Comment: I noticed that

(See in situ)

I noticed that

the chants didn't last very long and kept changing. Some of them I couldn't make out. Looked somewhat chaotic out there.

This situation was very useful for all of us to Gage what is audible/visible and can make it through from the background. The big signs that said RON PAUL were the best. The one with shinny letters I couldn't make out what it said, and the other big sign, some kind of image? Waving of signs is bad because it makes it difficult to read. Imagine you're an elderly person with poor sight and hearing. Simple and clear is best otherwise the message will not make it through and it just looks like a crowd in the background yelling stuff and waving things.

I think we should only chant RON PAUL in these situations because in the media broadcast it is the only chant that is unmistakably clear and makes it through from the background over the pundits. 'End the Fed' and 'President Paul' and 'Ron Paul Revolution, Reinstate the Constitution' are all good and fun to chant at a speech, but outside where the sign wavers (once again: waving=bad.) have the potential to work there way toward the cameras and bleed onto the TV airwaves we should keep it simple and easy to understand. Same thing goes for people driving buy in a car. They may not be able to distinguish within a few seconds the chants and signs that don't say RON PAUL.

Someone below suggested there were plants in the crowd disrupting the chanting. If we had a general consensus to only chant RON PAUL, then we would make it difficult to disrupt the chanting. Think about it, his name is perfect for chanting. It's the brand. Branding is advertising 101. Repeat the brand as much as possible.

"The world is a dynamic mess of jiggling things, if you look at it right." - Richard Feynman