Good News for TAM4

[Linda]

We've already announced the dates for TAM4 are Jan. 26-29, but I wanted to add that the room rates at the Stardust will remain the same as they were for TAM3....$60 for weekdays and $90 for Friday and Saturday.

 

[CFLarsen]

Dibs on the book table.

 

[DanishDynamite]

Please consider a move to somewhere else. This is TAM4. No. 4. Held in exactly the same place.

I "did" Vegas in the one time I was there.

Sure, the JREF program of speakers is great, but there is still a lot of "non-Convention" time for the attendees. And the attendees are generally very curious, very much in need of new experiences.

Please give me one good reason why the TAM should always be held in the same little place. And in so doing, please give me a reason that I should allocate my sparce vacation time to this meeting once again, when I'm already a fan, and there are so many other unexplored regions of the Earth. Or at least regions I yet have to explore.

Please, consider a new place for the next TAM. I would even go so far as to please consider a new place for every TAM.

 

[DanishDynamite]

Just sent a mail to Randi in this regard. My first mail ever to the Amazing himself!

The reason is because I not only personally feel strongly in this regard, but because I've heard similar sentiments from other attendees.

Familiarity breeds contempt. And boredom.

 

[CFLarsen]

DD,

Baby. I feel for you. Well, not really, because I don't feel for men, but....you know.

No, TAM isn't going to be somewhere else. Las Vegas is hell for me to get to (for one, I always seem to lose my luggage!), and this probably goes for most other attendees.

But it's a compromise. It's low-cost, at the price of being hard-to-get-to. Skeptics don't make a good living being skeptics, but what we may be able to afford is time. Hotel is cheap, and we can bunk with other skeptics, if that is our perversion.

I refuse to name the skepchicks I want to bunk with, though!

We can afford spending time going to TAM, even if it means spending time in friggin' O'Hare (possibly the most idiotic place on Earth). Or any other dopey truck-stop. I'll wager the bet that, to most TAM-attendees, price is a major concern. If that means 5 or 12 more hours spent travelling, so be it. We can do that, reading Sagan, Randi, or Gardner. That's not exactly "wasted time", is it?

Acording to Linda, 40% of JREF members are from California. I don't like that one little bit, for several obvious reasons, but...there it is. If we want impact, we need people.

Las Vegas is a crappy choice, except for these reasons:

1) Price
2) Good accomodations
3) MoeFaux lives there

So???

 

[DanishDynamite]

DD,

No, TAM isn't going to be somewhere else. Las Vegas is hell for me to get to (for one, I always seem to lose my luggage!), and this probably goes for most other attendees.

Unexpected, but I'll categorize this as Reason No.1.

But it's a compromise. It's low-cost, at the price of being hard-to-get-to. Skeptics don't make a good living being skeptics, but what we may be able to afford is time. Hotel is cheap, and we can bunk with other skeptics, if that is our perversion.

It is no more low cost than any other place in the US. It isn't even in the middle of the US.

I refuse to name the skepchicks I want to bunk with, though!

Don't worry. I'm psychic.

We can afford spending time going to TAM, even if it means spending time in friggin' O'Hare (possibly the most idiotic place on Earth). Or any other dopey truck-stop. I'll wager the bet that, to most TAM-attendees, price is a major concern. If that means 5 or 12 more hours spent travelling, so be it. We can do that, reading Sagan, Randi, or Gardner. That's not exactly "wasted time", is it?

You seem to be missing the point. I'm not worried about how long it takes me to get there. I'm concerned that I should spens money and time in going to a conference where I not only know the history and achievements of most speakers, but where there will be nothing new to explore.

Acording to Linda, 40% of JREF members are from California. I don't like that one little bit, for several obvious reasons, but...there it is. If we want impact, we need people.

Is there some reason that those from California would want to go to the same place every year? Every year!

Las Vegas is a crappy choice, except for these reasons:

1) Price
2) Good accomodations
3) MoeFaux lives there

So???

Please provide evidence for 1 and 2. Please compare to the rest of the US. Oh, and please wake up and smell the coffee as far as why people would continue to attend, even after they've been there many times.

 

[Chanileslie]

Unexpected, but I'll categorize this as Reason No.1.

It is no more low cost than any other place in the US. It isn't even in the middle of the US.

Don't worry. I'm psychic.

You seem to be missing the point. I'm not worried about how long it takes me to get there. I'm concerned that I should spens money and time in going to a conference where I not only know the history and achievements of most speakers, but where there will be nothing new to explore.


Is there some reason that those from California would want to go to the same place every year? Every year!


Please provide evidence for 1 and 2. Please compare to the rest of the US. Oh, and please wake up and smell the coffee as far as why people would continue to attend, even after they've been there many times.

People continue to attend because TAM is the best 4 days in Skepticism - and you get to mingle with a lot of really cool people that you don't normally get to hang with.

Also, if it relieves your anxiety, Nyarlathotep and I should be in attendence next year. See? Reason to come to Vegas!!

 

[DanishDynamite]

People continue to attend because TAM is the best 4 days in Skepticism - and you get to mingle with a lot of really cool people that you don't normally get to hang with.

Also, if it relieves your anxiety, Nyarlathotep and I should be in attendence next year. See? Reason to come to Vegas!!

Chani, I love you. Now, before Nyarl gets aggressive, let me say I love you both equally. I really want to meet you guys. Very much so. Extremely very much so, in fact.

That being said, I don't want to go to Vegas next time around. Really, been there, done that.

And I don't understand how such a simple requirement could be rejected. We are talking about a crowd of very intelligent people.

I just don't get how Vegas, for the f**king fourth time, should be some kind of Mecca.

 

[Luciana]

Claus - when you say that price is a concern, I agree with you. But I'll tell you something. To me, $1,000 dollars in Vegas is much more than $1,000 dollars in another town. Vegas is now a luxury to me, because I've been there three times now (once, before TAM), and as much as I love meeting people here, there are also many other places, (including in the US) that I'd love to go to. There's the idea of the Love Boat. If that happens, I might just do that and never make it to Vegas! Again, every dollar spent there, is a dollar that I feel that I'm wasting.

The same people (the best part), the same city, the same hotel, just about the same speakers...

And of course most attendees are from the West Coast. It's closer to them. If the conference goes East, more people from the East will go, why not?

 

[Patricio Elicer]

The timing is perfect for me. Thank Ed!

I don't care much about the location. If it's Las Vegas again, so be it!.

I don't know for sure of course, but perhaps with the exception of NYC, no other city in the US offers so many possibilites and attractions for extracurricular activities concentrated in a small area, at a walking distance from the hotel. Well, surely there are other attractive locations, but what about the costs?. New Orleans?

Danish, I'm looking forward to meeting you again.

 

[WonderfulWorld]

I've been to Vegas several times (and managed to spend about $2.50 on slots, total -- I may be missing the point), but there's always something to do. I'd like to see more "field trips", like Beiersdorfer's at TAM2 or a trip up to the nuclear facilities north of Las Vegas.

But frankly, I just like the warm, dry weather in January, and the rational company. Okay, so Vegas didn't come through on the sunshine this year, but you get the idea.

 

[Suezoled]

Dibs to help at checkout/cashiering.

 

[Kiless]

Baggsies the book table too, although Claus and Gaz did it better than I. And all hail to the marvelous Scott R who took a chance on a pair of scruffy Aussies. I hope the bribe of a wombat helped out with guaranteeing help for TAM4, if we can make it.

 

[SezMe]

Acording to Linda, 40% of JREF members are from California. I don't like that one little bit, for several obvious reasons, but...there it is. If we want impact, we need people.

Las Vegas is a crappy choice, except for these reasons:

1) Price
2) Good accomodations
3) MoeFaux lives there

So???

Is the 40% cause or effect? As a Californian, I know of two people who went to TAM3 only because it was easy to get to. I went to TAM2 because I could drive there.

Maybe if TAM was somewhere else, the 40% would drop...which would be a good thing IMO.

Here are two more thoughts (which might be heretical):
First, if TAM were not in Vegas, there would not be as many "speakers" paying homage to Randi. I do not mean this in a venal manner. I'm just pointing out that there is a lot of "clubiness" in Vegas that would not exist elsewhere.

Second, if it were elsewhere, it would take a LOT more work to put together a program because all the local (Vegas) talent would not be available. I would consider this a good thing because it would lead to a more varied program - less of the same-o, same-o. That said, it would also make for a LOT more work for Linda and the rest of the JREF crew.

I would offer this annecdote. Part of the reason I did not attend TAM3 was that it was too duplicative of TAM2.

 

[CFLarsen]

It is no more low cost than any other place in the US. It isn't even in the middle of the US.

It is low cost as well as being capable of housing 600 people. It's close to the airport. Lots of cheap restaurants. We can stay together as a group with no hassle.

Don't worry. I'm psychic.

Perhaps, but I wasn't thinking of you!

You seem to be missing the point. I'm not worried about how long it takes me to get there. I'm concerned that I should spens money and time in going to a conference where I not only know the history and achievements of most speakers, but where there will be nothing new to explore.

If you don't think you can get more out of TAM, then don't go.

Is there some reason that those from California would want to go to the same place every year? Every year!

Well, Californians are a bit weird....

Please provide evidence for 1 and 2. Please compare to the rest of the US.

NY? Ha! Try finding a hotel that can accommodate 600+ (I think we're going close to 800 next year) people for 60 bucks a night. LA? Same thing. And don't say "Bumblef*ck, Nowhere", because that ain't going to happen.

Oh, and please wake up and smell the coffee as far as why people would continue to attend, even after they've been there many times.

Although I hear some disgruntled voices, I don't exactly see a drop in attendees. People can do what they want. We all have different reasons to go. I go, because I want it all: The speakers, the people, networking with not just forum members, but also with a lot of other people. If we only meet because we want to meet those we know, we don't spread skepticism, we become a group of people, cut off from the rest of the world. I'd hate for that to happen.

 

[CFLarsen]

Claus - when you say that price is a concern, I agree with you. But I'll tell you something. To me, $1,000 dollars in Vegas is much more than $1,000 dollars in another town. Vegas is now a luxury to me, because I've been there three times now (once, before TAM), and as much as I love meeting people here, there are also many other places, (including in the US) that I'd love to go to. There's the idea of the Love Boat. If that happens, I might just do that and never make it to Vegas! Again, every dollar spent there, is a dollar that I feel that I'm wasting.

I hear you. And I get the same feeling that I've seen all of LV, but then...I start discovering other things in LV that tourists don't see. Had we not known Moe, we would never had eaten at a fun place like that. At TAM2, I found the Bellagio art museum, which I also went to this year. It's the same as when I moved to NY: I had visited NY about 10 times before I moved there, and thought that I had a reasonable understanding of the city. Was I wrong!

We go from being tourists to being (Las) Vegans.

The same people (the best part), the same city, the same hotel, just about the same speakers...

Ah, that's not entirely true. Randi and Shermer are fixtures, that's a given. But we've seen Dawkins, Nickell, Ver Ploeg and Wiseman this year, and last year it was Rowland, Peoples, Barrett from Quackwatch, Scott, and Bob Park. There's still a bunch of people that I want to see:

Ray Hyman, Susan Blackmore, Roger Culver & Philip Ianna, Jared Diamond, Thomas Gilovich, Terence Hines (he was at TAM1 and 2, but didn't speak), Nicholas Humphrey, Philip Klass, Larry Kusche, Mary Lefkowitz, Deborah Lipstadt, David Marks, Jeffrey Victor, Massimo Polidoro.....to name a few.

And of course most attendees are from the West Coast. It's closer to them. If the conference goes East, more people from the East will go, why not?

I think we can assume that most attendees are from the West Coast, since about 40% of JREF members are from there, but it could be interesting to hear how many "repeat customers" TAM has.

And, let's not forget that JREF board members only made up 10% of TAM3 attendees.

 

[CFLarsen]

I don't know for sure of course, but perhaps with the exception of NYC, no other city in the US offers so many possibilites and attractions for extracurricular activities concentrated in a small area, at a walking distance from the hotel.

Precisely. It's a drag to have to commute all the time, especially when you are there for a few, short days. We would simply not be able to get together as often and so many, if we have to go from A to B constantly. It's perfect to take a few hops from the seminar to the Party Room to the hotel room.

 

[CFLarsen]

Is the 40% cause or effect? As a Californian, I know of two people who went to TAM3 only because it was easy to get to. I went to TAM2 because I could drive there.

I think Linda told us this after TAM1, but I don't think it has anything to do with TAM.

Maybe if TAM was somewhere else, the 40% would drop...which would be a good thing IMO.

Why?

Here are two more thoughts (which might be heretical):
First, if TAM were not in Vegas, there would not be as many "speakers" paying homage to Randi. I do not mean this in a venal manner. I'm just pointing out that there is a lot of "clubiness" in Vegas that would not exist elsewhere.

Hmmm...is that a bad thing? TAM is Randi's show, it's his Foundation.

Second, if it were elsewhere, it would take a LOT more work to put together a program because all the local (Vegas) talent would not be available. I would consider this a good thing because it would lead to a more varied program - less of the same-o, same-o. That said, it would also make for a LOT more work for Linda and the rest of the JREF crew.

Although there are a lot of people to choose from, it is a hassle to arrange for people to speak. Some of these people have their calendars booked years in advance.

I would offer this annecdote. Part of the reason I did not attend TAM3 was that it was too duplicative of TAM2.

You missed out on Nickell, Wiseman and Dawkins, I can tell you that!!

 

[SezMe]

Why?]

Because, as evolutionary thinking tells us, diversity leads to robustness.

Hmmm...is that a bad thing? TAM is Randi's show, it's his Foundation.

True, indeed. If TAM is, in fact, a RandiLoveFest then I have no objection. But JREF should not expect new attendees to the same 'Fest.

You missed out on Nickell, Wiseman and Dawkins, I can tell you that!!

True, indeed, again. But would these people have not been in attendance if the venue were other than Vegas?

 

[CFLarsen]

Because, as evolutionary thinking tells us, diversity leads to robustness.

Indeed. But it would require that we know that more non-Californians would come.

True, indeed. If TAM is, in fact, a RandiLoveFest then I have no objection. But JREF should not expect new attendees to the same 'Fest.

I don't think of TAM as a "RandiLoveFest" at all. It isn't exactly one string of speakers, extolling the virtues and feats of Randi.

True, indeed, again. But would these people have not been in attendance if the venue were other than Vegas?

I don't know. Why don't you ask them?