Make easier for a event owner to get decent lists with participants

[+yxza]

Hello,

after wrestling with events connected to FAD 2017 in Sweden I'm a bit worn out. Cutting and pasting "will attend" logs, extracting info about participants, nicks, date of logging, number of persons that will attend I have a suggestion for improving the "will attend" process and the event owner's control over number of attendees.

It could an option for the EO to select whether he wants to enable the feature. But if EO chooses to do so there will be a mandatory field that must be filled in by the "will attend" logger. Namely number of participants. Might be other interesting information as well, like attending screening number 1, 2 or 3 at a GIFF event e.g.

The EO should then be able to via the web page for the event to say - I want to get a list of all who has logged "will attend", the number of attendees for that nick, nick, and mailaddress.

It would make my life or any other EO's life easier. It would then be possible to easily create lists where you can tell who is allowed to enter a specific screening e.g. and who has to be put on the waiting list.

Regards

hans/aka yxza

Edited November 2, 2017 by yxza

[+hzoi]

I could get behind this.

Even at events where we specifically ask, "Please let us know in your 'will attend' log how many seats you need so we can let the venue know," it's rare to get this from everyone.  I don't think it needs to be mandatory for every event, but it'd help.

[+cerberus1]

We've seen groups of  people not attend yet said they will, and others show last minute with four.  Curious how a mandatory function would work.

[+hzoi]

18 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

We've seen groups of  people not attend yet said they will, and others show last minute with four.  Curious how a mandatory function would work.

No feature will make up for cachers who don't bother to make life easier for an event holder by providing an accurate head count.  Kind of like no feature will keep cachers from logging a "find" on a piece of velcro that used to have a cache attached to it.  That's no reason to stop developing features, though, is it?

[+cerberus1]

On ‎11‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 0:18 PM, hzoi said:

No feature will make up for cachers who don't bother to make life easier for an event holder by providing an accurate head count.  Kind of like no feature will keep cachers from logging a "find" on a piece of velcro that used to have a cache attached to it.  That's no reason to stop developing features, though, is it?

I agree ... sorta - and I didn't say I was against it... What part of the post says I am?  Sheesh...

[+lodgebarn]

Surely for most events it really doesn't matter at all, this is an edge scenario where it is important. There is no contract to turn up on the day.

[+hzoi]

On 11/4/2017 at 3:51 PM, cerberus1 said:

I agree ... sorta - and I didn't say I was against it... What part of the post says I am?  Sheesh...

Well, I was only responding to you, as the last part of your post seemed to pretty much pooh-pooh the idea.  If you took my response as anything stronger than a reply to your comment, it wasn't intended as such.

On 11/4/2017 at 4:56 PM, lodgebarn said:

Surely for most events it really doesn't matter at all

You must live in a mystical place where restaurants have reserve staff at their beck and call and don't need a number attached to a group reservation, or where loaves and fishes multiply to ensure that all attendees are fed regardless of how much food the organizers provided.  I envy you.

[+CAVinoGal]

On 11/3/2017 at 9:18 AM, hzoi said:

No feature will make up for cachers who don't bother to make life easier for an event holder by providing an accurate head count. 

True.  Just as putting RSVP on an invitation, or posting it on eventbrite and asking for responses will not ensure an accurate head count. Whether it's geocaching, weddings, parties, or just backyard BBQ's, people respond and don't show, or don't respond and DO show for just about anything.  At least by asking you get a GENERAL idea - so yes, I can see where this would be a nice addition to an event page (optional, if it's needed) when a good idea of how many are going to show will be helpful in planning.

 

1 hour ago, hzoi said:

On 11/4/2017 at 1:56 PM, lodgebarn said:

Surely for most events it really doesn't matter at all

You must live in a mystical place where restaurants have reserve staff at their beck and call and don't need a number attached to a group reservation, or where loaves and fishes multiply to ensure that all attendees are fed regardless of how much food the organizers provided.  I envy you

This.  Most (not all) of the events I've attended (in my limited experience) have been in restaurants, and public places, where "size matters".  A head count is apprenciated.

[+lodgebarn]

4 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

True.  Just as putting RSVP on an invitation, or posting it on eventbrite and asking for responses will not ensure an accurate head count. Whether it's geocaching, weddings, parties, or just backyard BBQ's, people respond and don't show, or don't respond and DO show for just about anything.  At least by asking you get a GENERAL idea - so yes, I can see where this would be a nice addition to an event page (optional, if it's needed) when a good idea of how many are going to show will be helpful in planning.

 

This.  Most (not all) of the events I've attended (in my limited experience) have been in restaurants, and public places, where "size matters".  A head count is apprenciated.

Virtually no events in my neck of the woods would be in restaurants. Some in pubs to be sure but exact numbers for food never matter. A rough idea helps sometimes but then people say whether they are eating. Not all attendees would eat which is another reason why exact numbers attending are not worth it most if the time.  

Edited November 6, 2017 by lodgebarn

[+hzoi]

18 hours ago, lodgebarn said:

Virtually no events in my neck of the woods would be in restaurants. Some in pubs to be sure but exact numbers for food never matter. A rough idea helps sometimes but then people say whether they are eating. Not all attendees would eat which is another reason why exact numbers attending are not worth it most if the time.  

OK, then it doesn't apply to you.  I'm a little surprised that your local pubs wouldn't be interested in a heads up if they could have been warned ahead of time that thirty people will be coming in all at once, but ok.  Rest easy that the OP asked for this to be an option, which, if it's implemented, you can choose not to select.

On 11/2/2017 at 4:17 PM, yxza said:

It could an option for the EO to select whether he wants to enable the feature.

 

[+frinklabs]

I had proposed an attendee management feature back in the day but I can't link to it because I can't find it.

Is it just non-PMO forum users whose searches are restricted to no more than 365 days?

Someone want to do me a solid and find the [FEATURE] thread I started on this?

Thanks!

[+niraD]

1 hour ago, frinklabs said:

I had proposed an attendee management feature back in the day but I can't link to it because I can't find it.

Is it just non-PMO forum users whose searches are restricted to no more than 365 days?

Someone want to do me a solid and find the [FEATURE] thread I started on this?

Thanks!

I found:

Request: Option to add multiple attendees to 'Will Attend' logs for events
[FEATURE] Event cache attendee management
New Request [yeah, I know, great subject line]
 

Edited November 7, 2017 by niraD