Welcome to this club (not)

Subject: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,A cookiless member
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 04:25 AM

I've taken my cookie off to protect the innocent or guilty as the case may be.


Last night I emailed (with my name and address) a club I thought I might visit tonight. It's about a 40 mile drive there, and the same back. I said:

"Membership?

Or am I too late and if so can I get signed in if arriving at the door?

Do you actually start at 8, or is it 8 for 8.30?

Are there floor singer spaces?"



They replied in terms I felt rather unhelpful:


"You are too late for registering for this week but another member (known to you) can sign you in. Obviously we cannot arrange this since the member MUST be genuinely known to you.

Or if you are a member of an affiliated club, that is Islington, Cellar Upstairs or Musical traditions - or the EFDSS you can come in as a guest with evidence of membership.

Sorry to seem a bit heavy on this but it's out of our hands. To register for the future, assuming you can't sort out this week as above, please reply with an address (for the record).

Assuming you are able to come there are usually floor spots available.
These tend to be one song each as there are often plenty of perfomers.

We always aim to start at 8.00, we usually have a resident band who kick off then with some tune sets.

Regards"



I replied (in part)


"You know what?

I don't think I'll bother.

If you were wondering if I was a genuine folkie or a spy for a licensing authority, check (etc)".



They replied: -

"Your loss"


Now who thinks they were right and who thinks I was?

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: The DeanMeister
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 04:29 AM

Ouch! You mate.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 04:46 AM

There are very good reasons for this if the premises don't have an entertainments licence. Many London boroughs (Greenwich for example) have been known to do spot checks to see if membership rules are being flaunted.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 04:53 AM

But the anonymous member did suggest ways his bona fides could be checked, and it is very normal to introduce a visitor to a member, permit them to make acquaintance, and then, since the member now genuinely knows the visitor, to allow the member to sign the guest in.

But what also about the message (I re-phrase) "don't bother coming, you'll only get one song, we don't really want any singers, and our resident band always plays all it wants so there's no time for anyone else"? I remember the point being firmly made to us at Hazlitt Folk that if the evening is oversubscribed, it should be the residents who lose their slots, not those whose door payments fund the club. Previous threads have stressed the way a self-important and self-indulgent house band can drive punters away.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 05:56 AM

Why do the words 'anal retentive' and 'tight knicker elastic' spring to mind?

Sal (cookie exposed for all to see!)

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: The Barden of England
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 05:56 AM

Well I suppose this is one thing the new Licensing Bill (spitting fire & hate!) will take care of. I wonder if they're aware of it? Come to that I wonder if they're aware? It's an awkward situation I know, but Richard has given the answer that could have been used. Any club that can turn people away (especially some-one willing to do an 80 mile round trip)must be either:

1) Heavily over subscribed (ain't seen many of those lately), or

2)So far up it's own a*se that they can't see the wood for the trees.

Me - I'd be spiteful and join, then go, and probably tell them why I wouldn't be going back. Then again they would probably tell me not to come back!

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Santa
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 06:12 AM

Seems to me that you were given a straightforward and honest answer, with fair warning about how much time was available. There seems to be rather more being read into this that I can see justified. Paraphrasing to change the meaning is saying more about chips on shoulder than the actual club policy.

But if it was a fair paraphrasing, then you're better off without the club anyway. Why didn't you send your details and give them a chance the following week? Without that then it could indeed be "your loss" - though that could have been more tactfully phrased!

The trade-off between regulars and visitors could perhaps be dealt with in a separate thread, as I think it could raise several valuable points, but in the end a private club exists for the benefit of its members. The members who go along to listen might like the sound of someone new, but the performing regulars no doubt value their opportunity to play. An organiser who offends his regular performers will soon find him/herself without a club.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Cookieless member
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 06:26 AM

Well, you can read the paraphrase and the message.

And you can see that I had given the name and address in my first email.

And ms Lemon which side are you referring to?

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 06:40 AM

The club. Maybe you should join, observe, and write a sit-com about the place. Sounds about ripe and ready for one! Could be a winner.

Sal

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Kevin Sheils
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 06:44 AM

Richard

You are making some massive assumptions here regarding the club, based on the original posting by the anonymous member (I am the MC of the club concerned and feel that I should take some time to state the facts from this side but will not hide under anonymity as there is nothing to hide).

Yes the member sent the email as stated word for word but less than 48 hours notice which is required for membership and I responded as stated.

I personally can't see why anonymous member feels that the first reply was unhelpful, although the rather terse "your loss" which was after his follow up may be considered as such and I'll return to that, but concentrate on the original reply.

It gave all the details that we can stretch to in order to allow a person in with less than 48 hours notice and remain within the club rules for premises without a PEL, signed in as a known guest of a member (affilaited clubs EFDSS etc), and answered his questions about floor spots. Yes we do often get a lot of singers, not residents, so to fit in as many as possible it's frequently one song/tune/monologue whatever each and, yes (to answer his start time query) we have a resident band who play from 8.00 as people are settling and during the interval to manintain an ambience which people like. They do not hog the evening or take up floor spot time unless nobody turns up in which case they may play a little longer. It has long been a tradition of clubs around this area to have an opening house band (it ensures a prompt start)

Now can either the anonymous member clarify what was unhelpful there or can Richard explain how he made assumtions about our club and rephrased the reply in a manner which if it had been the reply would have been arrogant and unhelpful. Also the checking of bona fides thing is a red herring (I won't copy the parts of the further email from Mr Anonymous which he has left out as it may identify him, and he clearly doesn't wish to be so identified) but all it said was, and I paraphrae "look check here and you'll see I'm a bona fida folkie". Being a bona fide folkie doesn't get round the 48 hours notice rule I'm afraid and the email did not state, that's OK I'm a member of efdss etc which we would be happy to accept

It was the rather, to me, arrogant "You know what? I don't think I'll bother.... check out etc" which came across as "Don't you know who I am?" that prompted the "your loss" response, in a bit of grumpiness I suppose, because I believe it is his loss if he found information in the original response that stops him coming to our club, because I can't see it.

So what is the problem Mr Anonymous? Is it that you can't be bothered meeting some very simple rules to come, which I agree are aggravating but that's the way with the PEL thing, or is it that you can't be bothered turning up if you might only get one song?

And Richard Re-read the original message and explain how you made such assumptions about a club, that I guess you don't know, from it. I'm sure our house band and regular singers would be fascinated to hear why you assume they are self indulgent and self important without coming.

I've recently contributed to a few threads here as a guest because a member suggested I might enjoy it more that umf. I'm toying with registering but there seem to be as many people hiding behind cloaks of anonymity and making unsubstantiated statements as elsewhere.

Still I'm an easy going chap so I'll stick with at as guest for the moment.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: The Barden of England
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 06:56 AM

Thanks for being so open Kevin - it's refreshing.
I just wondered if you couldn't have done what Richard suggested i.e. the GUEST was introduced to a member of the club, etc. etc. . Richard is one of the Performing Lawyers Group who tried so valiantly to get the onerous new Licensing Bill changed, but unfortunately to no avail, so he is not unknowledgeable about matters of the law.

To others things though, how do you see the new Law affecting you from July next year?

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 06:58 AM

From Brewster's Dictionary of Fables:

The Gold and Silver Shield. Two knights coming from different directions stopped in sight of a trophy shield, one side of which was gold and the other silver. Like the disputants about the colour of the chameleon, the knights disputed about the metal of the shield, and from words they proceeded to blows. Luckily a third knight came up at this juncture, to whom the point of dispute was referred, and the disputants were informed that the shield was silver on one side and gold on the other. This story is from Beaumont's Moralities. It was reprinted in a collection of Useful and Entertaining Passages in Prose, 1826.



   The other side of the shield. The other side of the question. The reference is to the “Gold and Silver Shield.” (See above.



   That depends on which side of the shield you look at. That depends on the standpoint of the speaker. (See above.)

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Kevin Sheils
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 07:05 AM

Thanks John

I've always understood that if we arrange the meeting we are to all intents and purposes circumventing the law and it's a bit like entrapment but the other way round (if you know what I mean) and could still be illegal, but I'm no lawyer so I'd happily accept genuine advice but, like the new licensing bill, advice can be convoluted and confusing. But yes if people turn up we have ways of suggesting things but we don't believe we can do it openly.

I "think" the anonymous member might be a member of an acceptable acffiliate so why didn't he just come along and tell us.

I'm still trying to get my head round the implications for next year. I've read the advice etc and find the less than 200 exemption before midnight etc a maze of contradictions and confusions so hopefully there will soon be an easy to read guide to clarify it.

Mind you I'm just the MC not the organiser......;-)

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Kevin Sheils
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 07:07 AM

I Like the story DmcG but my name is spelt differently (unless you are one of my uncles who does spell it Shields)

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Ritchie
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 07:11 AM

I would n't join any club that would be daft enough to have me as a member.
yet again another very good thread to while away the lunch hour

regards Ritchie

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 07:19 AM

Firstly I'm always curious about these places that are the same distance coming back as they are going. Never pans out like that for me, but maybe I spent too long in Ireland.

Richard Bridges, it's not the point, but where precisely did Cookieless offer ways to check his/her bona fides? And where's the justification for that fantastic construction you've put on the info about a resident band kicking things off at 8pm? Seems to me that our anonymous fellow member got a thoroughly helpful response to his/her queries. And very promptly, given that some clubs leave their email boxes unattended for days on end.

No doubt if Cookieless had turned up at the door, it would have been easy enough to get signed in - the club was simply pointing out (as it was pretty much obliged to do in print) that it could not officially get involved in that. The guy even apologised for having to be "heavy" on a point that was none of his doing.

In case you can't work out which side I'm on, I'm with the guy who said "your loss." Wake up and smell the coffee, Cookieless. Or the lemonade. (Mrs Lemon's is going to taste better than ever at Warwick!)

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Strupag
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 07:32 AM

Although valiant effort was made to change the dreaded bill, is it not time for organised resistance and for every folk club in England to openly defy the terms of the bill? Surely, "getting round" the bill is still a way of accepting it.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 07:34 AM

I turn my back on the PC for a mere few minutes and a whole raft of new posts come flooding in before I can press "submit."

So Mrs Lemon's post was indeed ambiguous, despite taking a swipe at the whinger's anonymity. But then I aways said her brew was bitter as a lemon.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Kevin Sheils
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 08:00 AM

Thanks Fionn

Perhaps what I should have written in the final reply to Mr Anonymous was

"Your loss, because it's a really good club and you'd enjoy it, and we'd like to see you there."

Which is "probably" what I would have said if it was a conversation but hell this was email it's supposed to be short and sharp, and sometimes comes over terse ;-)

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Maryrrf
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 08:14 AM

That was my feeling when I read the post - that as Kevin said, sometimes e-mail exchanges can come across as terse. I write freely on e-mail and don't make any attempt to keep it "short and sharp" - to me its more like a letter, but others think of e-mail more like a telex or something and confine their e-mails to the strictly minimum necessary to convey the information. I've had wrong impressions of people because of this, then I met them and realized they just don't like to type and in person they were really quite communicative. I think that's what all this boils down to - a misunderstanding that wouldn't have happened had the prospective visitor and the MC met in person.   I can see where the e-mail wasn't especially welcoming butI don't think it was intended to discourage the person from attending - just to convey the information in as succinct a form possible.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: treewind
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 08:20 AM

I couldn't understand the original poster's problem.

But then I've lived in London and been (still am) a member of the Islington Folk Club and of Kevin's "Old Rose and Crown" club, and I'm familiar with the 'private club' PEL loophole frequently used by London folk clubs. It's well known locally that the 48 hour and other membership rules do get tested by unannounced visiting council officers and that, especially in writing (which includes email) the clubs have to be very careful about what they say. Islington once got into hot water because a band they had booked advertised the gig in Time Out. The club also advertises in TO but is very careful to state membership requirements and a contact number in their ad - the band didn't, of course.

Yes, the words 'anal retentive' and 'tight knicker elastic' may spring to mind, but they apply to the rules made by the government and the local authorities' zeal for complying with them, as evidenced by several incidents in the past few years. The club just has to comply or it will get closed down.

By the way - Kevin: welcome to MudCat - nice to see you here and dispensing some well written common sense!

Anahata

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Kevin Sheils
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 08:24 AM

Hi Anahata

I have actually registered so that I don't appear as a guest. Still haven't fully sorted out what I can do as a registree (?) but I think we can email each other.

It's always been a great shame that we meet on the same night Thursdays as the Islington Club but most nights clash with Something....

Will we be seeing you now that Islington's closed for the summer?

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: treewind
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 08:32 AM

Yep - you can send and receive PM's (private messages) is the main thing, and I think you can set up some personal settings and store info about yourself in the MudCat rogues gallery for all to see - that sort of thing.

I've been looking at your programme and ours - with three gigs in a row this weekend we don't need another late night tonight, but next week - as we have now a brand new CD to sell.... well, you never know. The two month long launch party starts on Saturday!

Anahata

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Cookieless member
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 08:35 AM

Well, after digesting the above I am certainly more (if not wholly) inclined to see that perhaps the club's message was not as dismissive as I first thought. Of course I understand the legalities. I certainly however initially read the club's reply more as "won't help and don't need floor singers anyway" than "sorry, but we have to be paranoid and can't be seen to help".

But since the purpose of my formerly intended visit was to surprise someone tonight, and since I was not a local authority spy but cannot be assured of entry, and since it is long round trip, in practice it is still not practical.

That may be my loss, but there are clubs round here (give or take a bit) and many closer than North London, so it is not only my loss.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Bassic
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 09:09 AM

Kevin, two points.

Firstly, would you like to identify your club? I am in London on occasion and enjoy the chance to visit clubs and meet other Mudcatters.

Secondly, is a persons membership of Mudcat sufficient to identify him/her as being "know" to other Catters who are your club members, thus allowing them to be bona fide guests and signed in on the nite?

As "GUEST,A cookiless member" is clearly know on the Cat, and his/her membership of Mudcat can be proved if required, surely the unanounced visiting officers would be hard pressed to prove a breach of the "rules".

As I am not a member of any of the organisations you have already mentioned, if I were to ask to make a visit to your club, then I could find myself in a simmilar situation so I would apreciate your advice. I think that The Sloop in Barton (N.E. Lincs) where I do have membership, has opperated in this way with visiting Mudcatters without problems. (If you see this ET, do you have a view?)

Gordon

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 10:30 AM

Seemed a perfectly fair reply. When you're operating in a repressive state, where there is always the possibility of some kind of entrapment going on, you have to be careful in what you say.

If Kevein Shels had written "of course you'll be able to find someone who will sign you in as a Guest" he'd have been asking for trouble. But obviuously that is virtually always the case in this kind of situation. Writing "but another member (known to you) can sign you in" was a pretty strong hint, I'd have thought.

arning someone that they might not get more than one song in as a floor is fair too. It's often enough the case in practice on a buysy night in a busy club.

And welcome to the Mudcat, Kevin S. We can quarrel about anything here...

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Kevin Sheils
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 10:39 AM

From Mr Anons post I guess he was coming to surprise tonights guest artist, Reg Meuross, so following the logic he could be signed in by Reg. If it's not Reg he was planning to surprise then there wouldn't be aproblem because I assume the other person must be a member to be there so all the previous things in the original reply cover that. Also I think you must be a member of efdss (or an efdss affiliate club) from your email to us so you would be covered. Also no formal House band tonight, I think they've got a gig (typical), but I believe Mr Simon Ritchie will be along to play us in.

Bassic - as Anahata mentioned, we're the Old Rose & Crown Walthamstow (in fact last week we had a new member whose surname was "Rosencrown" there must be a thread in there somwhere) and you raise interesting points about what is an affiliate club as regards mudcat members. As stated I'm not the organiser so I'll get him to take out the old fag packet and read the club constitution to see if there's something there. I think we use a standard efdss constitution, being affiliated, which allows us to consider other efdss clubs to be affiliated. in the meantime here's a link for you (if I can work out how to do it).

Old Rose & Crown

That seems OK

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Ritchie not really a guest
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 10:55 AM

And I thought that we had problems up here in the North East with the Working Mens Club doormen. Ha, I did n't realise we had it so good. Try and listen to 'star turn's' 'are you affliated' on second thoughts you'd better not.
keep on rocking in the freeworld regards Ritchie

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,befuddled
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 11:12 AM

sounds like a brian of "Traditional Music maker" magazine venue/folk club to me. His venue in that area of London always has his band of old fuddy duddy wannabe north London hillbilies there to torture with their cacophony anybody foolish enough to think of attending
If your good enough to be heard in public,then you should be out playing on the streets....Folk clubs only ever appeal to folkies and we all know what a boring lot they are.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: JedMarum
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 11:20 AM

I guess the pie's only so big, and the more there are in attendance, the thinner the slices!

Maybe the answer is, more pies, bigger pies ...

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Bassic
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 11:46 AM

Thanks, Kevin.

Got a PM from treewind covering the same thing. Email for membership on its way! Hope to make CBS gig in a couple of weeks.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Mary Humphreys
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 12:25 PM

For the benefit of those who haven't visited the Old Rose & Crown club, my take on the club is that it is one of the most friendly and inclusive clubs in the UK - and i have experienced a fair few!
Anyone who wants to join in with the Sauna in the Corner band is welcomed to play. They do so, as Kevin says, to give a certain ambience in the early minutes of the evening, and to fill some of the gaps in the interval. There is no way that they are precious or exclusive. If they have me playing with them, they must be a pretty tolerant bunch!
There are many really first-rate and nationally known performers who turn up on a regular basis to the club nights - Peta Webb, Lynn Heraud, Kitty Vernon are just three that spring to mind. They only get one song apiece too. So there is nothing wrong in Kevin alerting the potential visitor to the limitations on performance time for floor singers. I think it is much better knowing what you will get as a slot, rather than being told once you have arrived. At least you can sing your belter and hope to get an encore!
Kevin - we'll be visiting as soon as we get a free Thursday. Saw your famous little brother Gerry last week at Hitchin!

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 12:28 PM

To the lawyer's mind that raises an avenue: If our anon-e-mouse guest member is a mamber of any where nearby, how long does it take for "the committee" to decide that that club is affiliated? Can that be done by 8 pm tonight?

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: RoyH (Burl)
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 12:31 PM

Greetings Kevin, good to see your name here. We know each other, have done for many years. I was a frequent guest at Herga. As a former club organiser I'm with you on this. These are dodgy times for the club scene, we must watch our steps. Good luck with the club, Cheers, Burl.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Mary Humphreys
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 12:36 PM

Sorry Kevin -It was Bishop's Stortford where we saw Gerry. The Nancy Kerr & James Fagin - Clap & Smile gig. Wonderful!
Anahata says - 'You little Welsh people - all the South of England seems the same to you!' Must try harder....

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Kevin Sheils
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 01:08 PM

Richard

I think we would probably have needed to establish an affiliation more than 48 hours but I believe you're a lawyer so let me know. The organiser says it needs to be in the constitution.

I have replied earlier that our anon friend can probably be signed in by whoever he wants to surprise, if that makes sense.

I'll be off to the club shortly so probably won't see any further postings 'til the morrow

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Kevin Sheils
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 01:11 PM

Burl

Thanks for your comments was it you I spoke to at the Musical Traditions club on Reg Halls birthday bash?

And thanks to Mary H

This hot weather does affect us all in strange ways

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Willie-O
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 01:54 PM

This whole exchange completely boggles me poor Canadian brain but I guess all's well that ends well.

Someone should make a film noir about the cutthroat door politics of the ultra-secret underground folk music scene in the U.K....


Halt! Who goes there! Password!

Willie-O

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Dead Horse
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 02:15 PM

Dear ................(insert name of club)

Please accept this as my application to join your club.
P.S. Please keep membership card at the door, as I may drop in at anytime, or even later if you have no real ale bar.
Yours sincerely

    .......................(insert name of choice)

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 02:32 PM

Willie-O, it's not the UK, it is England and Wales. Even within England and Wales, you may not come across this type of policy - much depends on the attitudes of local authorities.

What's going to happen with the member only ideas when the new PEL laws come in?

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 02:45 PM

The most unwelcoming clubs that I have been to purely as a punter have been open to customers "off the street". The funny thing is that they are the ones that the guitar jockeys here praise to the skys.

As a non performing punter by far the rudest club I have been to was Maidenhead. The total contempt for a paying customer was mind boggling. Their loss - a couple of hundred pounds in entrance fees that have been spent elsewhere over the years.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: clansfolk
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 04:37 PM

The club was right - sorry

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: C-flat
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 05:14 PM

I'm pleased to see a little thawing of hostilities between "cookieless" and "club". It does sound like a well run and well attended operation and one that the thread originator would probably enjoy visiting. E-mail conversations are not often the best way to strike a rapport and misunderstandings like this are all too often the outcome.
Maybe the Old Rose and Crown could extend an invitation to our cookieless member and build a bridge?

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 06:33 PM

As I understand it, when the new act kicks in, there'll be no legal advantage in being a members only club. If there's a music licence in place it'll be legal, and if there isn't, it'll be illegal, regardless of whether it's a club or not.

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Jul 03 - 07:04 PM

Magrath, you are right

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Ralphie
Date: 11 Jul 03 - 02:32 AM

Oooh wasn't fun, fairly cheered me up on a Friday Morn !!

Nice to see my local club get a mention.
I have to agree with the supporters of the Old R & C. In no way could the organisers (or MC, for that matter!) be seen as aggresive, unfair, etc, none of them have the energy!! But, a more eclectic booking policy you'd be hard pressed to find in England, let alone London. And as Mary said above, such is it's reputation, that the floor singers list can be pretty intimidating !!

The first time I came across a "House Band" kicking off the evening, was with the various clubs run by Mr Davenport and Flowers and Frolics many years ago. And a more perfect way to fill in the gaps, and ensure a prompt start, I can't imagine...and, Yes, the Sauna in the Corner band, always accepts itinerants, stray bagpipe players (Mmm maybe!) and in no way does it get in the way of the evening, I see it more as the mortar that holds the evening together. (or should that be glue?....On hot nights, it would seem wise to keep a little distance from them! Only Joking!!)

So, I'm sorry that my cookieless friend had a bad time...E Mails are a curse sometime.   

As for the PEL angle, London councils can be particularly nasty when it comes to licensing laws, with the consequent demise of a myriad of fine venues, or, if your name is "The Cellar", you have to keep moving from one "Safe" house to another every couple of months, just to stay one step ahead of bad guys!

As others have said, welcome Kev....! All sorts of advantages on the Cat, but, don't visit Room 101, the photo gallery, you have been warned..

Cheers Ralphie

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Kevin Sheils
Date: 11 Jul 03 - 03:16 AM

Probably the final from me in this thread as I think all the issues have been well and truly dusted off (at least as far as the emails between the club and anon are concerened but there are interesting issues on the new regime to come perhaps in a different thread) I can see that the final email was a bit terse but was in response to the follow up and I hope cookieless can see there was nothing really unhelpful in the original reply, I guess that feeling came after the follow up. We both knee jerked blame the hot weather

I don't think anon was there last night although I'm MCing and somebody else does the door, but no new performers identified themselves. As C-flat mentioned, cookiless is very welcome and since he sent his original email he is technically registered so no problem.

As is the way of these things the two main members of our band were away at a music event in France so we had a very stripped down band. Also being the time of year and hot weather, when holidays start kicking in, we had very few floor singers (although good numbers in the audience) so everyone did one in the first half and one in the second and even then we had got to 9.45 with the guest due on at 10.00 so I had to do a Billy Bennett monologue as an extra since none of the others wanted to sing again.

An enjoyable but odd night all round, somebody forgot to empty the container we draw the raffle from and put this weeks tickets in with last weeks, I thought we'd never draw a genuine winner. And the poor old guests mobile phone went off just as he started a number. Didn't we all laugh.....

I agree with McGrath and Richard, it's my understanding that the members only thing won't matter in the new regime, which could be better for the scenario for clubs like ours, but clearly not for sessions and other events which is why the new legislation is such a dog's dinner of muddle. I'd rather we had the members only problem because we've lived with it for years and know how to work it, than a possible slight easement for us but ridiculous aggravation for everyone else.

And even in the club scenario I'm concerned that other things required to ensure that our pub covers music in it's license (I always get muddled with c's and s's there) may place problems our way which we don't have in the current regime.

Anyway, apart from the original aggravation which started this thread, which I hope is cleared, it was good to have some nice things said about our club. Who said there's no such thing as bad publicity ;-)

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jul 03 - 04:21 AM

Was Reg Meuross good, and what sort of guitar does he play - indeed what sort of music did he play?

And, incidentally, is there a bit more of a hint in that you were not sure if cookieless was there - but as per your first email to him he could (theoretically) not have got in anyway?

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Kevin Sheils
Date: 11 Jul 03 - 04:46 AM

Richard

Reg was excellent. Always is in my experience, can't recall a bad evening with him either solo or in the various bands he's been with. I guess you don't know him from your question but he is a singer/songwriter with a mild country'ish slant but coming from an English perspective (Bloody hell I'm glad I don't write reviews regularly!!!!). Although he did some non self penned stuff including Boots of Spanish Leather as a fill in when his accompanist (the wonderful Martin Belmont on guitar) broke a string and had to pop into the green room (posh name for the spare room out the back next to the gents) to change it, and a fine version of the traditional "wind and Rain" (the two sisters ballad).

The question "what sort of guitar does he play", do you mean style or make? style is fairly normal finger picking and strum (normal but well played) as for make I had assumed both played Martins but I heard Martin discussing his with one of our guitar players (I'm only an occasional player when I get my Springsteen mood on) and it was a Japanese imitation but I didn't catch the make, Martin said it was te best semi electric acoustic round.

Back to Reg he played many years ago in The Panic Brothers and later with the Flamingoes who included a couple of members of Barely Works (sorely missed) and also one of the incarnations of the Hank Wangford Band (which he still might but I haven't seen them for years) and most recently I've seen him with Steafan Hanigan but that was an informal do (boozy book launch) so may not be regular. Hope some of the above puts him in context for you.

The rest of your question, I was being a little tongue in cheek saying I don't think he was there as I'm 99.999% sure he wasn't (I only recall two non members turning up with some of our members, I think I recognised everyone else) and I didn't spot his name in the signing in book (another aggravating thing we have to keep to cover the PEL business). As stated earlier i felt that he could have turned up since he posted that he intened to surprise someone (could even have been me, maybe I know him).

Cheers

Subject: RE: Welcome to this club (not)
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 11 Jul 03 - 04:47 AM

While you're feeling friendly, Richard, why not go the whole hog and acknowledge that your paraphrasing of Kevin was completely out of order?