Moving on....

[Yogi_Bear]

Originally Posted by stewart38

well you dont seem to understand the draw backs of the scatter method why not ?

and these drawbacks are...?

[Tessalicious]

Originally Posted by Yogi_Bear

Well I think queueing theory, which has been applied to the queues for men's and women's lavatories, could be applied to the queues of n females standing at the side of the room waiting to move on....

*sits quietly munching popcorn watching innocent poll develop into full-on mathematical debate*

[El Salsero Gringo]

Originally Posted by Yogi_Bear

Well I think queueing theory, which has been applied to the queues for men's and women's lavatories, could be applied to the queues of n females standing at the side of the room waiting to move on....

No, because the service time is deterministic, not random, and because the entire queue is served at once rather than one at a time. Queuing theory is mainly concerned with metricating things like the expected waiting time and the variance of the expected waiting time.

It works very well for toilet queues, bank and post office queues, computer networks, and telephone calls. I'm not really clear how it would apply to Ceroc or what it would tell you.

[Yogi_Bear]

well, maybe it might offer some insights, maybe not, but for now I'm going to have to duck out of this and get some proper work done

[Stuart M]

Originally Posted by El Salsero Gringo

I'd pick a different name. "Queuing Theory" is something quite different:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queuing_theory

Can I just say, personally I resent being valued at one Erlang unit.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Originally Posted by LMC

Because I personally think that they are all more intelligent than that.

Huh? By the way - my monitor is now upside down because of your avatar and Im standing on my head to read this.

Alternatively, maybe I should apologise for forgetting that I am the only biassed and opinionated person on the forum and should therefore not openly display it.

Indeed. Bad bad BAAAD LMC

Anyway, people who go to dancing are stupid and can't count. That may be a generalisation though

[carolinemcewan]

Although I voted for the old skool way of doing it, reading the comments does make me think about being slotted in when convenient. However, I can't really blame the women for standing their ground when we are instructed to "be quick otherwise you could still be out!" Granted most people realise that it's only fair to take turns, but it's not frowned on by teachers etc. if someone cuts in front of you, even though it's their turn out. Rotation in this way does work but cut the whole 'snooze you lose' crap!

[Magic Hans]

Funeral Wake method works fine for me .... so long as, it doesn't get any more than about 10.

a) it keeps the rotation time fairly reasonable, and
b) reduces chance for miscounting.

Obvious disadvantage is that some queuers will have to wait for more that 1 rotation to come on. Expectionally more than 2.

[El Salsero Gringo]

Originally Posted by Magic Hans

Obvious disadvantage is that some queuers will have to wait for more that 1 rotation to come on. Expectionally more than 2.

How's that?

[LMC]

*sits in back with Tessa & popcorn*

Right, what other can of worms can I go and open? Or is two in one week two more than enough?

Any method other than the queue has the potential to create a fine ol' mess to start with - if scatter is the *normal* method at that venue, then most people should be used to it... from what DJ has said, this doesn't seem to necessarily be the case.

Although I've been arguing against queue, I haven't really been arguing "for" scatter. All I want is less time rotating and more time DANCING.

[Clive Long]

The problem is obviously gender imbalance.

Hence - for those on the "wrong side" of the gender divide for that night either

1. Do the short-straw method much beloved of 50's drama movies where one is deciding which women and children to deny access to the life-boats. If you draw a short-straw you are ejected from the dance venue.

or

2. Offer quick and dirty gender re-assignment programmes to even up the male-female ratio.

May seem ruthless - but very time efficient.

Next problem please.

CRL

[bigdjiver]

meanwhile I am daydreaming of a beginners class that has "men" moving on using the scatter method. The new arrivals see a lady dancing as lead in a gap. The ladies go and find a gap, the guys try and partner with a "lead". At the side there are a queuing theorist and a human factors theorist arguing over whose deficiencies are to blame ...

[David Franklin]

Originally Posted by LMC

All I want is less time rotating and more time DANCING.

A lot of which has less to do with the rotation method than with how the teachers approach things. One thing I've really noticed at non-MJ venues, or at CerocAustralia, is how much faster the teachers expect everyone to rotate. Even with the 'funeral queue', they really zip things along. There's no pre/post-amble, no introduce yourself to your partner, it's "move on 3, {2 second pause}, and 5, 6, 7, 8 start". And you typically rotate a lot more often. Which starts a 'virtuous circle', as it allows you to rotate only 2-3 people even if there are 10 women over, because even if you sit out 3 turns, that's still only 90 seconds or so. MJ classes in the UK take a much more leisurely approach, and there's a relatively long time between each rotation.

Having done both, my feeling is the MJ method is more friendly, but you get more done using the "rush 'em through" approach.

[Russell Saxby]

Originally Posted by David Franklin

A lot of which has less to do with the rotation method than with how the teachers approach things. One thing I've really noticed at non-MJ venues, or at CerocAustralia, is how much faster the teachers expect everyone to rotate. Even with the 'funeral queue', they really zip things along. There's no pre/post-amble, no introduce yourself to your partner, it's "move on 3, {2 second pause}, and 5, 6, 7, 8 start". And you typically rotate a lot more often. Which starts a 'virtuous circle', as it allows you to rotate only 2-3 people even if there are 10 women over, because even if you sit out 3 turns, that's still only 90 seconds or so. MJ classes in the UK take a much more leisurely approach, and there's a relatively long time between each rotation.

Having done both, my feeling is the MJ method is more friendly, but you get more done using the "rush 'em through" approach.

but then again I did suggest that last week

[Magic Hans]

Originally Posted by El Salsero Gringo

How's that?

Well .... rotating 12 people only 10 round means .... last two wait for the next.

Rotating 65 people round 10 at a time .... last 5 sit out 7 times!!

[ ... was I being unclear??? .... or perhaps you, sarcastic? ]

[Yogi_Bear]

Having come back to this thread after a period of absence, I think someone ought to try the approach typically adopted in small classes of Argentine tango - "Find yourself another partner". The ensuing chaos in a large MJ class would be fun to watch

[Yogi_Bear]

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

meanwhile I am daydreaming of a beginners class that has "men" moving on using the scatter method. The new arrivals see a lady dancing as lead in a gap. The ladies go and find a gap, the guys try and partner with a "lead". At the side there are a queuing theorist and a human factors theorist arguing over whose deficiencies are to blame ...

the solution, of course, is to ban women dancing as leads. Then the scatter method would work just fine, even for those for whom the concept of moving one place at a time is hard to grasp

[Dorothy]

There are distinct advantages in the queuing method:-

1. Allows the ladies time to have a well-earned seat, and also to see how/how not to do it.

2. It clears the ladies off the floor and out of the way.

I was once in a class where groups of us were assigned to rows, it was a shame because we only had the chance to dance with the men in that particular row.

[Yogi_Bear]

Originally Posted by Dorothy

There are distinct advantages in the queuing method:-

1. Allows the ladies time to have a well-earned seat, and also to see how/how not to do it.

2. It clears the ladies off the floor and out of the way.

I was once in a class where groups of us were assigned to rows, it was a shame because we only had the chance to dance with the men in that particular row.

there are pros and cons. When assigned to a row, you should change to another row if you'd welcome more variety - that applies to leaders (assuming they are not rotating) as well...
There are advantages in seeing how to do it when you are right there in the thcik of it and can walk it through opposite an imaginary partner..

[El Salsero Gringo]

Originally Posted by Magic Hans

Well .... rotating 12 people only 10 round means .... last two wait for the next.

Rotating 65 people round 10 at a time .... last 5 sit out 7 times!!

[ ... was I being unclear??? .... or perhaps you, sarcastic? ]

OK, yes, but you don't rotate 10 round if there are 65 people waiting - you rotate 65 people round. (Although one hopes it never gets quite that bad.) What's the point of rotating fewer people than are waiting out?