John Kovac, MCHS 1971, has initiated a most interesting discussion at a previous post:
I share the following discussion because I believe there is tremendous value in dialogue, as we proceed with decision making regarding the MCHS Sixties Reunion to be held Oct. 17, 2015 at Old Mill Toronto. I believe there is also value in transparency, to the extent it makes sense to share information about decision making, with regard to the organizing of the reunion.
I also like to act quickly, when I feel it’s the right thing to do. I say all of this with the awareness that final decisions are matters not for me but for the MCHS Sixties Reunion organizing committee, of which I am a member, and on which I have one vote.
I also see great value in free, respectful, and cordial discussion on all topics of mutual interest.
So, let’s see how the discussion continues to unfold. We will be interested in comments from any source.
John Kovac wrote, in a Comment at the above-noted link:
How sad that our class of 71 is left off the invite list . We spent most of our time at MCHS in the Sixties , but get squeezed out of the fun reunion by a year .Think it over . I’m sure we can get a nice turn out for our year as well . John
Jaan Pill wrote a Comment in reply, at the above-noted link:
The last time the organizing committee addressed this topic, John, the decision was firm. However, I will make a point of letting the committee know of your views. We will get back to you. Jaan
Discussion among MCHS Sixties Reunion organizing committee
Jaan Pill has added the following Comment at the previously noted link, and has posted the discussion as a separate post because the topic is of interest and warrants close attention:
Here’s the discussion to date, among the MCHS Sixties Reunion organizing committee. I’ve made a point to share the dialogue, because above all else, we feel it’s important that the reunion is developed with input from as many sources, and with as high a degree of transparency with regard to decision making, as possible.
Interesting dilemma. Thought we had resolved before. BUT and there is always a but.
You had suggested we could get 300 folks. Frankly within our present configuration as planned, l do not see us reaching that nimber.
Our present list is approx 105?? Not all that list will come, for a myriad of reasons.
I therefore suggest a rethinking of the invitees to be.all MCHS students who were at the school any time during the 60s. Let it be a celebration of the 60s by those who were in high school during the 60s..
MCHS CELEBRATES THE 60’s.
Did you attend MCHS anytime DURING THE 60s ? Join us in Toronto Oct 17, 2015 .
Think about it? Opens the doors to those who were there in the 60s at any stage of their high school career.
Just food for thought.
SECOND COMMENT (this is a paraphrase):
This perspective has merit, in my view, and warrants close thought. The matter has been expressed in a way that is clearer than would have occurred to me, had I tried to put my thoughts together on this topic.
The fact that we have a well organized MCHS Sixties Reunion database team in place, and thus have a good sense of potential overall attendance, adds weight to the remarks from the FIRST COMMENT person.
The criterion that a person attended in the 1960s — that is a concept that had not occurred to me. The concept has merit, in my view. There is value, I believe, in further discussion about this topic.
THIRD COMMENT (paraphrase):
The ideas from the FIRST COMMENT person are great it will bring some “young blood” into the group – looking forward to discussing this option plus any other ie – colour code everyone so that it will be easier to check out who was in your classes.
FOURTH COMMENT (paraphrase):
I agree with the FIRST COMMENT person on this matter –
FIFTH COMMENT (paraphrase)
(Part 1 of comment) Hi all – I’m with the FIRST COMMENT person on this. Obviously we can’t cover the whole period that MCHS was open, but any part of the sixties experience works for me.
(Part 2 of comment) Hi all – no need to deliberate long over this. Let’s just expand the invitation list beyond what we originally thought so we can include John and a few others.
I was the one who took a hard line on attendance but have no problem with expanding the
invite list as proposed. As far as I’m concerned, go [for] it.