Time for some more discussion folks. Since we no longer have access to the room we had been using we are going to be moving the game around on a rotating basis. The question becomes how to determine who gets seats when there is more demand than supply. Fortunately, we will only have to do this some of the time since Adam has generously offered up his place which has plenty of capacity and Ryan is willing to try two tables by converting his game room to hold a second table. However, we are not always going to have access to high capacity venues. We may be limited to 10, 9, or even 8 seats.
There are many different factors which could be used to decide who gets priority. They include but are not limited to the following:
* "Seniority" as in the people who have been playing mid-week poker the longest. Should people who have been with the group longest get priority?
* Attendance - people who have shown up the most regularly over the past few months. Does it make sense that the players who always show up get spots over those who show up periodically?
* Duration - players who show up and play the longest each night. Should a person who plays from 7pm until the game breaks trump a player who shows up late and/or leaves early?
* Hosts - people who have offered their place to play. Clearly anyone hosting would play while hosting. But do people who host get priority over people who don't host
when playing at a third party location?
* First come first served? - True casino style would be that those who show up first get seats and after the table is full they can either wait or leave. RSVP order to the email invite could conceivably be used but I don't think that would be a good solution.
* Rotation - everyone would take a turn sitting out. Does it make sense for everyone to have to skip a week every so often when the seating is limited?
* Other? I'm sure there are other ways we can determine who gets a seat and who doesn't which are not listed above.
Also, as a sidebar, I want to know what people's opinions are about player versus shuffler. I am working on a way to get the shuffler to take up less rail space, ideally the solution would take zero rail space. But if the choice had to be made between having the shuffler or having people shuffle the cards but squeezing in an extra person, what would people prefer?
Please comment on what you think would be the best method for distributing limited seats. I'd like to get this resolved so that we can have the procedure in place for next week's game. Thanks!