RSVP (and pinatas)

"Banty" wrote in message
...
If I opt out, how would my address be gotten? (Assuming someone sticks
with the
roster.)

The old backpack mail or have kid give it directly to your child route.


I haven't seen a class list be all so cutomized as address only, address
and
phone only, address and email only. IME they just out.

At our school, whatever info the parents opt-in is used, nothing else. Some
people give only phone, some only address, some only email, etc.

I am not so vehemently opposed to not having a phone list as you are to
having them. That's life, so we go with it. It would be nice to have one
at DD's school, though. If they had one, I'd sign up right away.


Consider the reasons they don't.

Because of the mere chance of offending those few who are vehemently opposed
(what the director said), which is too bad. It's not like she knew anyone
was opposed, she didn't ask. She just thought someone out there might be
opposed. Even one person opposing was enough. We have to cater to that one
person. It's not even one person, it's an imaginary person, because she
really doesn't know. Now, if she had it up for a vote, then I could
understand.


Consider that possibly that was her way of telling you she understood the
problem and had used her judgement or was following the judgement of the
administration as a whole. Maybe there *had* been problems, but she didn't want
to detail it to you (or anyone) or have field those "tell me who!" questions.
And look - you hardly are receptive to my objections - so maybe she's right in
not getting into it.

Banty

"Banty" wrote in message
...
Because of the mere chance of offending those few who are vehemently
opposed
(what the director said), which is too bad. It's not like she knew anyone
was opposed, she didn't ask. She just thought someone out there might be
opposed. Even one person opposing was enough. We have to cater to that
one
person. It's not even one person, it's an imaginary person, because she
really doesn't know. Now, if she had it up for a vote, then I could
understand.


Consider that possibly that was her way of telling you she understood the
problem and had used her judgement or was following the judgement of the
administration as a whole. Maybe there *had* been problems, but she
didn't want
to detail it to you (or anyone) or have field those "tell me who!"
questions.
And look - you hardly are receptive to my objections - so maybe she's
right in
not getting into it.

I object to you, but I am not upset with you, just like I object with her;
but I left the topic alone, because such is life. I did not ask "tell me
who." I merely inquired if there were objections. She did not know of any.
You, OTOH, seem to be flaming mad about the whole subject. Don't blame me
for being upset when it is you who are.

In article , toypup says...



"Banty" wrote in message
...
Because of the mere chance of offending those few who are vehemently
opposed
(what the director said), which is too bad. It's not like she knew anyone
was opposed, she didn't ask. She just thought someone out there might be
opposed. Even one person opposing was enough. We have to cater to that
one
person. It's not even one person, it's an imaginary person, because she
really doesn't know. Now, if she had it up for a vote, then I could
understand.


Consider that possibly that was her way of telling you she understood the
problem and had used her judgement or was following the judgement of the
administration as a whole. Maybe there *had* been problems, but she
didn't want
to detail it to you (or anyone) or have field those "tell me who!"
questions.
And look - you hardly are receptive to my objections - so maybe she's
right in
not getting into it.

I object to you, but I am not upset with you, just like I object with her;
but I left the topic alone, because such is life.

I think you object to my objections about the roster lists, not with me (just
like I have no objection whatever to Toypup, quite the opposite).

I did not ask "tell me
who." I merely inquired if there were objections. She did not know of any.
You, OTOH, seem to be flaming mad about the whole subject. Don't blame me
for being upset when it is you who are.


??

I didn't mean that *you* asked "tell me who". It's that an adminstrator or
teacher needs to field these questions, and this may come up with some
frequency, so she answers in a way to put the subject to bed without causing
hard feelings, divulging too much, or leaving herself open to certain questions.
There *are* people who would press for the "who", not that it would be you.

And since we've been going back and forth, how is it *I'm* somehow the upset
evul meanie? Consider that your position in this isn't all so quite the
obviously reasonable position you think it to be, such that anyone questioning
it with any strength would have to be more "upset" than you.

Banty

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , toypup says...

I object to you, but I am not upset with you, just like I object with her;
but I left the topic alone, because such is life.

I think you object to my objections about the roster lists, not with me
(just
like I have no objection whatever to Toypup, quite the opposite).

Yes. I object to your objections. You are right.

And since we've been going back and forth, how is it *I'm* somehow the
upset
evul meanie? Consider that your position in this isn't all so quite the
obviously reasonable position you think it to be, such that anyone
questioning
it with any strength would have to be more "upset" than you.

It comes across to me that you are upset about this whole deal meaning that
it bothers you more than it bothers me. I did not say you are an evul
meanie. You are definitely more vehement. I don't care quite as much.

I much prefer lists, but if there are not lists, like at DD's school, I can
live with that.

Why I'm debating here is because I don't understand. I don't understand why
people don't want opt-in lists because they are completely voluntary. You
explained how you join them under duress because if you don't, your kid
misses out on social opportunities, opportunities you object to anyway. I
explained that your child wouldn't really miss out on any opportunities
except that you wouldn't get RSVP's and you still haven't addressed that.
What exactly is your duress? What are you missing out of by not being on a
list which you state is mostly being used for birthdays?

You state that the lists change the way people interact. I'd say DS's
school, which does have lists, is a more tightly knit community than DD's
school, which doesn't have lists. Her school is also much, much smaller.
Not having a list does not facilitate any closer more personal
communication. I'd say not having a list does the opposite and limits
social interactions. Your wish that people go out of their way to make
contact just doesn't work IRL. Maybe you might be willing to do it, but
most people just leave it alone. So, in the context of the larger community
and the way they interact, lists help not hinder.

"toypup" wrote in message
...
Why I'm debating here is because I don't understand. I don't understand
why people don't want opt-in lists because they are completely voluntary.
You explained how you join them under duress because if you don't, your
kid misses out on social opportunities, opportunities you object to
anyway. I explained that your child wouldn't really miss out on any
opportunities except that you wouldn't get RSVP's and you still haven't
addressed that.

I mean you won't get RSVP phone calls.

In article , toypup says...



"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , toypup says...

I object to you, but I am not upset with you, just like I object with her;
but I left the topic alone, because such is life.

I think you object to my objections about the roster lists, not with me
(just
like I have no objection whatever to Toypup, quite the opposite).

Yes. I object to your objections. You are right.

And since we've been going back and forth, how is it *I'm* somehow the
upset
evul meanie? Consider that your position in this isn't all so quite the
obviously reasonable position you think it to be, such that anyone
questioning
it with any strength would have to be more "upset" than you.

It comes across to me that you are upset about this whole deal meaning that
it bothers you more than it bothers me. I did not say you are an evul
meanie. You are definitely more vehement. I don't care quite as much.

I much prefer lists, but if there are not lists, like at DD's school, I can
live with that.

Why I'm debating here is because I don't understand. I don't understand why
people don't want opt-in lists because they are completely voluntary. You
explained how you join them under duress because if you don't, your kid
misses out on social opportunities, opportunities you object to anyway. I
explained that your child wouldn't really miss out on any opportunities
except that you wouldn't get RSVP's and you still haven't addressed that.
What exactly is your duress? What are you missing out of by not being on a
list which you state is mostly being used for birthdays?

It's simply not the case, and I've explained before. They come to be relied on
for *any* kind of gathering, not just the cattle-call parties. If teachers
stuff cubbyholes for all-class parties per their policies, and I RSVP, that
doesn't affect me at all since I RSVP. It's that, given this handy-dandy
apprently fairly complete list, it gets used for other things. Consider that
transfer-ins are in the same position with respect to an existing list. Not
being on it, they're comparitevly invisible.

And you haven't addressed any of that.


You state that the lists change the way people interact. I'd say DS's
school, which does have lists, is a more tightly knit community than DD's
school, which doesn't have lists. Her school is also much, much smaller.
Not having a list does not facilitate any closer more personal
communication. I'd say not having a list does the opposite and limits
social interactions. Your wish that people go out of their way to make
contact just doesn't work IRL. Maybe you might be willing to do it, but
most people just leave it alone. So, in the context of the larger community
and the way they interact, lists help not hinder.


I'm not arguing that having a list makes for *better* communication, their
absense doesn't get in the way of the truly personal communication. It just
facilitates the facile contact (like chasing after RSVP's) and opens people up
to who-knows-what.

You can't say lists facilitate community and communication, AND say that those
who opt off or transfer in later aren't losing out. So which is it? And what
do you even mean by "close-knit". So I don't think dropping kids off at a mega
party a community makes.

Again - all this so people can make party lists easier. It's not the thing to
put on others, be it a school administrator or teacher, or parent class helper,
to put that together for you. Knock yourself out, have any kind of gathering
you want. It's just not something the world should bend around for you.

Banty

"Banty" wrote in message
...
It's simply not the case, and I've explained before. They come to be
relied on
for *any* kind of gathering, not just the cattle-call parties. If
teachers
stuff cubbyholes for all-class parties per their policies, and I RSVP,
that
doesn't affect me at all since I RSVP. It's that, given this handy-dandy
apprently fairly complete list, it gets used for other things. Consider
that
transfer-ins are in the same position with respect to an existing list.
Not
being on it, they're comparitevly invisible.

And you haven't addressed any of that.

Okay, I will. DS goes to a school that uses lists, so I am familiar with
the land of lists. I completely disagree that the lists are relied on as
the sole source of everything. The teachers still stuff cubbyholes. We
still get flyers for everything. Birthday invites still go out by card.

They do get relied on by room mom, who uses them to get her volunteers; but
then anyone not on that list would just tell room mom she wants to be
contacted privately, I suppose.

The only thing I've seen them used for by other moms is truly just RSVP's
and maybe an occasional I need your help phone call.

I'm not arguing that having a list makes for *better* communication, their
absense doesn't get in the way of the truly personal communication. It
just
facilitates the facile contact (like chasing after RSVP's) and opens
people up
to who-knows-what.

But I say I've also lived in the land of no lists, and I don't think it
facilitates any such thing.


You can't say lists facilitate community and communication, AND say that
those
who opt off or transfer in later aren't losing out.

I do think it facilitates community and communication overall. I think its
existence makes people feel like a community. It doesn't shut any single
person out who wants to be a part of that community but not on the list. It
makes the school as a whole feel like a community.

No one is going to go to the list and say, "Hey, you're not on the list so
I'm not going to talk to you."

So which is it? And what
do you even mean by "close-knit".

Everyone knows each other. We're comfortable talking to each other. We
feel more friendly towards each other. We can call each other for help and
can help each other out. Our kids play together and we are friends.

At DD's school, no one knows anyone.


Again - all this so people can make party lists easier.

If that's it, then it's not true that it gets to be relied on for any kind
of gathering not just parties per your argument above. Which is it? Just
parties or everything else?

It's not the thing to
put on others, be it a school administrator or teacher, or parent class
helper,
to put that together for you. Knock yourself out, have any kind of
gathering
you want. It's just not something the world should bend around for you.

No one is bending. It is *voluntary*, with just the need of the
administration to give permission. How is anyone bending? The
administration would not even need to put any effort into it. The parents
would not even have to participate, if they don't want.

toypup wrote:

I do think it facilitates community and communication overall. I think
its existence makes people feel like a community. It doesn't shut any
single person out who wants to be a part of that community but not on
the list. It makes the school as a whole feel like a community.

I don't think so at all. In spite of the fact that my son's teacher put
out this list, I've only met the other parents on it incidentally and on
occasion. My daughter's fifth grade teacher put out NO such list (the
closest he came was sending home a tree-calling list the night before a
major field trip that looked like it may be canceled for weather, with
kids' names and phone numbers only), and I have spent much more time
with those parents. Largely because of my daughter's involvement in
basketball.

Michelle
Flutist

In article , Michelle J. Haines says...

toypup wrote:

I do think it facilitates community and communication overall. I think
its existence makes people feel like a community. It doesn't shut any
single person out who wants to be a part of that community but not on
the list. It makes the school as a whole feel like a community.

I don't think so at all. In spite of the fact that my son's teacher put
out this list, I've only met the other parents on it incidentally and on
occasion. My daughter's fifth grade teacher put out NO such list (the
closest he came was sending home a tree-calling list the night before a
major field trip that looked like it may be canceled for weather, with
kids' names and phone numbers only), and I have spent much more time
with those parents. Largely because of my daughter's involvement in
basketball.

Right - actually having a common endeavor makes community, not having everyone's
info floating about. Scouts is what provided much of my connection to
community, that plus work (I work for a big employer around here) and the
immediate neighborhood.

The Montessori school went from having a distributed roster list to (I think
later) *not* having a list, because it was actually hurting community in that it
was really highlighting a cultural difference between the JW families and others
as far as birthday celebrations. When I was there they had a list, and, really,
if there was one thing they could have done to foster community, it woudl have
been to move the Thursday 1pm parent board meetings to an evening, or at least
switching off between a daytime and an evening time.

I never called or got called from the list at the Montessori - the connections I
made were with the other after school moms and dads at pickup.

Banty

"Michelle J. Haines" wrote in message
...
toypup wrote:

I do think it facilitates community and communication overall. I think
its existence makes people feel like a community. It doesn't shut any
single person out who wants to be a part of that community but not on the
list. It makes the school as a whole feel like a community.

I don't think so at all. In spite of the fact that my son's teacher put
out this list, I've only met the other parents on it incidentally and on
occasion. My daughter's fifth grade teacher put out NO such list (the
closest he came was sending home a tree-calling list the night before a
major field trip that looked like it may be canceled for weather, with
kids' names and phone numbers only), and I have spent much more time with
those parents. Largely because of my daughter's involvement in
basketball.

Do you think the existence of the list contribute to the lack of
communication amongst the parents? Is the list for your son's class used in
lieu of other methods of contact? Is anyone on the outs because they are
not on the list? In your experience, do you feel the absence or existence
of a list has an effect on parent communication and the sense of community
or do you think that neither option affects it at all?