give the automatic waiting list people a "confirm spot within 6 hours or back onto the waiting list"
AUTOMATIC WAITING LIST: problem: some people don't check their email often enough to learn that they got moved into the 'yes' RSVP column, resulting in inadvertent no-shows
MANUAL WAITING LIST: problem: people without constant access to their email rarely get the opportunity to affirm a "yes" spot 'cuz the smartphone/cubicle people beat them to it.
SOLUTION: give the AUTOMATIC list a "time-to-confirm" setting, where people get moved into the open 'yes' spots, but have to confirm within a set amount of time (i.e. 6 hours), otherwise they get bumped to the bottom of the waiting list.
Heather - Nerd Fun Boston
shared this idea
42 comments
-
Twin Cities Museum Meetup Group
commented
Great idea, I'm so tired of hearing "I didn't see I was moved up until it was too late" I really wish people would read their emails.
-
Ron Leedy
commented
After reading the original meetup forum and most of the comments, I will be giving a couple of my votes to this but I think instead of going to the end of the line, the waiting person who doesn't confirm by a certain time gets bypassed but keeps their postion at the front of the line for the next person. There are times as a Scout leader, I am off my email for periods of 36 hours while camping. Why should have to go to the back of the line? I have no problem with the next person getting a chance to take my spot just not everyone.
-
Jim
commented
Seems so obvious - yet another feature not thought out...
-
Anonymous
commented
Sometmes 6 hrs won't be enough. Also....how about 'returned' to the top of the wait list to be given another chance. Maybe 'they' weren't on email or smartphone soon enough.
-
Karen
commented
This group should have a no-show policy! You must update your RSVP if you cannot attend an event and provide as much notice as possible!
-
Karen
commented
12 hours is more than enough time to confirm. If you can't check email then you don't have to time to go to the event either.
-
Karen
commented
YES I agree with "time to confirm" setting and we should vote this way. The current system is very unfair and we are a group of kind just people or I would hope so! Even when a space is available it is not available by computer. Says a spot is available 79 people at the sign up page but it doesn't work to add a name always listed. Perhaps this is a waste of time as I don't intend to pay a $150 per month for a phone- what a waste of money and I am a smarter person than this.
-
Anonymous
commented
Some folks cancel their reservations at the last minute. I have been bumped up to going without adequate notification. At that point, I had already made other commitments.
It would be nice if we got an email to update our reservation if someone updates their reservation to not going.
-
Doodle Bean
commented
I like it! I'd like to see the time expanded a bit because not everybody checks their email every six hours. 10-12 hours would work better for me.
-
Anonymous
commented
I wish there were a way to throttle the RSVPs so smartphone users don't just pile onto an event all at once. An idea that other groups use is to change up the time of day that new events are posted; this gives morning people a chance on some events, and evening people on others. That goes a little way toward helping the folks who check email only once a day. One idea I tried was this: I limited attendees to just 6; then after a week I increased the limit to 12 and offered the waitlist people spots. This felt cumbersome and frankly it was too much work!
Other ideas out there about how to throttle the RSVPs?
-Liz -
Anonymous
commented
That's a great idea. I have often wished for a way to manage the waitlist better and this would be better than any half-baked ideas I had (like cloning the event and asking for a second RSVP to the cloned event).
People on the waitlist quite often go ahead and make other plans (understandably) and this idea makes the whole thing sorta self-managing.
-
Heather - Nerd Fun Boston
commented
6 hours is just for example. It can be 24 hours up to several days before the event and then maybe one hour on the day of the event. If the amount of time coud be configurable we'd be all set.
-
Doreen Charbonneau
commented
I think this is an excellent idea....especially if the organizer can set the wait time. In general no idea is perfect, and reading the comments here I see that some think 6 hours is too short a time, but giving organizers more flexibility on how they set up events and wait lists etc. to better suit the nature of their groups and events is a great thing.
-
Beth Parkhurst
commented
Could you make the time-to-confirm setting longer, or at least have people who don't confirm within the timeframe go back to the top of the list? I don't get to check my e-mail even every six hours; more like every twenty-four. As a computer "have-not" I'd get bumped to the bottom all the time.
-
Karen
commented
It is not fair to endlessly keep other's waiting. If your on the bottom of comfirm list then you should do so promtly.
-
Karen
commented
Yes, a time limit would be fair because it isn't fair to say 5 seats available then none ever are because people don't check back in one day. To wait a day from the day of posting is fair.
-
Anonymous
commented
This is a very good idea, another would be to have meetup send a confirmation message at some pre-determined time as to weed-out those RSVP's that were made long in advance and then either don't show, or cancel at the last minute.
-
Linda Kornfeld
commented
seems reasonable!
-
sha
commented
I like this option as long as the next in line is notified by email instead of having to look to see if there is a glimmer of hope that someone dropped off.
-
Giovanni
commented
I see all the comments and it seems nothing is going to satisfy everyone. However, I do think the 6 hour time limit is a good idea because it is a compromise solution. Norman wants a guarantee which I think is unfair. The impetus has to be more on the people on the waiting list. They need to check frequently on the day of the event. And they have a full day to respond the week of the event. Organizers should not be put in a position that they have to call people. Organizers put these events together without pay and out of friendship. Adding a burden to the organizers would likely reduce the amount of events. I support Heather's recommendation.
