Concerning letting 'em sit or not -- I'd say that depends on the event. If it's billed as a dance event, then, counter-intuitively, I'd let them socialize more frequently because the socializing is really the point under it all, and the dancing is an excuse. They will have dancing in mind. Depending on the event, the length scheduled, and the crowd, you could conceivably announce and establish at the start that there will be short sets of ~2-3 dances with breaks between, so they know that they'll have the breaks coming. Even more than a couple of dances in a row will be stretch for folks who have come because of social obligation, rather than a particular enthusiasm for dancing. :-)
If it's a wedding reception with some dancing, yes, do it all at once, because there are lots of other things to be accomplished. In the end throw away any expectations of the kind of continuous dancing you have at a regularly scheduled evening. ~ Becky Nankivell Tucson, Ariz. and Long Beach, Calif. Tina wrote: David M. then brought up the shrewd strategy of not letting ONS dancers sit down (meaning they might stay away forever). Again, I agree - I've experienced that too, and am totally on board with the plan to continually "dance for 45 minutes before they cut the cake". Yet in this case, even though I held that intent (albeit with two planned halves as the organizers wanted 1.5 hours of dancing), a couple of times the dads bolted for the cool drinks in the kitchen as soon as a dance stopped! So I just let it go with their flow, then called them back for another dance after a little while when their faces seemed less red again. :-> And they came. Their daughters did need to earn their badges, after all. Given that behavior, would you do something different? If so, what? Beth, also thanks for the tip about Marian Rose's books. Tina
