(02-23-2021 01:42 PM)Deez Nuts Wrote: [ -> ]Is it a lack of transparency, or a constantly evolving mess of rules and regs about what you can and can't do to comply with state mandates? You seem to think it's the former.
The mess part certainly seems plausible, can't argue there.
Would you say that if the way that an organization complies to an evolving mess of rules and regs changes, it would be incumbent upon said organization to update their highly publicized guidance on said compliance?
That can be really difficult to do well without creating more confusion. Simplicity is the standard in messaging. Not disagreeing with your premise, but saying I understand why an organization might not take that route in favor of keeping one consistent message out there.
(02-23-2021 02:20 PM)HyperDuke Wrote: [ -> ]That can be really difficult to do well without creating more confusion. Simplicity is the standard in messaging. Not disagreeing with your premise, but saying I understand why an organization might not take that route in favor of keeping one consistent message out there.
Agreed that putting out there just adds to the confusion and changes absolutely nothing. It also does not change the fact that suite holders own the right to go to those games and they were given the choice at restricted occupancy to pay for and use their suite for the year. It appears that one suite holder opted out and that suite was available at the cost of ~12,500 dollars for the five game season (8 tickets) and you had to buy it for all games. Someone took them up on the offer and I am really not sure why anyone would be mad about that. It's one thing if you would have wanted the shot at the suite, but otherwise it just appears to be a reason to moan about why can they get to go and and I can't.
I am pretty sure that big donors have been getting tickets to basketball games when available as well.
(02-23-2021 02:46 PM)jmu98 Wrote: [ -> ]It's one thing if you would have wanted the shot at the suite, but otherwise it just appears to be a reason to moan about why can they get to go and and I can't.
(02-23-2021 12:25 PM)bjk3047 Wrote: [ -> ]I truly love how many psychics we have on the board who have decided that the only reason someone could have a problem with this issue is because they're whining about not being able to go to the game and not that a lack of transparency at one's alma mater is gross.
Wonder how many times I'm going to quote myself on this one. There sure a gaggle of you simplistically-minded folks on this thread.
(02-23-2021 02:55 PM)bjk3047 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2021 02:46 PM)jmu98 Wrote: [ -> ]It's one thing if you would have wanted the shot at the suite, but otherwise it just appears to be a reason to moan about why can they get to go and and I can't.
(02-23-2021 12:25 PM)bjk3047 Wrote: [ -> ]I truly love how many psychics we have on the board who have decided that the only reason someone could have a problem with this issue is because they're whining about not being able to go to the game and not that a lack of transparency at one's alma mater is gross.
Wonder how many times I'm going to quote myself on this one. There sure a gaggle of you simplistically-minded folks on this thread.
You can quote it as many times as you want but at least do it when relevant. Or is your simplistic mind assuming that JMU98's use of "they" meant a singular "you"?
Is anyone else vehemently objecting? Saw one general agreement on setting a bad precedent. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure it's just me out here on this limb. Who else would JMU98 be referring to?
(02-23-2021 03:37 PM)bjk3047 Wrote: [ -> ]Is anyone else vehemently objecting? Saw one general agreement on setting a bad precedent. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure it's just me out here on this limb. Who else would JMU98 be referring to?
an entire facebook group and even JMU barstool is in on the action
https://twitter.com/JMUBarstool/status/1...52224?s=20
I meant who on these boards would he be referring to (which seemed to me like a likely conclusion for one's audience while posting on the boards), but I suppose jmu98 could be speaking more globally. Fair enough.
(02-23-2021 03:52 PM)Centdukesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2021 03:37 PM)bjk3047 Wrote: [ -> ]Is anyone else vehemently objecting? Saw one general agreement on setting a bad precedent. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure it's just me out here on this limb. Who else would JMU98 be referring to?
an entire facebook group and even JMU barstool is in on the action
https://twitter.com/JMUBarstool/status/1...52224?s=20
"Donors always matter more unfortunately. Disappointing."
The Duke Club needs to eliminate Donor levels because special perks based on giving levels it just not fair.
(02-23-2021 03:58 PM)bjk3047 Wrote: [ -> ]I meant who on these boards would he be referring to (which seemed to me like a likely conclusion for one's audience while posting on the boards), but I suppose jmu98 could be speaking more globally. Fair enough.
Have you talked to anyone a JMU about this? Not trying to start anything, just curious what their response to an upset donor is.
Gov Northam has a press conference scheduled at 11am tomorrow. Will there be new guidelines issued for outdoor event capacities?? WE'LL FIND OUT NEXT TIME. SO LONG FOR NOW!
(02-23-2021 05:00 PM)NovaDukes Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2021 03:58 PM)bjk3047 Wrote: [ -> ]I meant who on these boards would he be referring to (which seemed to me like a likely conclusion for one's audience while posting on the boards), but I suppose jmu98 could be speaking more globally. Fair enough.
Have you talked to anyone a JMU about this? Not trying to start anything, just curious what their response to an upset donor is.
I have not and do not intend to. A lack of transparency (as I see it) at this scale does not rise to the level of worth speaking to some poor sap whose job it is to listen to me, roll their eyes, and note my objection. Much rather complain about it on a sports message board.
I'd encourage you to contact a Duke Club rep. You'll get much better information than you will on social media. Just my 2 cents.
(02-23-2021 08:27 PM)Deez Nuts Wrote: [ -> ]Gov Northam has a press conference scheduled at 11am tomorrow. Will there be new guidelines issued for outdoor event capacities?? WE'LL FIND OUT NEXT TIME. SO LONG FOR NOW!
I hope he does as I am heading down for the Drexel game on Friday and would love to go the football game as well. My guess is that even if he does it will not be for this weekend, but with a go live date of next week similar to what NJ just did.
(02-23-2021 10:09 PM)jmu98 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2021 08:27 PM)Deez Nuts Wrote: [ -> ]Gov Northam has a press conference scheduled at 11am tomorrow. Will there be new guidelines issued for outdoor event capacities?? WE'LL FIND OUT NEXT TIME. SO LONG FOR NOW!
I hope he does as I am heading down for the Drexel game on Friday and would love to go the football game as well. My guess is that even if he does it will not be for this weekend, but with a go live date of next week similar to what NJ just did.
True. Effective date will be a huge part of any expansion of capacity.
From the governor's press conference today:
Starting Monday March 1
-outdoor venues to 30% with a cap of 1000 people. eventually the 1000 person cap will be removed.
(02-24-2021 11:15 AM)Deez Nuts Wrote: [ -> ]From the governor's press conference today:
Starting Monday March 1
-outdoor venues to 30% with a cap of 1000 people. eventually the 1000 person cap will be removed.
Just as I thought, but doesn't help me for this Saturday. Hope JMU is reaching out to see if they can get a waiver, but doubt there is enough time.
30% but capped? Why would you cap it? What is the science behind capping it?
Why wait until march 1st? Is anything going to change appreciably in 3 days?
(02-24-2021 11:36 AM)Centdukesfan Wrote: [ -> ]30% but capped? Why would you cap it? What is the science behind capping it?
Why wait until march 1st? Is anything going to change appreciably in 3 days?
all good questions, but when you have unilateral and unchecked authority in one position there is no room for alternative views.
(02-24-2021 11:39 AM)jmufbs Wrote: [ -> ] (02-24-2021 11:36 AM)Centdukesfan Wrote: [ -> ]30% but capped? Why would you cap it? What is the science behind capping it?
Why wait until march 1st? Is anything going to change appreciably in 3 days?
all good questions, but when you have unilateral and unchecked authority in one position there is no room for alternative views.
lol that you think these decisions are made by one person in a vacuum