This posting is from: annie
----------
Thanks to everybody who took this. As you'll see, there a lot of very
good information here ...
. . . . .
Here's the objective part of the DLV 2004 survey report.
65 valid responses were received, which is more than half of the 118
total attendees who registered and signed in. For those who are familiar
with after-the-fact voluntary surveys such as this, a 50% response rate
is exceptionally high.
The rate of response indicates that without question, the results of the
survey represent a statistically significant portion of the attendees.
It also shows to me that the majority of the attendees do indeed care
about DLV and want to help make it a success. The enthusiasm of the
attendees should be noted by all. :)
I've taken the liberty of adding some comments here and there. Your
comments, observations, and interpretations are most welcome.
Not all totals will add up to 65. Not everybody answered all questions.
(And that's perfectly fine, most questions are stand-alone in nature.)
If anything here is not clear, please let us know. If you have any
comment on the survey or the results, please say so.
The written survey comments and suggestions will be posted shortly.
. . . . . . . . . .
Here are the answer summaries:
Attendance history:
25 stated DLV 2004 was their first DLV.
16 stated they had attended DLV once before.
24 stated they had attended DLV two times or more before.
This shows we have a good mix of newcomers, returnees, and longtimers
taking the survey.
. . . . .
Travel distance:
Approximate average travel distance was 2350 miles. Significant increase
from 2003.
. . . . .
Method to get to DLV:
Private vehicle: 34
Commercial air: 29
Rental vehicle: 1
Somewhat of a surprise to me, with the higher average travel distance,
I assumed more would be flying.
. . . . .
Arrival date:
Before May 1: 14
Saturday, May 1: 9
Sunday, May 2: 18
Monday, May 3: 8
Tuesday, May 4: 4
Wednesday, May 5: 7
Thursday, May 6: 3
Friday, May 7: 2
Departure date:
Thursday, May 6: 4
Friday, May 7: 10
Saturday, May 8: 14
Sunday, May 9: 18
After May 9: 18
Average number of days in attendance: 6.23, an increase from 2003. Over
the past few years we've been seeing a trend toward more week-long
attendees.
Our people are coming earlier and staying longer. They must like it! :)
. . . . .
Age:
Average age was 54.3
Slight increase from last year. This has been creeping upward, more than
one year of age per calendar year, since we have been tracking it. (I
guess eventually I will get to the wrong side of this myself.) :)
. . . . .
Public exposure:
DLV 2004 was first public exposure: 1
Less than one year: 6
1-2 years: 5
2-5 years: 17
5-10 years: 23
10-20 years: 7
20+ years: 2
Does not apply: 4
This is more or less the same distribution we've been seeing since we
started tracking this.
Frequency of public exposure:
Once per year or less: 5
A few times a year: 18
Monthly or so: 9
Weekly or so: 25
Daily: 4
Does not apply: 4
This is the first year we've asked this. It does show a good mix of
those who get out very regularly and those who do so only occasionally.
. . . . .
Self-identification:
CD: 31
TG: 10
TV: 8
Pre-op: 5
Does not identify with any: 5
No-op: 3
SO: 2
Just a remark that we don't attempt to define these, we're just tracking
what the attendees state they identify with. There is quite a bit of
overlap and overloading of these terms. Once again, data points all over
the TG spectrum. This is the first year we've had nobody state "DQ"
since we've been tracking this.
. . . . .
Support group membership:
Current member: 27
Never a member: 22
Former member: 16
No surprises here. More or less the same as we've seen all along.
. . . . .
Other t* events:
Relative responses to each event ...
South Comf: 14
Holiday Enfemme: 8
Be-All: 8
Cal Dream: 8
FanFair: 6
EnFemme Getaway: 6
Texas T: 6
Paradise Poconos: 6
Pinkfest: 5
Fall Harv: 5
Colo Gold: 4
Esprit: 2
Dignity Cruise: 1
Once again, a lot of scatter to this one. Nobody showed signs of being
a regular on the t* circuit.
Attended none of the others: 36
Attended one and only one session of any: 17
Attended two or more sessions of any: 12
I'm a bit surprised that the majority have never attended at least one
of those.
. . . . .
Registration and activity sign-up:
Convenient and easy: 60
A bit confusing: 4
Difficult: 0
This is what we like to hear.
. . . . .
Technical or ergonomic difficulty with screens:
No difficulty: 62
Some difficulty: 3
Ditto, the process appears to be working.
. . . . .
Hotels, satisfaction:
Sahara, definitely satisfied: 9
Sahara, mostly satisfied: 6
Sahara, neutral: 3
Sahara, not really: 1
Sahara, definitely not satisfied: 1
More or less what it's been the past few years. Sahara seems to be the
most popular of our suggested hotels for the past few years.
San Remo, definitely satisfied: 1
San Remo, mostly satisfied: 5
San Remo, neutral: 1
San Remo, not really: 1
San Remo, definitely not satisfied: 2
This is a definite slippage for the San Remo since last year.
Imperial Palace, definitely satisfied: 1
Imperial Palace, mostly satisfied: 3
IP has rated highly for satisfaction all 7 years of DLV. It's the only
hotel where we've had people each year. The percentage of our people
staying at the IP, however, has decreased over the past few years.
Clarion Suites, definitely satisfied: 2
This is the first time we've had this on our suggested list.
Note that no responses for Bellagio or Stratosphere came in, even though
the registrations showed that we had people at both.
Boardwalk, definitely satisfied: 1
Boardwalk, mostly satisfied: 1
Harrah's, mostly satisfied: 1
Hawthorn Suites, definitely satisfied: 2
Brodway {sic}, definitely satisfied: 1 (Is this supposed to be Boardwalk?)
Palace Station, mostly satisfied: 1
Paris, definitely satisfied: 1
Riviera, mostly satisfied: 1
Summer Bay Resort, mostly satisfied: 1
Tahiti Resort, definitely satisfied: 1
Terrible's, definitely satisfied: 1
Westward Ho, mostly satisfied: 1
. . . . .
Hotels, comfort:
Sahara, very comfortable: 10
Sahara, mostly comfortable: 9
Sahara, very uncomfortable: 1
We've had complaints in the past of kids and jockish young adult types
at the Sahara. It appeared to me that there were fewer of both at the
Sahara this year. The timeshare creeps were just as thick as ever. :(
San Remo, very comfortable: 7
San Remo, mostly comfortable: 1
San Remo, very uncomfortable: 1
Imperial Palace, very comfortable: 5
Clarion Suites, very comfortable: 2
All of our suggested hotels that had any responses were again rated high
on the comfort scale.
Boardwalk, very comfortable: 1
Boardwalk, somewhat comfortable: 1
Brodway {sic}, very comfortable: 1 (Boardwalk??)
Harrah's, very comfortable: 1
Hawthorn Suites, very comfortable: 1
Hawthorn Suites, neutral: 1
Palace Station, somewhat comfortable: 1
Paris, very comfortable: 1
Riviera, very comfortable: 1
Summer Bay Resort, somewhat comfortable: 1
Tahiti Resort, very comfortable: 1
Terrible's, very comfortable: 1
Westward Ho, very comfortable: 1
. . . . .
Activities, enjoyment. 1-5 scale ...
The way I see things were intended, any activity that is rated 3 or
above is good, meaning more enjoyed it than did not, anything 4 or above
is excellent, and anything 4.5 or above is outstanding.
We're not grading on a curve here. :)
The skewing of these toward the high side is due to the fact, I believe,
that most of them are indeed outstanding activities and the participants
saw them as such and rated them as such.
So, please don't think of anything that scores in the low 4's or even in
the 3's as anything of a failure. Only one activity deserves to be
recognized as an underachiever.
Bellagio lunch: 5.0 (3 responses)
SO get-together 5.0 (1 responses)
Golf 4.94 (16 responses)
High tea: 4.93 (14 responses, 3 no-shows)
NSD side trip: 4.91 (35 responses, 2 no-shows) Almost 100% response!
Lake Mead cruise: 4.86 (14 responses)
Pity Party: 4.82 (17 responses)
Limo tour: 4.79 (28 responses)
MCC Church: 4.78 (9 responses)
Bad Attitude workshop: 4.75 (4 responses)
Carluccio's dinner: 4.72 (39 responses, 2 no-shows)
Art tour: 4.67 (6 responses, 1 no-show)
Gun Show: 4.67 (3 responses)
Garden Party: 4.59 (25 responses)
San Remo: 4.56 (16 responses)
"V" show: 4.56 (16 responses, 2 no-shows)
Dance Night: 4.52 (21 responses)
Thrift shop tour: 4.5 (8 responses, 2 no-shows)
Star Trek Experience: 4.5 (6 responses)
Hard Rock Cafe: 4.49 (43 responses)
Milano's dinner: 4.46 (26 responses)
Lunch With/out Ginger: 4.42 (19 responses)
Annual Mixer: 4.39 (41 responses)
Hamburger Mary's: 4.39 (38 responses, 2 no-shows)
Welcome Celebration, Flex: 4.31 (35 responses)
Glamour Boutique: 4.31 (26 responses, 4 no-shows)
Farewell get-together: 4.31 (13 responses)
Rhyolite trip: 4.3 (20 responses, 1 no-show) (Almost 100% response!)
Charles Bar: 4.3 (10 responses)
Pre-DLV, Spotlight: 4.26 (27 responses)
Premium Outlet shopping: 4.25 (4 responses)
Goodtimes karaoke: 4.24 (42 responses)
Freezone happy hour: 3.83 (23 responses)
Las Vegas Lounge: 2.17 (17 responses)
Bowling (no responses)
The only thing that was disliked more than it was liked was the Las
Vegas Lounge. I think it's quite obvious why this is the case.
. . .
Activities, comfort. 1-5 scale ...
Most of these are clustered so tightly that I debated skipping the
enumeration. Most everybody was comfortable with any and all of our
activity venues this year.
Golf 5.0
Charles Bar: 5.0
Thrift shop tour: 5.0
Bad Attitude workshop: 5.0
Bellagio lunch: 5.0
SO get-together 5.0
Pity Party: 4.93
Dance Night: 4.93
High tea: 4.93
Carluccio's dinner: 4.92
NSD side trip: 4.91
Garden Party: 4.88
Welcome Celebration, Flex: 4.86
Limo tour: 4.85
San Remo: 4.83
Art tour: 4.83
Glamour Boutique: 4.81
Hamburger Mary's: 4.8
Lake Mead cruise: 4.8
Annual Mixer: 4.79
MCC Church: 4.78
Goodtimes karaoke: 4.77
Milano's dinner: 4.77
Pre-DLV, Spotlight: 4.72
Hard Rock Cafe: 4.6
Farewell get-together: 4.73
Lunch With/out Ginger: 4.63
Premium Outlet shopping: 4.6
Rhyolite trip: 4.6
"V" show: 4.6
Freezone happy hour: 4.52
Star Trek Experience: 4.33
Gun Show: 4.33
Las Vegas Lounge: 3.73
Bowling (no responses)
Most everybody was comfortable with everything. No major surprises here.
. . . . .
Time crunch ...
Seldom or never: 36
Occasionally: 25
Frequently: 4
This is slightly higher than last year. As we increase the number of
activities we plan, I think we will see this go higher.
. . . . .
Primary local transportation ...
Personal vehicle: 31
Rental vehicle: 15
Another's vehicle: 16
Taxi: 2
City bus: 1
On foot: 1
Again, no surprises.
. . . . .
Difficulty getting a ride ...
No difficulty: 61
Some difficulty: 2
Again, people are cooperating and processes seem to be working. Very
few reported trouble here.
. . . . .
Finding activity locations ...
No difficulty finding venues: 61
Some difficulty: 3
. . . . .
Finding the group at the venue ...
No difficulty finding group: 60
Some difficulty: 4
. . . . .
Online maps and directions ...
Maps and directions helpful: 51
Not helpful: 6
What maps and directions: 6
Again, this shows that this process is working, also that some do not
RTFMailings.
. . . . .
Contacting DLV volunteers by phone ...
Did not need to phone: 48
No problem contacting by phone: 12
Some difficulty: 2
What numbers: 2
. . . . .
Identifying DLV volunteers ...
No problems: 61
Problems identifying volunteers: 3:
. . . . .
Friendly and inclusive ...
Mostly yes: 56
Yes, somewhat: 6
Neutral: 3
I think this says a lot about the quality of people we attract and
about the overall atmosphere and climate of DLV this year. Everybody
takes credit for the high score on this one. Thanks, gang! :)
. . . . .
DLV Discussion Forum ...
Participate via e-mail: 30
Participate on the web: 11
Does not participate: 20
What the ... is this: 3
. . . . .
Comfortable being seen with group ...
Most or all the time: 57
Sometimes uncomfortable: 7
Frequently uncomfortable: 2
This, again, is a reflection of the overall climate of this year's DLV.
The vast majority dressed and behaved in a manner that others were
comfortable with in public.
. . . . .
Did you attend some other event in conjunction with DLV? ...
Other non-TG event: 3
No: 61
Other TG event: 0
No: 64
Looks like nobody who answered the survey went to that "other" thing, huh?
. . . . .
Big Sister Program ...
Did not participate: 44
Big Sister, positive experience: 9
Little Sister, positive experience: 4
Big Sister, negative experience: 2
Say what: 3
I'm assuming the negative experiences here were Little Sisters who were
no-shows. I heard no reports of any BS/LS pairs that did not get along.
If this is incorrect, please write in and let us know.
We would also appreciate if the two who reported a negative experience
write in explaining why the experience was negative. We will keep the
names confidential if requested.
. . . . .
Roommate matching ...
Did not participate: 58
Roommate, positive experience: 1
Huh: 3
. . . . .
Not interested: 53
Interested in roommate next year: 5
. . . . .
How much did it cost? ...
Average spent on accommodations: $439
Average spent on food: $210
Average spent on alcohol: $107
Average spent on gaming: $190
Average total spent to attend DLV: $1260
. . . . .
Was DLV affordable? ...
Affordable, definitely: 52
Affordable, somewhat: 13
Nobody reported that DLV was not affordable. This may be somewhat of a
self-fulfiling question, since those who can't afford it will not come.
. . . . .
Increased attention to behavior/dress/restroom issues ...
Fine with it: 52
Understand why it has to be: 12
Don't like, but will put up with it: 1
Again, this says a lot regarding the climate and culture this year.
. . . . .
How much did the Mothers Day issue affect your plans:
Little or none: 49
Somewhat: 10
Significantly: 5
This also may be somewhat self-fulfiling, since I'm aware of a few
people who did have Mothers Day issues who chose to skip the entire DLV
this year rather than attend for what they could.
. . . . .
Degree of structure:
Fine as it is: 59
Want less structure: 2
Want more structure: 3
If it ain't broke ...
. . . . .
Seclusion of activities:
Fine as it is: 38
Want less seclusion: 20
Want more seclusion: 6
Majority still says it ain't broke, however we're now seeing a number of
those who desire more seclusion, as well as less.
. . . . .
Length of DLV:
Just right: 44
Too short: 12
Too long: 7
This is the first year we've had any significant reports of it being
too long. The length may be catching up with us.
. . . . .
Name tags ...
Found them helpful: 40
Ok with them: 19
Do not like: 4
Again, if it ain't broke ...
. . . . .
Restrooms ...
Yes, incident(s): 1
Used restrooms, no incidents: 40
Seldom or never used them: 18
Does not apply: 6
Looking at the comments (report coming shortly) the one yes for this
refers to the restroom traffic cop situation at the Hard Rock.
Those of us who discussed the Hard Rock situation in depth agree that
we should call this an "issue" and not an "incident", reserving the
term "incident" for a case where somebody is confronted or is denied
access to facilities.
. . . . .
Your expectations ...
Exceeded expectations: 40
Met expectations: 24
Failed to meet: 0
This is a significant increase over last year (26/29) and again reflects
the overall improvement in climate and culture.
. . . . .
Will you return ...
Definitely will return: 51
Probably will return: 9
Maybe will return: 3
Probably not: 0
Again an improvement over last year. :)
. . . . .
DLV t-shirts, demand for ...
No shirt: 23
Maybe: 16
Probably: 8
Definitely: 16
Looks like there is at least some demand for bringing back the DLV
t-shirts. We'll revisit this as DLV 2005 approaches. (And no, this is
not my conspiracy to get more people to "dress down.") :) :) :)
. . . . . . . . . .
Comments, gang?
----------
(This posting was entered by annie, an external user of MyDLV.)
|
divalas.vegasDiva Las Vegas Network - MyDLV |
|
Preliminary survey report ...
Return to DLV Discussion Forum
26 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Preliminary survey report ...
by External Poster » Sat May 29, 2004 7:28 pm
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
Preliminary survey report ...
by External Poster » Sat May 29, 2004 9:24 pm
This posting is from: Nora
----------
HI Annie:
Please let me know what you learn about the negative experiences. This
may help me for next year.
Hugs,
Nora
----------
(This posting was entered by Nora, an external user of MyDLV.)
----------
HI Annie:
Please let me know what you learn about the negative experiences. This
may help me for next year.
Hugs,
Nora
----------
(This posting was entered by Nora, an external user of MyDLV.)
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
Preliminary survey report ...
by External Poster » Sun May 30, 2004 10:38 am
This posting is from: Sarah Charles
----------
I want to thank those who attended the Art Tour for their responses!
Wow, as a first-time organizer, I had hoped it wouldn't be a disaster
and never thought it would be so well appreciated and comfortable for
everyone.
I volunteer to do something similar again next year and invite you to
make any suggestions on how it can be improved. I have a few ideas and
would love to hear from anyone else. My comments: Be more specific
about exactly where to meet prior to the start of the trip, Check on
construction, so we aren't delayed by route-finding, and rather than pay
for individual admissions, collect the money at the desk and pay for the
group to avoid the extended stay at Frau Blucher's paystation.
Finally, I would like to share a restroom thought. No, not that kind.
On my way out of the Alladin to the parking lot I found a couple of
"Family" or "Unisex" restrooms. It made my evening much more
comfortable. If we could get an idea of where that type of facility is
in the various mainstream venues we visit, it would make it easier for
those of us not ready to commit to the ladies room, but are unable to
hold it any longer.
Sarah
----------
(This posting was entered by Sarah Charles, an external user of MyDLV.)
----------
I want to thank those who attended the Art Tour for their responses!
Wow, as a first-time organizer, I had hoped it wouldn't be a disaster
and never thought it would be so well appreciated and comfortable for
everyone.
I volunteer to do something similar again next year and invite you to
make any suggestions on how it can be improved. I have a few ideas and
would love to hear from anyone else. My comments: Be more specific
about exactly where to meet prior to the start of the trip, Check on
construction, so we aren't delayed by route-finding, and rather than pay
for individual admissions, collect the money at the desk and pay for the
group to avoid the extended stay at Frau Blucher's paystation.
Finally, I would like to share a restroom thought. No, not that kind.
On my way out of the Alladin to the parking lot I found a couple of
"Family" or "Unisex" restrooms. It made my evening much more
comfortable. If we could get an idea of where that type of facility is
in the various mainstream venues we visit, it would make it easier for
those of us not ready to commit to the ladies room, but are unable to
hold it any longer.
Sarah
----------
(This posting was entered by Sarah Charles, an external user of MyDLV.)
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
Unisex restrooms (was Re: Preliminary survey report)
by External Poster » Sun May 30, 2004 6:05 pm
This posting is from: annie
----------
> Finally, I would like to share a restroom thought. No, not that kind.
> On my way out of the Alladin to the parking lot I found a couple of
> "Family" or "Unisex" restrooms. It made my evening much more
> comfortable. If we could get an idea of where that type of facility is
> in the various mainstream venues we visit, it would make it easier for
> those of us not ready to commit to the ladies room, but are unable to
> hold it any longer.
The Aladdin/Desert Passage complex appears to have many unisex restrooms
scattered about the facility.
I'm going to put a note about this on the Big List, and I would
encourage those who know of unisex restrooms in other Las Vegas venues
to do likewise.
----------
(This posting was entered by annie, an external user of MyDLV.)
----------
> Finally, I would like to share a restroom thought. No, not that kind.
> On my way out of the Alladin to the parking lot I found a couple of
> "Family" or "Unisex" restrooms. It made my evening much more
> comfortable. If we could get an idea of where that type of facility is
> in the various mainstream venues we visit, it would make it easier for
> those of us not ready to commit to the ladies room, but are unable to
> hold it any longer.
The Aladdin/Desert Passage complex appears to have many unisex restrooms
scattered about the facility.
I'm going to put a note about this on the Big List, and I would
encourage those who know of unisex restrooms in other Las Vegas venues
to do likewise.
----------
(This posting was entered by annie, an external user of MyDLV.)
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
Preliminary survey report ...
by External Poster » Mon May 31, 2004 4:50 pm
This posting is from: annie
----------
>>25 stated DLV 2004 was their first DLV.
>>16 stated they had attended DLV once before.
>>24 stated they had attended DLV two times or more before.
>How does this compare to the mix on the registration database...as to
>whether the 65 respondents are indicative of the group as a whole?
The survey appears to be skewed toward the returnees, and in particular
those who have been twice or more.
If we look at the registration database, we find that there are 101
registrations that resulted in at least 1 person attending.
52 were newcomers to DLV 2004
26 had attended once before
23 had attended twice or more before
As you see, slightly less than half of the newcomers answered the survey
while almost 2/3 of those who attended once did, and close to 100% who
had attended 2 times of more did so.
Yes, I think the twice or more counts are valid, since we do have the SO
factor on some registrations. (There also may be people who have
attended in the past who were not properly marked as returnees or
multi-year returnees in the system.)
>I would only comment that even though there may be no DLV activities on
>the two/three days prior to and immediately after the official DLV,
>there should be some nominated venues / times etc for these people to
>meet and do stuff together. Especially if the early arrivers and later
>departers are an increasing trend.
Actually that happened, both via our organization and otherwise. There
was an informal pre-pre-DLV thing at the San Remo which I attended and
some remarked that they had done various things before that.
. . .
>Ummmm... It seems to me that rating here can be misleading. Since most
>people go to thing they are likely to participate in and enjoy anyway
>the chances of a good rating are pretty good to start with. Eg Golfers
>like playing golf...end of story hence the high rating.
For the special-interest things I would agree. However, for the general
interest activities I think the ratings give us a valid handle on which
ones were well liked and which ones laid an egg.
However, I would also think that, for example, avid golfers who went to
a poorly implemented golf activity would rate it appropriately poorly.
I only see two cases of activities this year where things were bad, one
with very poor turnout and the other which just should not have been
planned for the venue in which it was held.
. . .
>The reason I suspect, is not the fact that they were bars per se, but
>that they were bars at which we had no actual activity, such as a meal
>or a show or theme (eg Pity Party).
>I guess what I'm saying is that while we've previously had a call for
>socialising time, simply putting bars on a schedule doesn't do it for a
>lot of people. You can socialise and DO something, given the right
>environment.
Maybe I'm just the odd person out here, but I'm one who enjoys going to
bars just to drink and socialize and such. Yes, I enjoy going to bars
where there's low-key entertainment or some activities, but I tend to
enjoy this mostly for the relaxing and socializing aspect.
Back in 2001 when the call came in for more of that Quality Social
Time<tm>, the person who approached me about it mentioned specifically
that (she thought) there should be more time spent just socializing and
not necessarily doing anything in particular except socializing.
I still think there is a demand for at least some sessions of strictly
social time.
. . . . .
>>The only thing that was disliked more than it was liked was the Las
>>Vegas Lounge. I think it's quite obvious why this is the case.
>As much as I thought this place was a dive, I think the NSD reception
>party was general a none activity and it is as much that, that is
>reflected in the survey results.
I actually thought it would be a major hit to have 30-40 of us invade
the place in slutwear, nunwear, and whateverwear.
Nope, just didn't work!
. . . . .
>>Comfortable being seen with group ...
[deletia]
>This year I was very much more comfortable being with DLV as a group.
>There was a lot less of the obvious flamboyance (or should this be
>flamgirlance?) that has been seen in past years and was the cause of
>the dress and behaviour code. The quality of makeup, style, deportment,
>hair do's etc, etc was better (if not much better) that 2003.
I agree that there was a marked improvement in the overall behavior of
our group this year. (Amazing that the actions of a few in the past have
so reflected on the group as a whole.)
I think that in general, the attendees this year had more consideration
for the others, and even those with a "look at me" tendency kept it
within reasonable levels.
>There was that girl that kept showing up in a DLV T-Shirt... but get
>one in every crowd! :-)
Uh ...
. . . . .
>>Increased attention to behavior/dress/restroom issues ...
[bobbitt]
>I only heard / saw one person that objected to this in any obvious way
>and she was told firmly to go read it. In my opinion her appearance and
>attitude changed from last year and over the few days I did see her.
I think the word got out that we were (and still are) very serious
about it, and that it is not something that is optional.
>For a group with an average age in their fifties, male, female or
>mixed, the fact that we have to have such comprehensive rules /
>guidelines, is an unfortunate indictment on a few.
Yes, and I think that everybody does know that the majority of those
present already know how to dress and behave in public. It's just that
those who did not were so obvious about it that they reflected on the
group as a whole.
. . . . .
>>+sitting at the bottom was rather a disappointment, I felt left out of
>>+the party, only until I and my golf partner and 2 other girls picked
>>+up chairs and included ourselves in the festivities. The planner had
>>+no concept of bringing all those that played into her grasp.
>Seemed like it was more an oversight than anything to exclude anyone. I
>was surprised that we got the lunch / discount vouchers at all so I
>guess it depends on the expectation.
Inclusion, IMAO, is a two-way street. Our group does not intentionally
exclude others, I know the group too well to believe that. This had to
be, as you say, oversight and not active exclusion.
If somebody feels left out, he/she should take the initiative to join
in. "Mind if I join you?" "Is this seat taken?" "May I squeeze in?"
. . . . .
>>1. Temperature. There's not much we can do about this. I'm not a
>Moving the week earlier in the year won't necessarily help. You just
>have to remember that Las Vegas is in the desert and it does get hot!
Actually, I see weather as far less of a risk factor for DLV than it
is for things like Pinkfest, Fall Harvest, FanFair, etc.
With Las Vegas in the spring, the weather is far more predictable than
during autumn in Chicago, Omaha, or Provincetown.
With DLV, it may be a bit warm or cool and windy. An inconvenience at
most. For the other three, an early snowstorm will effectively kill the
event totally.
----------
(This posting was entered by annie, an external user of MyDLV.)
----------
>>25 stated DLV 2004 was their first DLV.
>>16 stated they had attended DLV once before.
>>24 stated they had attended DLV two times or more before.
>How does this compare to the mix on the registration database...as to
>whether the 65 respondents are indicative of the group as a whole?
The survey appears to be skewed toward the returnees, and in particular
those who have been twice or more.
If we look at the registration database, we find that there are 101
registrations that resulted in at least 1 person attending.
52 were newcomers to DLV 2004
26 had attended once before
23 had attended twice or more before
As you see, slightly less than half of the newcomers answered the survey
while almost 2/3 of those who attended once did, and close to 100% who
had attended 2 times of more did so.
Yes, I think the twice or more counts are valid, since we do have the SO
factor on some registrations. (There also may be people who have
attended in the past who were not properly marked as returnees or
multi-year returnees in the system.)
>I would only comment that even though there may be no DLV activities on
>the two/three days prior to and immediately after the official DLV,
>there should be some nominated venues / times etc for these people to
>meet and do stuff together. Especially if the early arrivers and later
>departers are an increasing trend.
Actually that happened, both via our organization and otherwise. There
was an informal pre-pre-DLV thing at the San Remo which I attended and
some remarked that they had done various things before that.
. . .
>Ummmm... It seems to me that rating here can be misleading. Since most
>people go to thing they are likely to participate in and enjoy anyway
>the chances of a good rating are pretty good to start with. Eg Golfers
>like playing golf...end of story hence the high rating.
For the special-interest things I would agree. However, for the general
interest activities I think the ratings give us a valid handle on which
ones were well liked and which ones laid an egg.
However, I would also think that, for example, avid golfers who went to
a poorly implemented golf activity would rate it appropriately poorly.
I only see two cases of activities this year where things were bad, one
with very poor turnout and the other which just should not have been
planned for the venue in which it was held.
. . .
>The reason I suspect, is not the fact that they were bars per se, but
>that they were bars at which we had no actual activity, such as a meal
>or a show or theme (eg Pity Party).
>I guess what I'm saying is that while we've previously had a call for
>socialising time, simply putting bars on a schedule doesn't do it for a
>lot of people. You can socialise and DO something, given the right
>environment.
Maybe I'm just the odd person out here, but I'm one who enjoys going to
bars just to drink and socialize and such. Yes, I enjoy going to bars
where there's low-key entertainment or some activities, but I tend to
enjoy this mostly for the relaxing and socializing aspect.
Back in 2001 when the call came in for more of that Quality Social
Time<tm>, the person who approached me about it mentioned specifically
that (she thought) there should be more time spent just socializing and
not necessarily doing anything in particular except socializing.
I still think there is a demand for at least some sessions of strictly
social time.
. . . . .
>>The only thing that was disliked more than it was liked was the Las
>>Vegas Lounge. I think it's quite obvious why this is the case.
>As much as I thought this place was a dive, I think the NSD reception
>party was general a none activity and it is as much that, that is
>reflected in the survey results.
I actually thought it would be a major hit to have 30-40 of us invade
the place in slutwear, nunwear, and whateverwear.
Nope, just didn't work!
. . . . .
>>Comfortable being seen with group ...
[deletia]
>This year I was very much more comfortable being with DLV as a group.
>There was a lot less of the obvious flamboyance (or should this be
>flamgirlance?) that has been seen in past years and was the cause of
>the dress and behaviour code. The quality of makeup, style, deportment,
>hair do's etc, etc was better (if not much better) that 2003.
I agree that there was a marked improvement in the overall behavior of
our group this year. (Amazing that the actions of a few in the past have
so reflected on the group as a whole.)
I think that in general, the attendees this year had more consideration
for the others, and even those with a "look at me" tendency kept it
within reasonable levels.
>There was that girl that kept showing up in a DLV T-Shirt... but get
>one in every crowd! :-)
Uh ...
. . . . .
>>Increased attention to behavior/dress/restroom issues ...
[bobbitt]
>I only heard / saw one person that objected to this in any obvious way
>and she was told firmly to go read it. In my opinion her appearance and
>attitude changed from last year and over the few days I did see her.
I think the word got out that we were (and still are) very serious
about it, and that it is not something that is optional.
>For a group with an average age in their fifties, male, female or
>mixed, the fact that we have to have such comprehensive rules /
>guidelines, is an unfortunate indictment on a few.
Yes, and I think that everybody does know that the majority of those
present already know how to dress and behave in public. It's just that
those who did not were so obvious about it that they reflected on the
group as a whole.
. . . . .
>>+sitting at the bottom was rather a disappointment, I felt left out of
>>+the party, only until I and my golf partner and 2 other girls picked
>>+up chairs and included ourselves in the festivities. The planner had
>>+no concept of bringing all those that played into her grasp.
>Seemed like it was more an oversight than anything to exclude anyone. I
>was surprised that we got the lunch / discount vouchers at all so I
>guess it depends on the expectation.
Inclusion, IMAO, is a two-way street. Our group does not intentionally
exclude others, I know the group too well to believe that. This had to
be, as you say, oversight and not active exclusion.
If somebody feels left out, he/she should take the initiative to join
in. "Mind if I join you?" "Is this seat taken?" "May I squeeze in?"
. . . . .
>>1. Temperature. There's not much we can do about this. I'm not a
>Moving the week earlier in the year won't necessarily help. You just
>have to remember that Las Vegas is in the desert and it does get hot!
Actually, I see weather as far less of a risk factor for DLV than it
is for things like Pinkfest, Fall Harvest, FanFair, etc.
With Las Vegas in the spring, the weather is far more predictable than
during autumn in Chicago, Omaha, or Provincetown.
With DLV, it may be a bit warm or cool and windy. An inconvenience at
most. For the other three, an early snowstorm will effectively kill the
event totally.
----------
(This posting was entered by annie, an external user of MyDLV.)
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
Preliminary survey report ...
by External Poster » Tue Jun 01, 2004 6:47 am
This posting is from: Michelle Jenkins
----------
Howdy everyone
> I've taken the liberty of adding some comments here and there. Your
> comments, observations, and interpretations are most welcome.
Kewl.....Goody...thats the best part!
> Attendance history:
>
> 25 stated DLV 2004 was their first DLV.
> 16 stated they had attended DLV once before.
> 24 stated they had attended DLV two times or more before.
How does this compare to the mix on the registration database...as to
whether the 65 respondents are indicative of the group as a whole?
> Travel distance:
>
> Approximate average travel distance was 2350 miles. Significant increase
> from 2003.
> Somewhat of a surprise to me, with the higher average travel distance,
> I assumed more would be flying.
I noticed that there seemed to be quite a few groups that had driven from
long distances, ie 3/4 sharing a car from the East Coast etc.
> Arrival date:
>
> Before May 1: 14
> Saturday, May 1: 9
> Sunday, May 2: 18
> Monday, May 3: 8
> Tuesday, May 4: 4
> Wednesday, May 5: 7
> Thursday, May 6: 3
> Friday, May 7: 2
> Departure date:
>
> Thursday, May 6: 4
> Friday, May 7: 10
> Saturday, May 8: 14
> Sunday, May 9: 18
> After May 9: 18
>
> Average number of days in attendance: 6.23, an increase from 2003. Over
> the past few years we've been seeing a trend toward more week-long
> attendees.
>
> Our people are coming earlier and staying longer. They must like it! :)
Well there has always been a clamouring for a longer DLV, the latter
comments by a few that it was too long, notwithstanding. I would only
comment that even though there may be no DLV activities on the two/three
days prior to and immediately after the official DLV, there should be
some nominated venues / times etc for these people to meet and do stuff
together. Especially if the early arrivers and later departers are an
increasing trend.
> Slight increase from last year. This has been creeping upward, more than
> one year of age per calendar year, since we have been tracking it. (I
> guess eventually I will get to the wrong side of this myself.) :)
Well as long as it keeps increasing you will remain on the lower side of
it one assumes? :-)
> . . . . .
> Public exposure:
>
> DLV 2004 was first public exposure: 1
> Less than one year: 6
> 1-2 years: 5
> 2-5 years: 17
> 5-10 years: 23
> 10-20 years: 7
> 20+ years: 2
> Does not apply: 4
I find it difficult to believe that ONLY 4 people have never exposed
themselves...in public! :-)
> Activities, enjoyment. 1-5 scale ...
>
> The skewing of these toward the high side is due to the fact, I believe,
> that most of them are indeed outstanding activities and the participants
> saw them as such and rated them as such.
>
Ummmm... It seems to me that rating here can be misleading. Since most
people go to thing they are likely to participate in and enjoy anyway the
chances of a good rating are pretty good to start with. Eg Golfers like
playing golf...end of story hence the high rating.
1 Golf 4.94 (16 responses) [MS]
2 High tea: 4.93 (14 responses, 3 no-shows) [MS]
3> NSD side trip: 4.91 (35 responses, 2 no-shows) [MS?]
4 Lake Mead cruise: 4.86 (14 responses) [MS]
5 Pity Party: 4.82 (17 responses) [CE]
6 Limo tour: 4.79 (28 responses) [MS]
7 MCC Church: 4.78 (9 responses) [MS]
8 Carluccio's dinner: 4.72 (39 responses, 2 no-shows) [CE]
9 Art tour: 4.67 (6 responses, 1 no-show) [MS]
10 Garden Party: 4.59 (25 responses) [CE]
11 San Remo: 4.56 (16 responses) [MS]
12 "V" show: 4.56 (16 responses, 2 no-shows) [MS]
13 Dance Night: 4.52 (21 responses) [MS]
14 Thrift shop tour: 4.5 (8 responses, 2 no-shows) [MS]
15 Star Trek Experience: 4.5 (6 responses) [MS]
16 Hard Rock Cafe: 4.49 (43 responses) [MS]
17 Milano's dinner: 4.46 (26 responses) [CE]
18 Lunch With/out Ginger: 4.42 (19 responses) [MS]
19 Annual Mixer: 4.39 (41 responses) [CE]
20 Hamburger Mary's: 4.39 (38 responses, 2 no-shows) [MS]
21 Welcome Celebration, Flex: 4.31 (35 responses) [CE]
22 Glamour Boutique: 4.31 (26 responses, 4 no-shows) [CE]
23 Farewell get-together: 4.31 (13 responses) [CE]
24 Rhyolite trip: 4.3 (20 responses, 1 no-show) [MS]
25 Charles Bar: 4.3 (10 responses) [MS]
26 Pre-DLV, Spotlight: 4.26 (27 responses) [CE]
27 Goodtimes karaoke: 4.24 (42 responses) [CE]
28 Freezone happy hour: 3.83 (23 responses) [CE]
29 Las Vegas Lounge: 2.17 (17 responses) [CE]
I do see some trends though based on a few other factors maybe.
7 of the top 10 activities are mainstream, 15 out of the top 20, while 7 of
the bottom 10 are Closed Environment. I believe that the group is enjoying
being out and about more than the closed environments of some of the clubs.
I know many will realise this is a little hobby horse of mine but I thing
the results do indicate a general liking for mainstream normal everyday (if
you can call anything in Las Vegas EVERDAY) activities.
Annie has also made some comments and has a slightly different few of
this, that even the lower rating is OK, given the higher average /
overall rating. Ignoring LVL as it was just a hole and Freezone,
probably because all it was, was really just a just meeting point and
nothing happened there, the others, as venue / activities were still
rated relatively lowly. The reason I suspect, is not the fact that they
were bars per se, but that they were bars at which we had no actual
activity, such as a meal or a show or theme (eg Pity Party).
I guess what I'm saying is that while we've previously had a call for
socialising time, simply putting bars on a schedule doesn't do it for a
lot of people. You can socialise and DO something, given the right
environment.
> The only thing that was disliked more than it was liked was the Las
> Vegas Lounge. I think it's quite obvious why this is the case.
As much as I thought this place was a dive, I think the NSD reception
party was general a none activity and it is as much that, that is
reflected in the survey results.
> Time crunch ...
>
> Seldom or never: 36
> Occasionally: 25
> Frequently: 4
>
> This is slightly higher than last year. As we increase the number of
> activities we plan, I think we will see this go higher.
Actually this year I only really hit the wall once, and that was after
an all nighter on Thursday / Friday morning. We over did the Thursday
withy Golf/ Show / Limo Tour / Charles Bar....etc. I think other made
comment on this as well.
> Comfortable being seen with group ...
>
> Most or all the time: 57
> Sometimes uncomfortable: 7
> Frequently uncomfortable: 2
>
> This, again, is a reflection of the overall climate of this year's DLV.
> The vast majority dressed and behaved in a manner that others were
> comfortable with in public.
This year I was very much more comfortable being with DLV as a group.
There was a lot less of the obvious flamboyance (or should this be
flamgirlance?) that has been seen in past years and was the cause of the
dress and behaviour code. The quality of makeup, style, deportment, hair
do's etc, etc was better (if not much better) that 2003.
There was that girl that kept showing up in a DLV T-Shirt... but get one
in every crowd! :-)
> Increased attention to behavior/dress/restroom issues ...
>
> Fine with it: 52
> Understand why it has to be: 12
> Don't like, but will put up with it: 1
I only heard / saw one person that objected to this in any obvious way
and she was told firmly to go read it. In my opinion her appearance and
attitude changed from last year and over the few days I did see her. For
a group with an average age in their fifties, male, female or mixed, the
fact that we have to have such comprehensive rules / guidelines, is an
unfortunate indictment on a few.
> Again, this says a lot regarding the climate and culture this year.
> . . . . .
> How much did the Mothers Day issue affect your plans:
>
> Little or none: 49
> Somewhat: 10
> Significantly: 5
>
> This also may be somewhat self-fulfiling, since I'm aware of a few
> people who did have Mothers Day issues who chose to skip the entire DLV
> this year rather than attend for what they could.
NOT Really. That fact that about 20% were affected is probably a
reflection on all of those on the list that might have come but didn't
for a variety of reasons. The only way to find out would be to survey
the mail list, for those that didn't come and ask why not.
> . . . . .
>
> Degree of structure:
>
> Fine as it is: 59
> Want less structure: 2
> Want more structure: 3
>
> Seclusion of activities:
>
> Fine as it is: 38
> Want less seclusion: 20
> Want more seclusion: 6
>
> Majority still says it ain't broke, however we're now seeing a number of
> those who desire more seclusion, as well as less.
If you look back DLV has changed in some ways over the last few years.
It is getting longer, it has having more mainstream activities and the
type of activity continues to be more adventurous (Eg NSD). There some
non partying mainstream stuff and it seems that these are quite popular.
Take the boat trip for example, this was both well supported and
enjoyed.
As the group (ie the average confidence level, not those of a leading
few) continues to gain confidence, there will be an increasing desire
for less seclusion but a continuing trail of people wanting more
seclusion until they've "caught up" so to speak. As anyone who has gone
from being a first timer to and experienced out and about DLVer will
tell you, its only the ultimate exposure like the boat trips etc that
make you realise that it can be done and the confidence levels grow
appropriately.
> Length of DLV:
>
> Just right: 44
> Too short: 12
> Too long: 7
>
> This is the first year we've had any significant reports of it being
> too long. The length may be catching up with us.
I don't think DLV was too long, just that stayed too long! :-)
> Name tags ...
>
> Found them helpful: 40
> Ok with them: 19
> Do not like: 4
>
> Again, if it ain't broke ...
Ummmm.... Got mine at Freezone, wore it there and at Milano's, put it in
my hand bag and never saw again until I was packing up to come home!
And from the comments....
> +I like to have one big event that we all can get dressed up ( like a
> +ball) and meet as many of the girls at one time. I can see that would
> +be hard with girls coming and going home every day
Ummm ... NSD?, Limo Tour? Show? Some of us dressed up!
> +I would like to see perhaps another round of golf at a different course
> +(2 days, 2 courses) and a ballroom dance venue for the DLV'ers
YES!!! A real person....Golf on two days!!!!
> +I think that possibly having an Evening of Dinner, Street Dancing, and
> +shopping on Fremont Street would be fun and low cost. An evening or day
> +trip to the Rio to see the Mardi Gras in the sky show would be fun as
> +well.
Good Idea's
> +I wanted to do the Limo Tour, but playing golf in the hot sun all day
> +and then trying to stay awake till 2am or more would have been a huge
> +effort for me as I am not a young person. Please let's discuss this
> +before next year comes and I'll do both. (Golf group average age was
> 50).
The Thursday schedule was demanding and I agree , having gone to the
golf, show and tour and Charles bar and breakfast at Bellagio the next
morning it was a long hard day!
> +I did find that the golf outing lunch was not all inclusive with the
> +payment of the golf. Also the seating arrangement of having those who
> +finished earlier sitting on top of the lounge and those finishing later
> +sitting at the bottom was rather a disappointment, I felt left out of
> +the party, only until I and my golf partner and 2 other girls picked up
> +chairs and included ourselves in the festivities. The planner had no
> +concept of bringing all those that played into her grasp.
Seemed like it was more an oversight than anything to exclude anyone. I
was surprised that we got the lunch / discount vouchers at all so I
guess it depends on the expectation.
> +This survey is to long.
It is a bit long.
> 1. Temperature. There's not much we can do about this. I'm not a
The week following DLV the temperature plummeted. I was there and it was
down into the 70-80's most days with maybe one day in the low 90's.
Seems like the week we were there may have been unseasonably warm,
compared to last year when the temperature was unseasonably cool! It was
warm though, made worse by the wind on occasions. Moving the week
earlier in the year won't necessarily help. You just have to remember
that Las Vegas is in the desert and it does get hot!
> 3. Restrooms. Overall, I would say that everybody present did an
> exceptional job in helping us to have zero significant incidents during
> DLV. The only case I can remember of any restroom difficulty is one
> person having to go very badly on a trip back from an activity where
> drinks were served. :)
Well two actually. Once coming back from NSD and once after the Limo
tour, while still with my group when we stopped for Burito's. I think it
was a quick call to the Cheers Bar next to Roberto's! Interesting!
> There was the issue at the Hard Rock, and I and the other ORG people I
I felt this was a little unfortunate. It not only affected our group but
impacted on all the GG's there as well. They should not have been
affected in that situation in my opinion. It seemed to be an HRC
decision as a result of a complaint by a girl to her parents about "us"
being in the ladies. Probably a good reason to avoid venues where
children are present!
> . . . . . . . . . .
>
> 4. Mainstream vs. alternative bars.
>
> Ya know, I don't think we will ever, as hard as we try, find one or two
> bars of any theme or any scale that 100 individuals will agree are
> ideal.
>
> Yes, this year, those who want more mainstream bars and fewer alternative
> bars have been vocal, far more so than in the past.
>
> I would think, however, that if this were indeed a calling from the
> Teeming Millions to eschew alternative bars and go entirely with
> mainstream bars, the activities in the alternative bars would be rated
> significantly lower overall. This does not appear to be the case. If we
> examine the enjoyment ratings for all bar activities, both mainstream
> and alternative, with two exceptions they are clustered between 4.2 and
> 4.5 with neither of the categories predominating.
>
> We did have two bar activities, both in alternative venues, that were
> clearly out of this cluster. First is the Las Vegas lounge, and our only
> activity to rate below 3.0 on the enjoyment scale. I think it's safe to
> say that we will not be going back there unless it changes
> significantly.
>
> The other one is somewhat of an enigma to me. That is the happy hour at
> the Freezone. It placed 3.8-something. 3.8x out of 5.0 is, IMAO, not
> bad per se, but all but two of our activities were in a cluster of
> 4.2 to 5.0, making this a clear exception.
Referring to my earlier comments, it's not the bars, its the lack of
theme, purpose that causes the problem. Freezone was more like one of
those registration activities. It was the first up for everyone who was
in LV at the time and wasn't really doing anything. IMO scheduding a bar
visit without a purpose is going end up with type of result in a survey.
> 5. One central hotel, group rates.
This isn't going to work. There are too many opinions on good / better
and best hotel in Las Vegas. IMO we should have hotels that are
geographically closer. The Sahara for example seems somewhat remote.
But.... People have there favorites and I can see the Sahara being
nominated every year. Having more rather than less? Not really sure that
will make much difference either.
Seemed to be more doing the suite and timeshare thing this year with
lots of positive comments.
> . . . . . . . . . .
>
> 7. Smoke and smoking.
Build a bridge. Get over it! Smokers smoke and in Las Vegas its seems to
be deemed very acceptable. I think the choice of the dive neighborhood
bars makes it worse than say the large open casino bars etc.....
> 8. Charles Bar.
>
> Yes, we probably should have stated that "Charles Bar" was not really
> the name of the bar, and that Allegro (Allegra?) was indeed the name of
> the bar to look for.
This was complicated by the incorrect bar name AND the fact that Charles had
actually moved to a bar round the corner anyway.
We are officially? (unoficially?) known as Charlies Angels to the rest of
Charles colleagues. Well done girls!
Hugs
Michelle
----------
(This posting was entered by Michelle Jenkins, an external user of MyDLV.)
----------
Howdy everyone
> I've taken the liberty of adding some comments here and there. Your
> comments, observations, and interpretations are most welcome.
Kewl.....Goody...thats the best part!
> Attendance history:
>
> 25 stated DLV 2004 was their first DLV.
> 16 stated they had attended DLV once before.
> 24 stated they had attended DLV two times or more before.
How does this compare to the mix on the registration database...as to
whether the 65 respondents are indicative of the group as a whole?
> Travel distance:
>
> Approximate average travel distance was 2350 miles. Significant increase
> from 2003.
> Somewhat of a surprise to me, with the higher average travel distance,
> I assumed more would be flying.
I noticed that there seemed to be quite a few groups that had driven from
long distances, ie 3/4 sharing a car from the East Coast etc.
> Arrival date:
>
> Before May 1: 14
> Saturday, May 1: 9
> Sunday, May 2: 18
> Monday, May 3: 8
> Tuesday, May 4: 4
> Wednesday, May 5: 7
> Thursday, May 6: 3
> Friday, May 7: 2
> Departure date:
>
> Thursday, May 6: 4
> Friday, May 7: 10
> Saturday, May 8: 14
> Sunday, May 9: 18
> After May 9: 18
>
> Average number of days in attendance: 6.23, an increase from 2003. Over
> the past few years we've been seeing a trend toward more week-long
> attendees.
>
> Our people are coming earlier and staying longer. They must like it! :)
Well there has always been a clamouring for a longer DLV, the latter
comments by a few that it was too long, notwithstanding. I would only
comment that even though there may be no DLV activities on the two/three
days prior to and immediately after the official DLV, there should be
some nominated venues / times etc for these people to meet and do stuff
together. Especially if the early arrivers and later departers are an
increasing trend.
> Slight increase from last year. This has been creeping upward, more than
> one year of age per calendar year, since we have been tracking it. (I
> guess eventually I will get to the wrong side of this myself.) :)
Well as long as it keeps increasing you will remain on the lower side of
it one assumes? :-)
> . . . . .
> Public exposure:
>
> DLV 2004 was first public exposure: 1
> Less than one year: 6
> 1-2 years: 5
> 2-5 years: 17
> 5-10 years: 23
> 10-20 years: 7
> 20+ years: 2
> Does not apply: 4
I find it difficult to believe that ONLY 4 people have never exposed
themselves...in public! :-)
> Activities, enjoyment. 1-5 scale ...
>
> The skewing of these toward the high side is due to the fact, I believe,
> that most of them are indeed outstanding activities and the participants
> saw them as such and rated them as such.
>
Ummmm... It seems to me that rating here can be misleading. Since most
people go to thing they are likely to participate in and enjoy anyway the
chances of a good rating are pretty good to start with. Eg Golfers like
playing golf...end of story hence the high rating.
1 Golf 4.94 (16 responses) [MS]
2 High tea: 4.93 (14 responses, 3 no-shows) [MS]
3> NSD side trip: 4.91 (35 responses, 2 no-shows) [MS?]
4 Lake Mead cruise: 4.86 (14 responses) [MS]
5 Pity Party: 4.82 (17 responses) [CE]
6 Limo tour: 4.79 (28 responses) [MS]
7 MCC Church: 4.78 (9 responses) [MS]
8 Carluccio's dinner: 4.72 (39 responses, 2 no-shows) [CE]
9 Art tour: 4.67 (6 responses, 1 no-show) [MS]
10 Garden Party: 4.59 (25 responses) [CE]
11 San Remo: 4.56 (16 responses) [MS]
12 "V" show: 4.56 (16 responses, 2 no-shows) [MS]
13 Dance Night: 4.52 (21 responses) [MS]
14 Thrift shop tour: 4.5 (8 responses, 2 no-shows) [MS]
15 Star Trek Experience: 4.5 (6 responses) [MS]
16 Hard Rock Cafe: 4.49 (43 responses) [MS]
17 Milano's dinner: 4.46 (26 responses) [CE]
18 Lunch With/out Ginger: 4.42 (19 responses) [MS]
19 Annual Mixer: 4.39 (41 responses) [CE]
20 Hamburger Mary's: 4.39 (38 responses, 2 no-shows) [MS]
21 Welcome Celebration, Flex: 4.31 (35 responses) [CE]
22 Glamour Boutique: 4.31 (26 responses, 4 no-shows) [CE]
23 Farewell get-together: 4.31 (13 responses) [CE]
24 Rhyolite trip: 4.3 (20 responses, 1 no-show) [MS]
25 Charles Bar: 4.3 (10 responses) [MS]
26 Pre-DLV, Spotlight: 4.26 (27 responses) [CE]
27 Goodtimes karaoke: 4.24 (42 responses) [CE]
28 Freezone happy hour: 3.83 (23 responses) [CE]
29 Las Vegas Lounge: 2.17 (17 responses) [CE]
I do see some trends though based on a few other factors maybe.
7 of the top 10 activities are mainstream, 15 out of the top 20, while 7 of
the bottom 10 are Closed Environment. I believe that the group is enjoying
being out and about more than the closed environments of some of the clubs.
I know many will realise this is a little hobby horse of mine but I thing
the results do indicate a general liking for mainstream normal everyday (if
you can call anything in Las Vegas EVERDAY) activities.
Annie has also made some comments and has a slightly different few of
this, that even the lower rating is OK, given the higher average /
overall rating. Ignoring LVL as it was just a hole and Freezone,
probably because all it was, was really just a just meeting point and
nothing happened there, the others, as venue / activities were still
rated relatively lowly. The reason I suspect, is not the fact that they
were bars per se, but that they were bars at which we had no actual
activity, such as a meal or a show or theme (eg Pity Party).
I guess what I'm saying is that while we've previously had a call for
socialising time, simply putting bars on a schedule doesn't do it for a
lot of people. You can socialise and DO something, given the right
environment.
> The only thing that was disliked more than it was liked was the Las
> Vegas Lounge. I think it's quite obvious why this is the case.
As much as I thought this place was a dive, I think the NSD reception
party was general a none activity and it is as much that, that is
reflected in the survey results.
> Time crunch ...
>
> Seldom or never: 36
> Occasionally: 25
> Frequently: 4
>
> This is slightly higher than last year. As we increase the number of
> activities we plan, I think we will see this go higher.
Actually this year I only really hit the wall once, and that was after
an all nighter on Thursday / Friday morning. We over did the Thursday
withy Golf/ Show / Limo Tour / Charles Bar....etc. I think other made
comment on this as well.
> Comfortable being seen with group ...
>
> Most or all the time: 57
> Sometimes uncomfortable: 7
> Frequently uncomfortable: 2
>
> This, again, is a reflection of the overall climate of this year's DLV.
> The vast majority dressed and behaved in a manner that others were
> comfortable with in public.
This year I was very much more comfortable being with DLV as a group.
There was a lot less of the obvious flamboyance (or should this be
flamgirlance?) that has been seen in past years and was the cause of the
dress and behaviour code. The quality of makeup, style, deportment, hair
do's etc, etc was better (if not much better) that 2003.
There was that girl that kept showing up in a DLV T-Shirt... but get one
in every crowd! :-)
> Increased attention to behavior/dress/restroom issues ...
>
> Fine with it: 52
> Understand why it has to be: 12
> Don't like, but will put up with it: 1
I only heard / saw one person that objected to this in any obvious way
and she was told firmly to go read it. In my opinion her appearance and
attitude changed from last year and over the few days I did see her. For
a group with an average age in their fifties, male, female or mixed, the
fact that we have to have such comprehensive rules / guidelines, is an
unfortunate indictment on a few.
> Again, this says a lot regarding the climate and culture this year.
> . . . . .
> How much did the Mothers Day issue affect your plans:
>
> Little or none: 49
> Somewhat: 10
> Significantly: 5
>
> This also may be somewhat self-fulfiling, since I'm aware of a few
> people who did have Mothers Day issues who chose to skip the entire DLV
> this year rather than attend for what they could.
NOT Really. That fact that about 20% were affected is probably a
reflection on all of those on the list that might have come but didn't
for a variety of reasons. The only way to find out would be to survey
the mail list, for those that didn't come and ask why not.
> . . . . .
>
> Degree of structure:
>
> Fine as it is: 59
> Want less structure: 2
> Want more structure: 3
>
> Seclusion of activities:
>
> Fine as it is: 38
> Want less seclusion: 20
> Want more seclusion: 6
>
> Majority still says it ain't broke, however we're now seeing a number of
> those who desire more seclusion, as well as less.
If you look back DLV has changed in some ways over the last few years.
It is getting longer, it has having more mainstream activities and the
type of activity continues to be more adventurous (Eg NSD). There some
non partying mainstream stuff and it seems that these are quite popular.
Take the boat trip for example, this was both well supported and
enjoyed.
As the group (ie the average confidence level, not those of a leading
few) continues to gain confidence, there will be an increasing desire
for less seclusion but a continuing trail of people wanting more
seclusion until they've "caught up" so to speak. As anyone who has gone
from being a first timer to and experienced out and about DLVer will
tell you, its only the ultimate exposure like the boat trips etc that
make you realise that it can be done and the confidence levels grow
appropriately.
> Length of DLV:
>
> Just right: 44
> Too short: 12
> Too long: 7
>
> This is the first year we've had any significant reports of it being
> too long. The length may be catching up with us.
I don't think DLV was too long, just that stayed too long! :-)
> Name tags ...
>
> Found them helpful: 40
> Ok with them: 19
> Do not like: 4
>
> Again, if it ain't broke ...
Ummmm.... Got mine at Freezone, wore it there and at Milano's, put it in
my hand bag and never saw again until I was packing up to come home!
And from the comments....
> +I like to have one big event that we all can get dressed up ( like a
> +ball) and meet as many of the girls at one time. I can see that would
> +be hard with girls coming and going home every day
Ummm ... NSD?, Limo Tour? Show? Some of us dressed up!
> +I would like to see perhaps another round of golf at a different course
> +(2 days, 2 courses) and a ballroom dance venue for the DLV'ers
YES!!! A real person....Golf on two days!!!!
> +I think that possibly having an Evening of Dinner, Street Dancing, and
> +shopping on Fremont Street would be fun and low cost. An evening or day
> +trip to the Rio to see the Mardi Gras in the sky show would be fun as
> +well.
Good Idea's
> +I wanted to do the Limo Tour, but playing golf in the hot sun all day
> +and then trying to stay awake till 2am or more would have been a huge
> +effort for me as I am not a young person. Please let's discuss this
> +before next year comes and I'll do both. (Golf group average age was
> 50).
The Thursday schedule was demanding and I agree , having gone to the
golf, show and tour and Charles bar and breakfast at Bellagio the next
morning it was a long hard day!
> +I did find that the golf outing lunch was not all inclusive with the
> +payment of the golf. Also the seating arrangement of having those who
> +finished earlier sitting on top of the lounge and those finishing later
> +sitting at the bottom was rather a disappointment, I felt left out of
> +the party, only until I and my golf partner and 2 other girls picked up
> +chairs and included ourselves in the festivities. The planner had no
> +concept of bringing all those that played into her grasp.
Seemed like it was more an oversight than anything to exclude anyone. I
was surprised that we got the lunch / discount vouchers at all so I
guess it depends on the expectation.
> +This survey is to long.
It is a bit long.
> 1. Temperature. There's not much we can do about this. I'm not a
The week following DLV the temperature plummeted. I was there and it was
down into the 70-80's most days with maybe one day in the low 90's.
Seems like the week we were there may have been unseasonably warm,
compared to last year when the temperature was unseasonably cool! It was
warm though, made worse by the wind on occasions. Moving the week
earlier in the year won't necessarily help. You just have to remember
that Las Vegas is in the desert and it does get hot!
> 3. Restrooms. Overall, I would say that everybody present did an
> exceptional job in helping us to have zero significant incidents during
> DLV. The only case I can remember of any restroom difficulty is one
> person having to go very badly on a trip back from an activity where
> drinks were served. :)
Well two actually. Once coming back from NSD and once after the Limo
tour, while still with my group when we stopped for Burito's. I think it
was a quick call to the Cheers Bar next to Roberto's! Interesting!
> There was the issue at the Hard Rock, and I and the other ORG people I
I felt this was a little unfortunate. It not only affected our group but
impacted on all the GG's there as well. They should not have been
affected in that situation in my opinion. It seemed to be an HRC
decision as a result of a complaint by a girl to her parents about "us"
being in the ladies. Probably a good reason to avoid venues where
children are present!
> . . . . . . . . . .
>
> 4. Mainstream vs. alternative bars.
>
> Ya know, I don't think we will ever, as hard as we try, find one or two
> bars of any theme or any scale that 100 individuals will agree are
> ideal.
>
> Yes, this year, those who want more mainstream bars and fewer alternative
> bars have been vocal, far more so than in the past.
>
> I would think, however, that if this were indeed a calling from the
> Teeming Millions to eschew alternative bars and go entirely with
> mainstream bars, the activities in the alternative bars would be rated
> significantly lower overall. This does not appear to be the case. If we
> examine the enjoyment ratings for all bar activities, both mainstream
> and alternative, with two exceptions they are clustered between 4.2 and
> 4.5 with neither of the categories predominating.
>
> We did have two bar activities, both in alternative venues, that were
> clearly out of this cluster. First is the Las Vegas lounge, and our only
> activity to rate below 3.0 on the enjoyment scale. I think it's safe to
> say that we will not be going back there unless it changes
> significantly.
>
> The other one is somewhat of an enigma to me. That is the happy hour at
> the Freezone. It placed 3.8-something. 3.8x out of 5.0 is, IMAO, not
> bad per se, but all but two of our activities were in a cluster of
> 4.2 to 5.0, making this a clear exception.
Referring to my earlier comments, it's not the bars, its the lack of
theme, purpose that causes the problem. Freezone was more like one of
those registration activities. It was the first up for everyone who was
in LV at the time and wasn't really doing anything. IMO scheduding a bar
visit without a purpose is going end up with type of result in a survey.
> 5. One central hotel, group rates.
This isn't going to work. There are too many opinions on good / better
and best hotel in Las Vegas. IMO we should have hotels that are
geographically closer. The Sahara for example seems somewhat remote.
But.... People have there favorites and I can see the Sahara being
nominated every year. Having more rather than less? Not really sure that
will make much difference either.
Seemed to be more doing the suite and timeshare thing this year with
lots of positive comments.
> . . . . . . . . . .
>
> 7. Smoke and smoking.
Build a bridge. Get over it! Smokers smoke and in Las Vegas its seems to
be deemed very acceptable. I think the choice of the dive neighborhood
bars makes it worse than say the large open casino bars etc.....
> 8. Charles Bar.
>
> Yes, we probably should have stated that "Charles Bar" was not really
> the name of the bar, and that Allegro (Allegra?) was indeed the name of
> the bar to look for.
This was complicated by the incorrect bar name AND the fact that Charles had
actually moved to a bar round the corner anyway.
We are officially? (unoficially?) known as Charlies Angels to the rest of
Charles colleagues. Well done girls!
Hugs
Michelle
----------
(This posting was entered by Michelle Jenkins, an external user of MyDLV.)
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
Preliminary survey report ...
by External Poster » Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:12 am
This posting is from: kate smith
----------
Through last summer I was leaning towards the thought that we were
overdoing the adhoc thing a little but I was wrong. ( Please put this
down to my lack of organizational experience ) But after this years DLV
being so succesfull and without any significant incidents I see that
taking a different aproach with respect to the suggested washroom and
apropriate clothing per event guidelines and consequences was what we
needed to improve on previous years. What I am saying is thank's to
those who kept the faith and pushed the Guidelines and "consequences"
document through to ensure we had an even better DLV than last year.
The Golf was a good example of deportment and apropriate attire as
everyone was suitably well dressed and behaving themselves as much as
golfers usually do and I think even I could have been taken for a female
golfer from 5 or 600 yards away. I went away from the course feeling
pretty good about myself having had such a really unique daytime
experience in the relative comfort of being with a group of like minded
folks and I'll be looking forward to doing it again now it went off so
smoothly.
I liked the Hard rock night but the washroom queue was unfortunate and
a little painfull too by the time I got to do the dirty deed so to
speak, so if we had a complaint from a parent there then maybe we
should look into finding a new spot where kids, like batteries - are not
included. Although why anyone would want to take kids to Vegas is
beyond me.
Kate.
----------
(This posting was entered by kate smith, an external user of MyDLV.)
----------
Through last summer I was leaning towards the thought that we were
overdoing the adhoc thing a little but I was wrong. ( Please put this
down to my lack of organizational experience ) But after this years DLV
being so succesfull and without any significant incidents I see that
taking a different aproach with respect to the suggested washroom and
apropriate clothing per event guidelines and consequences was what we
needed to improve on previous years. What I am saying is thank's to
those who kept the faith and pushed the Guidelines and "consequences"
document through to ensure we had an even better DLV than last year.
The Golf was a good example of deportment and apropriate attire as
everyone was suitably well dressed and behaving themselves as much as
golfers usually do and I think even I could have been taken for a female
golfer from 5 or 600 yards away. I went away from the course feeling
pretty good about myself having had such a really unique daytime
experience in the relative comfort of being with a group of like minded
folks and I'll be looking forward to doing it again now it went off so
smoothly.
I liked the Hard rock night but the washroom queue was unfortunate and
a little painfull too by the time I got to do the dirty deed so to
speak, so if we had a complaint from a parent there then maybe we
should look into finding a new spot where kids, like batteries - are not
included. Although why anyone would want to take kids to Vegas is
beyond me.
Kate.
----------
(This posting was entered by kate smith, an external user of MyDLV.)
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
HRC, kids and such (was Re: Preliminary survey report(
by External Poster » Tue Jun 01, 2004 9:42 am
This posting is from: annie
----------
> I liked the Hard rock night but the washroom queue was unfortunate and
> a little painfull too by the time I got to do the dirty deed so to
> speak, so if we had a complaint from a parent there then maybe we
> should look into finding a new spot where kids, like batteries - are not
> included.
Question here, does anybody actually know if the restroom cop thing was
the result of an actual complaint by a parent, or was it just a guess?
From what I observed, our people were using facilities properly, like
not going in groups and such. Was this everybody's observation?
> Although why anyone would want to take kids to Vegas is
> beyond me.
Well, in the late 80's and 90's, the powers that be in Las Vegas sure
tried to make it the Disneyland of the desert. You know, Family
Friendly<tm> and all of that. Most people now admit that the Disneyland
experiment failed, and we're now seeing the pendulum swing once again
in the direction of an adult playground.
Most people agree that Las Vegas is not a place for kids, including
those who insist on bringing them.
Oh well ...
----------
(This posting was entered by annie, an external user of MyDLV.)
----------
> I liked the Hard rock night but the washroom queue was unfortunate and
> a little painfull too by the time I got to do the dirty deed so to
> speak, so if we had a complaint from a parent there then maybe we
> should look into finding a new spot where kids, like batteries - are not
> included.
Question here, does anybody actually know if the restroom cop thing was
the result of an actual complaint by a parent, or was it just a guess?
From what I observed, our people were using facilities properly, like
not going in groups and such. Was this everybody's observation?
> Although why anyone would want to take kids to Vegas is
> beyond me.
Well, in the late 80's and 90's, the powers that be in Las Vegas sure
tried to make it the Disneyland of the desert. You know, Family
Friendly<tm> and all of that. Most people now admit that the Disneyland
experiment failed, and we're now seeing the pendulum swing once again
in the direction of an adult playground.
Most people agree that Las Vegas is not a place for kids, including
those who insist on bringing them.
Oh well ...
----------
(This posting was entered by annie, an external user of MyDLV.)
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
HRC
by External Poster » Tue Jun 01, 2004 11:30 am
This posting is from: kumiko yvonne watanabe
----------
We also have to consider HRC's side.
That evening, I occasionally noticed some of the staff watching over us,
esp a asian girl who I think was the coordinator from the HRC side, who
collected our 'meal ticket' and who also was a 'bathroom guard' when I
went. I talked to her for a short time, and she was very gracious and
pleasent, and I didn't get any a hit of any type of 'tranny' attitude of
me, from her at all. If she was the coordinator, its understandable of
her concern and worry about our group and the size of our group.
Their looking over us was more to making sure everyone was being
serviced during the meal.
Trying to see it from her side, which was HRC mgnt, I can understand her
dilema of balancing and trying to keep the general public and our large
group happy so that there are no complaints, problems, or situations
from either side. I think she was trying her best to keep us happy.
Her solution was low key, and to me a compromise. Having a not soo
visable gg standing by the restroom, being courteous and helpful, and
yet filtering who goes in, is so much better than some male or male
worker or some male beefcake no-brain male security guard standing in
front of women's bathroom, giving us the 'once over tranny look' doing
the same thing... or telling us to use a restroom far and away from the
general public.
My own experience was they never stopped me NOR said or did anything
negative to prevent or limit me from using the restrooms; and personally
I wasn't bothered or offended too much by it. In some ways I was more
positive and glad they did what they did, and felt a little bit more at
ease rather than worrying about a potential bad interaction with a real
gg in the restroom. HRC if anything - the bottom line, still let us use
the restroom of our own choice.
This was a very mainstream location and sizable event, considering how
many of us atttended. I'm personally impressed that HRC actually
allowed our relatively good sized group to have dinner there. Being
mainstream and a popular well known resturant, families and all types
are also welcomed into that resturant. We have to realize that they
(mgnt) also has to consider and defuse any potential situations that
creates any form of 'bad' karma or goodwill to anyone who enters the
resturant. They want everyone to have a good experience at their
resturant, and want to return to eat there.
Kids, rednecks, rude teens and as*h*le 'tranny-fobic' grown-ups are
just some parameters that has to dealt with (mgnt and us) when a group
of 2 or more of us go to a mainstream public place. Going to a place
that is w/o kids is like putting the ole 'safety' blanket out, like
going to safer trangendered venues.
If it was a complaint, and HRC mgnt had to deal with it. Its NOT HRC's
fault. I'd blame the one who complained and not HRC. HRC had the
un-fortunate problem to find some form of workable solution which is
hard to please everyone 100%.
----------
(This posting was entered by kumiko yvonne watanabe, an external user of MyDLV.)
----------
We also have to consider HRC's side.
That evening, I occasionally noticed some of the staff watching over us,
esp a asian girl who I think was the coordinator from the HRC side, who
collected our 'meal ticket' and who also was a 'bathroom guard' when I
went. I talked to her for a short time, and she was very gracious and
pleasent, and I didn't get any a hit of any type of 'tranny' attitude of
me, from her at all. If she was the coordinator, its understandable of
her concern and worry about our group and the size of our group.
Their looking over us was more to making sure everyone was being
serviced during the meal.
Trying to see it from her side, which was HRC mgnt, I can understand her
dilema of balancing and trying to keep the general public and our large
group happy so that there are no complaints, problems, or situations
from either side. I think she was trying her best to keep us happy.
Her solution was low key, and to me a compromise. Having a not soo
visable gg standing by the restroom, being courteous and helpful, and
yet filtering who goes in, is so much better than some male or male
worker or some male beefcake no-brain male security guard standing in
front of women's bathroom, giving us the 'once over tranny look' doing
the same thing... or telling us to use a restroom far and away from the
general public.
My own experience was they never stopped me NOR said or did anything
negative to prevent or limit me from using the restrooms; and personally
I wasn't bothered or offended too much by it. In some ways I was more
positive and glad they did what they did, and felt a little bit more at
ease rather than worrying about a potential bad interaction with a real
gg in the restroom. HRC if anything - the bottom line, still let us use
the restroom of our own choice.
This was a very mainstream location and sizable event, considering how
many of us atttended. I'm personally impressed that HRC actually
allowed our relatively good sized group to have dinner there. Being
mainstream and a popular well known resturant, families and all types
are also welcomed into that resturant. We have to realize that they
(mgnt) also has to consider and defuse any potential situations that
creates any form of 'bad' karma or goodwill to anyone who enters the
resturant. They want everyone to have a good experience at their
resturant, and want to return to eat there.
Kids, rednecks, rude teens and as*h*le 'tranny-fobic' grown-ups are
just some parameters that has to dealt with (mgnt and us) when a group
of 2 or more of us go to a mainstream public place. Going to a place
that is w/o kids is like putting the ole 'safety' blanket out, like
going to safer trangendered venues.
If it was a complaint, and HRC mgnt had to deal with it. Its NOT HRC's
fault. I'd blame the one who complained and not HRC. HRC had the
un-fortunate problem to find some form of workable solution which is
hard to please everyone 100%.
----------
(This posting was entered by kumiko yvonne watanabe, an external user of MyDLV.)
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
Preliminary survey report ...
by External Poster » Wed Jun 02, 2004 8:52 am
This posting is from: Michelle Jenkins
----------
Hi,
> I still think there is a demand for at least some sessions of strictly
> social time.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not proposing a total ban on Goodtimes,
Flex etc, but I think there is an opportunity for better venues without
increased risk or impact on socialising time.
I know that within the group(s) of people I circulated with most of the
socialising was while doing other things (NSD, Limo, Meals, etc).
>>> The only thing that was disliked more than it was liked was the Las
>>> Vegas Lounge. I think it's quite obvious why this is the case.
>
>> As much as I thought this place was a dive, I think the NSD reception
>> party was general a none activity and it is as much that, that is
>> reflected in the survey results.
>
> I actually thought it would be a major hit to have 30-40 of us invade
> the place in slutwear, nunwear, and whateverwear.
>
> Nope, just didn't work!
OK...We agree on that ! :-)
Hugs
Michelle
----------
(This posting was entered by Michelle Jenkins, an external user of MyDLV.)
----------
Hi,
> I still think there is a demand for at least some sessions of strictly
> social time.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not proposing a total ban on Goodtimes,
Flex etc, but I think there is an opportunity for better venues without
increased risk or impact on socialising time.
I know that within the group(s) of people I circulated with most of the
socialising was while doing other things (NSD, Limo, Meals, etc).
>>> The only thing that was disliked more than it was liked was the Las
>>> Vegas Lounge. I think it's quite obvious why this is the case.
>
>> As much as I thought this place was a dive, I think the NSD reception
>> party was general a none activity and it is as much that, that is
>> reflected in the survey results.
>
> I actually thought it would be a major hit to have 30-40 of us invade
> the place in slutwear, nunwear, and whateverwear.
>
> Nope, just didn't work!
OK...We agree on that ! :-)
Hugs
Michelle
----------
(This posting was entered by Michelle Jenkins, an external user of MyDLV.)
- External Poster
- External
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:37 pm
26 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Return to DLV Discussion Forum
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests