Hello Jack and other SAS-L Friends,
I've told key SAS personnel directly that I want those two hours of my life
back. It was the worst opening session that I remember having sat through.
I might also add that the Mad Doggy loves a good sales pitch. However, I
don't think that the opening session was effective even on that level.
IMHO, SAS does a good job of listening. I hope to see a shorter, more
informative, and more entertaining opening session in Montreal.
- Michael "Mad Doggy" Davis
At 11:12 AM 4/28/2003 -0600, Jack Hamilton <JackHamilton@FIRSTHEALTH.COM>
>There hasn't been much discussion on the list this year of the SUGI
>opening session. Was it non-controversial, or has everyone given up on
>it, or what?
>- There was a lot of useful information which could have presented, but
>it wasn't. In terms of getting a message across to a largely technical
>audience, the session was not a success. I doubt if a non-technical,
>managerial audience would have been impressed either.
>- The session took twice as long as advertised, and that was too long.
>Too much skit, not enough information.
>- The entertainment, a magician, was impressive, but irrelevant, and in
>some ways conveyed the wrong message.
>- Some of the objectionable elements of old opening sessions were gone,
>so improvements have been made.
>I've heard from several people that SAS Institute doesn't exercise
>much, if any, control over the content of the SUGI sessions, but that it
>views the Opening Session as its opportunity to speak to SUGI attendees.
> That's reasonable. I don't know how much SAS subsidizes SUGI, but it's
>probably a good amount, and they deserve to get some attention for their
>If you think of SUGI as being like a free weekend at a resort, and the
>Opening Session as the two hour session with the time-share operator
>that you have to sit through to get the weekend, then maybe the Opening
>Session is more tolerable.
>Is there anything in particular that SAS-L readers would like to see in
>the opening session that we're no longer seeing, or anything that
>definitely ought to be dropped? Or is it just that they should do a
>better job using the current format?
>Manager, Technical Development
>Metrics Department, First Health
>West Sacramento, California USA
Michael L. Davis
Bassett Consulting Services, Inc.
10 Pleasant Drive
North Haven CT 06473-3712