the official line idea thread

[Tub(a)]

[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

Am I wrong?[/q]

Yes. :-P

The line is monitored when 95% of the people will be there.

Complete GA would just move the line to every single game night. I addressed that above.

There is a question of motivation for a section GA ticket. If you came at the drop of the puck though, you would get a sliver of a board in the second to last row all the way on the wrong side of the section. We know that not everyone stands perfectly still in their alotted number spot. There is still some motivation to getting there early, under the current system there really isn't any (except to appreciate the best Pep Band in college hockey according to CSTV and INCH ;-) )

EDIT: Liz, I don't think they should give line numbers before there are line monitors. In fact, the university may want to break up any line that starts before 5pm, but we all know how that worked out. The reason I said there would be no monitoring of the line before Friday at 5pm is the appearance of avoiding any academic commitment. This is the part of my scheme that would require the most responsibility on the part of the students.

[Dave \'02]

What about a hybrid system of a line and a variety pack?  They could sell tickes in two-seat blocks (each person can buy 2 seats next to each other) but the seats are not in the same place for every game.  (e.g. section A for some games, B for some games, D for some games etc.)  That way it would encourage people to wait in line in order to get tickets but it would discourage people from lining up extremely early since there is no advantage to it.  Yes, people would not always get to sit where they want but they would get to see the games and would be surrounded by different people every time, so they could meet new faithful.  It would not discourgae facetimers, but it would certainly spread them around the rink.

[Beeeej]

Okay, so your system:

1) Discourages people from forming a line,
2) Doesn't discourage facetimers,
3) Doesn't let people sit where they want,
4) Doesn't let people sit with more than one other person they know,
5) Breaks up any semblance of section unity, and
6) Would require significantly more effort, resources, and intelligence from the people running the season ticket sales than any system used before it.

Sounds fantastic.  Sign me up.

Beeeej

[Liz '05]

[Q]Tub(a) Wrote:

 [Q2]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

Am I wrong?[/Q]
Yes.  

The line is monitored when 95% of the people will be there.

Complete GA would just move the line to every single game night. I addressed that above.

There is a question of motivation for a section GA ticket. If you came at the drop of the puck though, you would get a sliver of a board in the second to last row all the way on the wrong side of the section. We know that not everyone stands perfectly still in their alotted number spot. There is still some motivation to getting there early, under the current system there really isn't any (except to appreciate the best Pep Band in college hockey according to CSTV and INCH  )

EDIT: Liz, I don't think they should give line numbers before there are line monitors. In fact, the university may want to break up any line that starts before 5pm, but we all know how that worked out. The reason I said there would be no monitoring of the line before Friday at 5pm is the appearance of avoiding any academic commitment. This is the part of my scheme that would require the most responsibility on the part of the students.



Edited 1 times. Last edit at 09/30/05 09:32AM by Tub(a).[/q]

Sounds good to me.  Next question: Who monitors the line for 5 days and how do we convince athletics to spend this money?

[DeltaOne81]

I still fail to see why the unmonitored time of the line would be any better than 2003. What if 1000 people show up before the monitoring is scheduled to start? You think only 5% will, but what if 90% do? Are are you just saying 'too bad'? To those who get cut?

[Jacob '06]

I don't think they are ever going to do a line over fall break. People would get mad about not being able to go home and see their families, or go on job interviews etc.

[DeltaOne81]

[Q]Jacob '06 Wrote:

 I don't think they are ever going to do a line over fall break. People would get mad about not being able to go home and see their families, or go on job interviews etc.[/q]

I agree with this too. I don't think it would be a bad idea, but I would be very surprised to see them give up their columbus day weekend and risk upsetting parents and students who want to go home over this process. It would be a significant surprise to me too.

If people think 'section GA' tickets are good to make people show up early, that's fine, I have no problem with that, in fact I even like it. But to rely on that soley to decrease the crowding in the line, well, I can't see that working. So I really have to re-nominate the initial process I suggested. You need a monitored line, or no line at all (i.e. a lottery).

I'm fine with section GA, it's a good idea even for game night, but it doesn't help the line situation at all. Fall Break is almost certainly not gonna cut it, so we need some solution for the line process itself.

[KeithK]

[q]I am unconvinced that a 'section GA' ticket really solves anything. Afterall, who goes to the hockey line saying they want row 13! Or row 13, seat 6. No, people want Section B, or A. And they can still only get it by showing up to the line early, so it seems to me people have almost exactly as much incentive to show up early under that system as they do under the current one. [/q]I disagree.  When I was getting tickets mid-90's (admittedly in the first to return the form, not line days) I felt significant pressure to get the form in as early as possible so I could get the seats that I wanted - fourth row of B, on the center ice side, at the aisle.  Managed to basically get these twice and was rather annoyed one year when I was stuck about eight rows higher up (don't remember why).  I suspect lots of people want to sit in a particular location and not just in a specific section.

[KeithK]

[Q]I still fail to see why the unmonitored time of the line would be any better than 2003. What if 1000 people show up before the monitoring is scheduled to start? You think only 5% will, but what if 90% do? Are are you just saying 'too bad'? To those who get cut?[/q]As long as you monitor the line for a long enough time you shouldn't have a problem.  If the school let people line up a month in advance I seriously doubt there would be more than a handful of die-hards who would wait that long.  I believe the experiences of other schools with lines bear this out.

That said, I still think there's no reason not to hand out line numbers for that extremely early part of the line.  It does mean that you need to do line checks, but how hard is that really when there are 20 or maybe even 50 people waiting online three weeks early?

[redhair34]

[Q]Tub(a) Wrote:

 
Complete GA would just move the line to every single game night. I addressed that above.

[/q]


I am not ready to buy this argument.  I don't think there will be a group of 2000 students pushing to get into every game at 5:00 or 5:30 or 6:00 for every game.  I'm guessing that there would probably only be at most 50-100 or so students waiting to get in when the doors open (but I don't think Athletics would be willing to leave this to chance).  Someone try to convince me otherwise.  

People will be much more orderly and respectful because, unlike the desire to get line numbers, there is(are) no definitive "best seat(s)."  There is no zero sum-game mentality.

I do agree with you that the lack of cohesion could pose a problem.  But I think people will likely want to and be able to gravitate to the same area each game (I don't think you'd show up one week at 6:00 and the next at 7:10).

I like the idea of getting a section stamp the night of the game.  This will keep the number of students per section under control and might even be required for fire/safety requirements.
 

[DeltaOne81]

[Q]KeithK Wrote:

 [Q2]I still fail to see why the unmonitored time of the line would be any better than 2003. What if 1000 people show up before the monitoring is scheduled to start? You think only 5% will, but what if 90% do? Are are you just saying 'too bad'? To those who get cut?[/Q]
As long as you monitor the line for a long enough time you shouldn't have a problem.  If the school let people line up a month in advance I seriously doubt there would be more than a handful of die-hards who would wait that long.  I believe the experiences of other schools with lines bear this out.

That said, I still think there's no reason not to hand out line numbers for that extremely early part of the line.  It does mean that you need to do line checks, but how hard is that really when there are 20 or maybe even 50 people waiting online three weeks early?

[/q]


Alright, I'm glad you think from your GA experience that it may make the line a little more lax. Either way though, we definitely need a monitored line. I am very concerned about Tub(a)'s unmonitored line situation. Use my line procedure (well, not mine, but the one I spoke of above), combined with the section GA plan, and I'm fine with it.

Does anyone object to it? Want to point out other concerns? Or is it maybe worth getting Age to put a poll to see if we have any consensus on this?

[redhair34]

[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

 Does anyone object to it? Want to point out other concerns? Or is it maybe worth getting Age to put a poll to see if we have any consensus on this?[/q]

I think we should wait a while longer until other people have time to chime in.  Also I think we should try to develop the ideas a little more and iron out all the details.  There is no sense in rushing to a conclusion...We have PLENTY of time.

[Beeeej]

[Q]redhair34 Wrote: I think we should wait a while longer until other people have time to chime in.  Also I think we should try to develop the ideas a little more and iron out all the details.  There is no sense in rushing to a conclusion...We have PLENTY of time.[/q]

Plus, not to rain on anybody's parade, but I'm really not sure how important or even useful it is for this group to come to any kind of consensus.  Athletics is under no obligation even to listen to individual ideas, much less view an online discussion group's consensus as good advice.

I think it could be useful if a recognized student group comes forward with a comprehensive, written plan and ideas on how to make it work, including realistic addressing of budgetary, safety, and academic concerns.  But eLF users taking a majority vote on whether general admission by section or general admission by game is better?  Nobody's asked us.

I genuinely don't mean to be negative, I just wonder whether those of you calling for consensus among this board's users really believe that the consensus will matter.

Beeeej

[Dave \'02]

[Q]Beeeej Wrote:

 Okay, so your system:

1) Discourages people from forming a line,
2) Doesn't discourage facetimers,
3) Doesn't let people sit where they want,
4) Doesn't let people sit with more than one other person they know,
5) Breaks up any semblance of section unity, and
6) Would require significantly more effort, resources, and intelligence from the people running the season ticket sales than any system used before it.

Sounds fantastic.  Sign me up.

Beeeej[/q]

1) If Cornell wants to discourge people from forming a line, then this could do that and it would certainly be better than an angry mob.
2) So far, no system proposed seems to discourage facetimers.  If facetimers tend to be friends with other facetimers, is it better to have half a section show up halfway through the first period or have those people dispersed throught half the rink?
3) People frequently don't get to sit where they want, at least this would allow them do do that for a few games.
4) True, but it also does encourage people to meet different members of the faithful.
5) True, but theoretically could create more rink unity - people who know various cheers would more dispersed among the rink, increasing the likelihood of the whole student section
6) True, but that is exactly what should happen even though they would never implement this system.

I'm not saying it is the best answer, or even a realistic one, but it is a different solution and was put forth more in an academic sense than a practical one.  There never is going to be a perfect system as every system has various flaws, so why not pose as many alternative solutions as possible?  The more ideas that are out there, the better the odds will be of coming up with a viable solution

[Beeeej]

[Q]Dave '02 Wrote: I'm not saying it is the best answer, or even a realistic one, but it is a different solution and was put forth more in an academic sense than a practical one.  There never is going to be a perfect system as every system has various flaws, so why not pose as many alternative solutions as possible?  The more ideas that are out there, the better the odds will be of coming up with a viable solution[/q]

I agree completely, and I never suggested that you shouldn't have posed it.

As for discouraging facetimers, I think the Duke-style line (or the Fall Break line) does that rather handsomely.

Beeeej