[GNHLUG] Re: Hosstraders Dead, but NEARFest Lives!!

Bill Sconce sconce at in-spec-inc.com
Mon Mar 19 21:23:55 EDT 2007


On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 18:38:40 -0400
"Ben Scott" <dragonhawk at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 3/19/07, Bill McGonigle <bill at bfccomputing.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 2007, at 22:15, Jon 'maddog' Hall wrote:
> >> Maybe we can get them to change their minds about the monitors.
> >
> > I understand the concerns about the illegal dumping.  Perhaps another
> > option would be to register these monitors based on photo-id and
> > brand/serial number at the gate on the way in.
> 
>   Sorry to rain on your parade, but that's got a lot of drawbacks:


The whole idea has drawbacks.  One must think that the organizers
haven't had a chance to think things through to likely consequences.

Example 1a:  Just asking people to not bring CRT monitors would be
effective at some level.  That is, most would comply.  The ones
who won't comply will bring them in anyway.

Example 1b:  Asking people to not bring CRT monitors/charging a $20
deposit will be effective at some level, likely about the same.  The
ones who won't comply will bring them in anyway.  The only difference
will be that now the CRTs will be buried under other stuff in the
back of the car.  (Are the organizers thinking of searching vehicles?)

Example 2a:  Asking for a $20 deposit requires issuing chits of SOME
kind and tracking them with 100% accuracy.  (See Ben's remarks about
burden on the operators.)  Without an accurate control system, some
of the CRTs which come in under other stuff would go out on top, 
grabbing a deposit "refund" on the way.

Example 2b:  Without an accurate control system, some people who are
entitled to $20 back on the way out (e.g., the buyer of suct a CRT)
might not get it.  A hassle.

Example 2c:  Without an accurate control system (or maybe even with
it), forging the chits suddenly becomes possible, and worthwhile.
Ten of these deposits = $200 -- a lot of admission tickets. 

The heavy-metal argument/burden was one of the phenomena which
burned out the organizers of Hosstraders.  Most of what they tried
didn't work.  They weren't nuts enough to try a deposit scheme.

Photo ID and brand/serial number?  At a _fleamarket_?

-Bill


> - It puts most of the burden on the operators, not the perpetrators
> - Some CRTs may not have a make and unit ID (this *is* a hamfest)
> - The operators now *have* to comb the trash to find dumped CRTs
> - The operators still have to pay for disposal (or storage)
> - The operators have to wait for the authorities to find and convict
> the perps, and then seek damages
> - The authorities may not care (or may have bigger fish to fry)
> - If the perps are never caught, the operators are stuck with the cost
> 
>   (As an aside, I note that this bares some similarities to the spam problem.)
> 
>   The nice thing about a deposit is, it gives people a strong
> incentive to comply with the rules, and violations automatically cover
> their cost.  Meanwhile, there's no significant long term impact on the
> good guys.  Administration costs are about it (and registration has
> admin costs, too).
> 
>   Again, if you can afford to a haul a CRT to Deerfield for a hamfest,
> you can afford a $20 deposit for two days.
> 
> -- Ben


More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list