Thanks for that, really good!
Could you elaborate on "less-vertical coalitions of comparitively high-status females" and "paternity certainty is a nonissue" please?
Great post. The meet sounds awesome and touched on many things I'm interested in. I'd love to be on the same continent to attend these more regularly than once a year.
One possible typo: "This was followed by multiple passes for people to affiliated with any proposed topic".
I think that's a fair answer, and I especially approve of the mentality you describe here:
Mostly, my intent with these posts is for them to be seen and for people to get a few ideas out of them - and while it would be good for all sorts of reasons to make these posts high quality in other ways, if people get some ideas out of them but don't think it's that great a post, or even down-vote it for valid reasons of style and content-type, that would mostly be a win.
I do however believe this makes your series a better candidate for 'discussion' and then moving to 'main' if it still... (read more)
Now this isn't a comment on the content of the article itself but, given that your first part in this series has negative votes (at the time of this comment and, most crucially, at the time this part 2 was posted), I question the wisdom of pushing on before addressing the perceived problems with the first post. On the other hand, perhaps you believe continuing to the next instalment will place the first part in a better context. Another theory is that you don't care about the negative votes or comments and are writing for those who do like what you're doing, and the downvoters can disembark the boat if they choose. Enough speculation from me, what's your stance?
I love the bit at the end where Ibrahim (market trader) says it's "the hardest money I've ever had to work for" and Nick (charity worker) jokes "he obviously hasn't worked in the charity sector to try and get money", then the look on Nick's face when Ibrahim says he's going to respray his yacht!
I felt that Nick displayed a good mix of hot and cold rationality.
Why "summary for impatient readers" not "summary"?
There is already a post related to this meetup but it concerns a discussion which took place after I had left so I will write about the games of Werewolf. Please post your thoughts too and correct any inaccuracies.
Thoughts:
Taken.
Me, Chris, CJ, Emily, Jonathan, Roman, Arnie, Richard, xrchz, and I think three/four others to whom I apologise for not remembering/catching their names (Tim? Another Richard?).
Why the downvote? I'm expressing gratitude that goes beyond the anonymity and single point karma increase of merely clicking thumbs up, and clarifying that the answer was acceptable to me.
My reasoning is that by stating this publicly I make it more likely people will respond in detail to such requests in future, as they see that (some) such requesters do read the responses and do appreciate them. I am also making clear that the original request was earnest and not rhetorical.