Larger vs. smaller crowds at road meets - any thoughts/preferences?

[Max Rockatansky]

I experimented with map links in Fresno last year.  The trouble I found was that what you program in tends to get changed by Google.  I caught it before the meet started but I don't think it would work well in a larger group than what we had (given I gave out my phone in case anyone got turned around also). 

Use via points to prevent Google from messing with the route.

I did two weeks prior to the meet.  Google ended up erasing most of them when I clicked on the map links.  Basically almost all of the directions got streamlined into simply point A-B.

I take an image of the Google Map and paste it into a Word document.  That way, Google can't screw up the map.

Trouble there is that you can't tap links from a Word document.  Fresno wasn't the kind of meet that required a bunch of printouts.  I might do them for Bakersfield next year given some of the non-state highways involved. 

Were you clicking on the links on a phone, perhaps?  I do know that mobile Google Maps doesn't support via points and will always strip them out.

That might have been what the problem was with the original set.  When I tried the refreshed links in a browser version of Google Maps they worked as intended.  I don't recall but I believe that I even spoke regarding that at the meetup location. 

[Rothman]

I experimented with map links in Fresno last year.  The trouble I found was that what you program in tends to get changed by Google.  I caught it before the meet started but I don't think it would work well in a larger group than what we had (given I gave out my phone in case anyone got turned around also). 

Use via points to prevent Google from messing with the route.

I did two weeks prior to the meet.  Google ended up erasing most of them when I clicked on the map links.  Basically almost all of the directions got streamlined into simply point A-B.

I take an image of the Google Map and paste it into a Word document.  That way, Google can't screw up the map.

Trouble there is that you can't tap links from a Word document.  Fresno wasn't the kind of meet that required a bunch of printouts.  I might do them for Bakersfield next year given some of the non-state highways involved. 

Were you clicking on the links on a phone, perhaps?  I do know that mobile Google Maps doesn't support via points and will always strip them out.

That might have been what the problem was with the original set.  When I tried the refreshed links in a browser version of Google Maps they worked as intended.  I don't recall but I believe that I even spoke regarding that at the meetup location. 

The answer is using more destinations. :

Eh, just bulleted directions printed out will do.

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm kind of surprised some of you guys haven't commented on me giving out my phone number.  I was sure that would at least generate an opinion or two. 

[Alps]

my ideal road meet size is roughly 34 people.

That's oddly specific.  LOL

I think that was the size of his Baltimore road meet in April 2010, Steph, myself and our nephew were at that one

Yes, and I like hosting large meets.

[A.J. Bertin]

I'm kind of surprised some of you guys haven't commented on me giving out my phone number.  I was sure that would at least generate an opinion or two. 

A lot of us in this community have become pretty good friends.  Along those lines, we have exchanged phone numbers often.

[roadwaywiz95]

I'm kind of surprised some of you guys haven't commented on me giving out my phone number.  I was sure that would at least generate an opinion or two.

I always give out my phone number at meets I'm hosting, out of courtesy in case anyone needs to contact me for any reason.

Regarding meet attendance, the more the merrier as far as I'm concerned. Meets are still (25 years later) the premiere in-person events our community has to offer. We should want them to be as large and as successful as possible.

[jpi]

I’m kind of surprised some of you guys haven’t commented on me giving out my phone number.  I was sure that would at least generate an opinion or two.

I always give out my phone number at meets I'm hosting, out of courtesy in case anyone needs to contact me for any reason.

Regarding meet attendance, the more the merrier as far as I'm concerned. Meets are still (25 years later) the premiere in-person events our community has to offer. We should want them to be as large and as successful as possible.

This coming from the guy who has hosted the biggest road meet to date in terms of attendance!

[A.J. Bertin]

Regarding meet attendance, the more the merrier as far as I'm concerned. Meets are still (25 years later) the premiere in-person events our community has to offer. We should want them to be as large and as successful as possible.

Some people definitely have the mindset of, "the more the merrier" which is cool... but some don't, and that's okay too.  Some of the folks who have chimed in on this thread so far clearly are turned off by larger groups.  I think we all need to understand that some roads enthusiasts are introverted and some may have social anxiety.  Some newbies to this hobby/community might be interested in attending a road meet for the first time but might be overwhelmed by the idea of getting lost in a crowd of people that they are meeting for the first time.  Heck... I remember the first road meet I attended back in 2004.  It was a fairly small group which I appreciated, because it gave me the opportunity to get to know them and feel like I could contribute to the conversation without worrying about getting lost or forgotten.

Also, we should keep in mind that this is simply a hobby for most of us here... intended to be fun and enjoyable.  The idea of telling others what they should want for their hobby doesn't make much sense, because everyone's opinion matters... not just those of the small group of folks who host meets.  Some hosts aim to plan meets for large groups of people, and that's awesome... as long as they are aware that some folks in our community might be turned off by the idea.  But on the other hand, some hosts might prefer the groups to be smaller and, perhaps, easier to manage.

Just because a meet attracts a large group of people doesn't automatically make it a success.  I've attended some meets with large groups that were organized/planned very well and were quite enjoyable, but on the other hand, some of the meets I've attended with large groups were NOT organized well at all and weren't very fun because of that.  Honestly, some of my favorite meets from over the years are the ones that had less than, say, a dozen attendees...more intimate and easier connect with others.

We definitely want all of our meets to be successful, whether we are attending or hosting them.  But the size of the group isn't, or shouldn't necessarily be, a factor in how successful the meets are.  A few of the major factors of success, I would say, are how organized and fun they are, and what kinds of connections the attendees make with everyone else.  Some folks may think larger groups do a better job of facilitating that kind of success than smaller groups, but others may disagree with that which is an equally valid perspective.  I just want to make sure we're not turning off folks who are interested in attending road meets but would feel more comfortable in smaller groups.  Not everyone is drawn to big crowds.

I appreciate everyone who has chimed in so far on my question.  It's a topic I've been thinking about over the past couple months as I'm getting ready to plan my Charlotte city meet next year.

[froggie]

Regarding meet attendance, the more the merrier as far as I'm concerned. Meets are still (25 years later) the premiere in-person events our community has to offer. We should want them to be as large and as successful as possible.

To a point.  As with many things, larger groups can become unwieldy.  And even with the best of planning, events can conspire against a large gathering that would have a much smaller impact on a smaller gathering.  Anyone who was at a certain SEPA meet in 2010 knows one example of what I'm talking about.

Large groups can also be a problem with urban elements of a road meet where parking is at a premium.  I've personally experienced this with meets in both DC and Minneapolis.  Even with carpooling...if you have 30-some people attending, you're still going to have a lot of vehicles.  That said, AJ's "city meet" method would be one way to mitigate this, as attendees could tour these elements at their own pace.

[Rothman]

So, are we going to restrict meets to only a certain number of people, then?  That doesn't seem right, either.

[cl94]

So, are we going to restrict meets to only a certain number of people, then?  That doesn't seem right, either.

I don't think that's necessary. More that a meet doesn't need to be massive in order to be worth attending. It's up to the host to plan activities based on expected attendance. That includes the lunch location and making sure the meetup/carpool spot has plentiful, free, and safe parking.

Will Reno will be far easier to do with 10 people than it would be with 30? Yes, just because some of the good places to visit have limited parking. And, well, a 10-car convoy driving on very low-traffic roads to see funny signs and old alignments would attract attention we may not want from both yokels and Barney Fife. All depends on the exact circumstances of the meet. I'm not gonna place an attendance cap, of course, but I'm not particularly worried about getting 20 people at a western meet.

[A.J. Bertin]

a meet doesn't need to be massive in order to be worth attending.

This is exactly what I'm saying.  Small meets can be just as enjoyable as massive meets.

[roadwaywiz95]

I'm kind of surprised some of you guys haven't commented on me giving out my phone number.  I was sure that would at least generate an opinion or two.

I always give out my phone number at meets I'm hosting, out of courtesy in case anyone needs to contact me for any reason.

Regarding meet attendance, the more the merrier as far as I'm concerned. Meets are still (25 years later) the premiere in-person events our community has to offer. We should want them to be as large and as successful as possible.

This coming from the guy who has hosted the biggest road meet to date in terms of attendance!

Whatever accolades people want to throw my way, the thing I'm most proud of is the fact that between the three meets I've hosted, there have been about a dozen people (not including spouses of roadgeeks) who made their debut road meet appearance at one of my meets.

Meets are not only a chance to catch up with old friends, but they are also one of the best chances we get to attract newcomers and grow the community in an in-person fashion. As the "old guard"  begins to become less involved in the community in the years ahead, I think it's going to be very important in the years ahead for us as a group to gradually attract new people and new ideas to these events so that they may be able to continue on for at least the next 25 years.

Yes, Meets are "for fun" , but they do not exist without the people who are willing to attend them. The fun that we have is the result of the work we've put in collectively over the years to make these things what they are. We should all want meets to be large and successful, because it gives these events more appeal in general and that *does* make a difference with potential newcomers. I like to think that I'm doing my part to create these kinds of events that will attract a wide variety of folks and I hope that more hosts out there realize that they too can be influential in this way and put together good events that reflect their passion and their commitment to seeing our community grow in the years to come.

[hbelkins]

So, are we going to restrict meets to only a certain number of people, then?  That doesn't seem right, either.

The last meet I attended -- the abandoned PA Turnpike meet a few years ago -- had a hard-and-fast size limit because (IIRC) of the capacity of the van the host rented to transport everyone. Also, IIRC, he'd gotten a special dispensation from the conservancy that controls the old turnpike and the tunnels to operate a single vehicle on the road.

Outside of that, I don't know of any other meets that have had precise numerical limitations placed on the attendees. I can think of at least one meet that required something entirely different, however, that served to limit attendance.

[Alps]

Regarding meet attendance, the more the merrier as far as I'm concerned. Meets are still (25 years later) the premiere in-person events our community has to offer. We should want them to be as large and as successful as possible.

To a point.  As with many things, larger groups can become unwieldy.  And even with the best of planning, events can conspire against a large gathering that would have a much smaller impact on a smaller gathering.  Anyone who was at a certain SEPA meet in 2010 knows one example of what I'm talking about.

Says the person who introduced the idea of written notes (2010 DC) so that people wouldn't get lost anymore. (: Best. Contribution. Ever.

[Alps]

So, are we going to restrict meets to only a certain number of people, then?  That doesn't seem right, either.

The last meet I attended -- the abandoned PA Turnpike meet a few years ago -- had a hard-and-fast size limit because (IIRC) of the capacity of the van the host rented to transport everyone. Also, IIRC, he'd gotten a special dispensation from the conservancy that controls the old turnpike and the tunnels to operate a single vehicle on the road.

Outside of that, I don't know of any other meets that have had precise numerical limitations placed on the attendees. I can think of at least one meet that required something entirely different, however, that served to limit attendance.

Wearing masks to protect others from a deadly contagious disease, amirite?

[Duke87]

I echo the consideration that once you get past 10-12 people it starts to become difficult to actually interact with everyone and by the time you get to 20, forget it.

Setting an attendance record does have its own appeal though. It is amazing the record from Baltimore stood for 13 years. Curious how long the new record from Buffalo will.

[Rothman]

I do wonder what attendance will be like in New Orleans.  The element of surprise is delicious.

[Dougtone]

I do wonder what attendance will be like in New Orleans.  The element of surprise is delicious.

So are the beignets.

[Rothman]

I do wonder what attendance will be like in New Orleans.  The element of surprise is delicious.

So are the beignets.

Oof.  Not sure what I think of everyone cramming into Cafe du Monde.

[baugh17]

Just to chime in here, I've been to meets of all sizes (As small as three and as large as the 39 at the aforementioned Buffalo meet).  Attendance is not a deal breaker for me, but I do feel the larger meets take away from getting to meet and talk to other attendees, especially ones that you've never met in person.  It didn't help that I had other obligations the same weekend as the Buffalo meet, and there were many in attendance that I hadn't met previously.  Maybe I wouldn't have gotten to all of them, but I probably would've made a better effort to get to know some if I had more time.

[A.J. Bertin]

Whatever accolades people want to throw my way, the thing I'm most proud of is the fact that between the three meets I've hosted, there have been about a dozen people (not including spouses of roadgeeks) who made their debut road meet appearance at one of my meets.

That is an amazing accomplishment, and you should be very proud of that.  I think that's awesome.  I would be curious, though... did any of those newbies give you any feedback after your meets about what they thought?  Did all of them like the big crowd?  Would any of them have felt more comfortable in a smaller group?  I would wonder whether your meets are the only ones they would ever be interested in attending (if so, that's cool).  Have they attended, or would they be interested at all in attending meets that anyone else might host?  The answers to these questions don't matter to me much, but I'm just curious.  Again... congratulations on your accomplishment!

Meets are not only a chance to catch up with old friends, but they are also one of the best chances we get to attract newcomers and grow the community in an in-person fashion. As the "old guard"  begins to become less involved in the community in the years ahead, I think it's going to be very important in the years ahead for us as a group to gradually attract new people and new ideas to these events so that they may be able to continue on for at least the next 25 years.

I totally agree that we should be attracting new people to our hobby.  But let's think of attracting folks who are interested in smaller groups AS WELL AS larger groups.

Yes, Meets are "for fun" , but they do not exist without the people who are willing to attend them.

Of course!  No one is denying that.

We should all want meets to be large and successful, because it gives these events more appeal in general and that *does* make a difference with potential newcomers.

Again, I will say that "large" does not automatically mean "successful".  The 2014 St. Louis meet is a great example of that.  I would say the size of these events does make a difference with potential newcomers... to an extent.  Potential newcomers who have social anxiety might be turned off by larger groups and might be more comfortable in smaller groups.  All I'm saying is... let's think about the folks too who don't want to see massive events where they can potentially get lost in the crowd.

I like to think that I'm doing my part to create these kinds of events that will attract a wide variety of folks and I hope that more hosts out there realize that they too can be influential in this way and put together good events that reflect their passion and their commitment to seeing our community grow in the years to come.

Absolutely.  You've done an amazing job of bringing newcomers into this hobby!  I think a large part of that has to do with your Roadwaywiz persona/branding that you've created online... through your YouTube channel, your Facebook presence, merchandise, etc.  That's all fantastic.  But let's also celebrate everyone else in our community who has hosted successful meets (big and small) that have also brought newcomers in.  Small meets can be just as successful as large meets.

[Rothman]

Makes me wonder if someday there'd be a "roadgeek convention" rather than tour meet.  Not sure who we'd be able to get to speak...

[jpi]

Makes me wonder if someday there'd be a "roadgeek convention" rather than tour meet.  Not sure who we'd be able to get to speak...

I know of one person for sure who would have no problems speaking, he is a big time toast master guy, talking about Steve "The Georgia Road geek" Williams. 

[jpi]

I echo the consideration that once you get past 10-12 people it starts to become difficult to actually interact with everyone and by the time you get to 20, forget it.

Setting an attendance record does have its own appeal though. It is amazing the record from Baltimore stood for 13 years. Curious how long the new record from Buffalo will.

I know my CSVT road meet in April 2018 came close to surpassing the Baltimore meet attendance record but big kudos to Dam for setting the new record.