From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Fri May 26 23:17:15 2000 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id e4QMEhO09641 for britdisc-outgoing; Fri, 26 May 2000 23:14:43 +0100 (BST) Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@daffodil [137.205.192.30]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e4QMEep09623 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Fri, 26 May 2000 23:14:40 +0100 (BST) Received: from anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.90]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e4QMEdV07572 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Fri, 26 May 2000 23:14:39 +0100 (BST) Received: from phidelta.demon.co.uk ([158.152.248.177]) by anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12vSN8-000Ann-0W for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Fri, 26 May 2000 23:14:28 +0100 Message-ID: <zO5BdYAS6tL5EwT+@phidelta.demon.co.uk> Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 21:29:06 +0100 To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk From: Wayne Retter <w.retter@bigfoot.com> Subject: Re: ok!! References: <0846B011B9A4D111A1EE006097DA4FCE02716557@icex1.cc.ic.ac.uk> <006e01bfc72b$14c10b20$e8f952c1@cherwell.com> In-Reply-To: <006e01bfc72b$14c10b20$e8f952c1@cherwell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S <pjZRgFWDsQK5ViyP$l4rxVrb6a> Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Paul Meaney <p.meaney@cherwell.com> writes > Or would you prefer that we bury our heads in the sand and accept what >we are given without question? 4 bids for 4 Tour tournaments... either we accept what we are offered (and we pay the price that is asked, and maybe learn our unfortunate lessons later) or we don't play. Suddenly, IMHO, the "if you think you can do better..." argument becomes relevant again. (As Chris said, after Towcester, many people thought they could - next year's Diary should be Ultimate every weekend!) I cannot argue with the fact that the Tour attempts to meet certain standards - I'll even attempt to find the docs that details the aims of the Tour that Si Hill drew up a few years back. (Though I suspect that Si probably sent them to all the team contacts in 1997... so you, of course, read them, even if you don't have a copy of them any more, and you did, of course, fill in and return the Ultim8 Questionnaire that was run between T4 and T5 of 1997?) However, there are no formal rules, anywhere, on what you can charge teams to enter a tournament. If you don't like what you're paying for what you get, don't pay and don't get. In the long run we'd then end up abandoning the current system, and replacing it with another. If you have any seriously thought out proposals on a replacement system, or evolution of the current one, let somebody know - DON'T just whinge about the current one. Wayne wondering if it's really worth the effort... *Then again, whilst so few people are willing to make the effort to run events, people are willing to pay over the odds to play in the few that happen. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Wayne Retter mobile: 07970-903420 w.retter@bigfoot.com