  (And now that we have a “home” for our Meets, they may very well turn into shoots as well, if the venue is willing to oblige…)

As you say, many who sign on to MM aren’t fully “invested” in the modeling industry, having signed up for the “thrill” of it all.  So be it – that’s simply the way it is and there’s nothing to be done about it.

On the other hand, these Meets present an ideal & inexpensive opportunity to determine who may be reliable by publicly demonstrating who honors their commitment, who makes an effort (& when) to advise of a change in plan, as well as who can’t be bothered to extend that simple courtesy. 

I don't believe that a public demonstration of minimal courtesy - or lack thereof - should be in any way detrimental to attendance in the long run.  Flaking is as much about poor communication as it is about simple attendance.  If publicly acknowledging an individuals actions will help to iimprove communication & attendance, is that a bad thing?

Greg Kolack wrote:
I just don't see any reason to "shame" someone for not coming to a social gathering. It's different if it's a shoot, but it's a couple of hours to hang out with people. I think if we start pointing fingers and "shaming" people it will start to appear as an elitist event, and new people won't want to come, which kind of defeats the purpose.

Rachel Jay wrote:
I agree with you, and won't be crossing no-shows off anymore.  I do try to have an open mind about people's suggestions though... because despite popular belief, I really have no idea what the hell I'm doing

Hmmm.  Well if crossing off the “No-Shows” is now bad, how do you feel about BOLDING or otherwise acknowledging the “Show-ups” as an alternative? 

Surely holding someone up for praise can’t be considered negative, can it?

Gallery By Hal wrote:
Hmmm.  Well if crossing off the “No-Shows” is now bad, how do you feel about BOLDING or otherwise acknowledging the “Show-ups” as an alternative? 

Surely holding someone up for praise can’t be considered negative, can it?

But that does nearly exactly what crossing no-shows off does, in a way, doesn't it?

Gallery By Hal wrote:
Hmmm.  Well if crossing off the “No-Shows” is now bad, how do you feel about BOLDING or otherwise acknowledging the “Show-ups” as an alternative? 

Surely holding someone up for praise can’t be considered negative, can it?

Rachel Jay wrote:
But that does nearly exactly what crossing no-shows off does, in a way, doesn't it?

Not exactly.  When you list each individual who "says" they're coming, Rachel you did so by linking their name to their MM profile.

If, after the MEET you then "BOLD" that link (highlighting it) for those who actually showed up as promised, you're making the POSITIVE statement that those individuals are worthy of note & notice.  A very POSITIVE & subtle way of rewarding them with extra attention that no one could possibly find objectionable.

Leaving the No-Shows "UNBOLDED" leaves their name/link with the same status they had when they signed up.  Neither good nor bad - entirely NEUTRAL.

Net result is the same, but you're getting the message across in a POSITIVE rather than NEGATIVE fashion that may very well work better than "publicly shaming" would.  In other words, you're not saying "She's a flake!  Don't work with her!"  Instead, you're saying "I reccomend this one!  She came through!" 

Big difference, no?

Gallery By Hal wrote:
Big difference, no?

I guess it depends on whether you're a "glass half full" or "glass half empty" kinda person...

Gallery By Hal wrote:
Big difference, no?

Rachel Jay wrote:
I guess it depends on whether you're a "glass half full" or "glass half empty" kinda person...

...or how much of a believer you are in positive reinforcement! 

If pointing out bad behavior is to be avoided, does it then follow that there's a problem with reinforcing positive behavior instead?

Gallery By Hal wrote:
...or how much of a believer you are in positive reinforcement! 

If pointing out bad behavior is to be avoided, does it then follow that there's a problem with reinforcing positive behavior instead?

I have a dog.  Of course, she can be bribed with tiny pieces of cheese.  And if she misbehaves, I can smack her on the nose with a rolled up newspaper.

Right, but the way you're pointing out the positive behavior still points out the negative.  It may not LOOK as bad, but it still does the same thing (just in the opposite way).

If I had unlimited supply of money, I'd offer to buy a drink for everyone who showed up (maybe a cookie for anyone under 21).  But I can't afford that... unfortunately.

Gallery By Hal wrote:

Not exactly.  When you list each individual who "says" they're coming, Rachel you did so by linking their name to their MM profile.

If, after the MEET you then "BOLD" that link (highlighting it) for those who actually showed up as promised, you're making the POSITIVE statement that those individuals are worthy of note & notice.  A very POSITIVE & subtle way of rewarding them with extra attention that no one could possibly find objectionable.

Leaving the No-Shows "UNBOLDED" leaves their name/link with the same status they had when they signed up.  Neither good nor bad - entirely NEUTRAL.

Net result is the same, but you're getting the message across in a POSITIVE rather than NEGATIVE fashion that may very well work better than "publicly shaming" would.  In other words, you're not saying "She's a flake!  Don't work with her!"  Instead, you're saying "I reccomend this one!  She came through!" 

Big difference, no?

I still think pointing out in any way who showed up and who didn't seems petty. I don't see why it matters actually. Let everyone make their own decision as to how they want to base reliability.

It's almost as if we would be forming some kind of rating system for reliability - that has been pushed by some people on MM for awhile, and I am strongly against it.

Again, I think if there is any kind of list regarding who showed and who didn't, it would just have the opposite effect of encouraging people to come. If someone invited me to another gathering like this, and I RSVP'd, but was then told if you don't show up we will tell everyone what a loser you are, I'd say fuck that and not want to be part of it.

I still see this as a social event. If others are using this to base reliability standards for future work on, that a personal decision and that's fine. But I still don't we should proclaim ourselves as judges for other people.

Windyphoto wrote:
Or we could just show up to the M&Gs and have fun...

There will be pie next time.

Windyphoto wrote:
If we want positive reinforcement without the shaming, how about if our hostess, who seems to enjoy compiling pointless data, keeps track of who shows up and adds their show-up count to the signup list for the next M&G?

But what happens if someone doesn't show up to a few M&Gs?  Their count goes down... but not because they're unreliable.

In theory, a great idea.  But one that would take way too much effort on my part.  I prefer to do as little work as possible on these... especially now that there's a regular spot, hence my suggestion for doing away with the RSVP list altogether.

Windyphoto wrote:
There will be pie next time.

If you're serious, and are considering bringing in your own stuff, please call the restaurant and ask if it's ok.  Normally I'd call, but I won't be there next month.

I would think it would be ok, as I imagine that private kids parties bring in their own birthday cake or whatever, but some restaurants are REALLY strict about outside food being brought in.

Rachel Jay wrote:
that would take way too much effort on my part.  I prefer to do as little work as possible on these...

Obviously not, given how much work you've already done for us, but I take your point. I just thought I'd throw it out there.

Rachel Jay wrote:
If you're serious, and are considering bringing in your own stuff, please call the restaurant and ask if it's ok.

Their web site says "No outside food or drinks allowed." Sigh. Nothing is ever easy.

Of course, if we're using the pie as a shooting prop, it's not really food, is it?

Windyphoto wrote:
Their web site says "No outside food or drinks allowed." Sigh. Nothing is ever easy.

Of course, if we're using the pie as a shooting prop, it's not really food, is it?

Their website may say one thing, but if it's something you really want to bring in, it might be worth a call.  They might have an option for ordering specialty items like cakes and pies for parties

Windyphoto wrote:
If we want positive reinforcement without the shaming, how about if our hostess, who seems to enjoy compiling pointless data, keeps track of who shows up and adds their show-up count to the signup list for the next M&G?

E.g.:
----------
Attending:

Models
Rachel (9 M&Gs)
Mary

Photographers:
Hal (5 M&Gs)
Joe
Mark (2 M&Gs)
----------

This lends a certain (small) prestige to those who show up regularly, but doesn't single out no-shows to what is, after all, a social event.

Or we could just show up to the M&Gs and have fun...

Or how about Rachel does her first nude shoot for everyone who shows up?

Greg Kolack wrote:
Or how about Rachel does her first nude shoot for everyone who shows up?

That would get the photographers to show up, but I think it's the models we're more concerned about. Maybe offer free headshots...