What Are Cons For?
michael k kring
though it's really amusing, I've got a semi-related question
concerning the whole thread:
What do you folks go to a con for?
From what I've gathered from all the words written on this
thread, it all boils down to "if-it-ain't XYZ, then I'm not going to
go to ABC." In other words, if the food/drink isn't to your liking,
you won't go. This, to me, is very strange.
Personally, I don't go to conventions to eat chips and dips at
the con suite, nor do I go to swill back a few beers (nor coke). I go
to meet *people*, to exchange ideas, to look around and just, y'know,
get the real world off my shoulders for a while. I had thought that
was why most people go to cons, but, from this food thread, obviously
not.
So ... can anyone explain why you would shell out $20 (or
whatever) just to hang out at the con suite and gripe about how it's
not *real* coke or bitch about how they're not serving beer (or the
*right* beer)?
Tell me. I really want to know. It's very confusing to me.
Mike Kring mrk...@nmmf.unm.edu
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| She had passed from knowledge of evil to indifference: for this she |
| felt herself already damned. Keith Roberts, PAVANE |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Crispin Cowan
> What do you folks go to a con for?
> Personally, I don't go to conventions to eat chips and dips at
>the con suite, nor do I go to swill back a few beers (nor coke). I go
>to meet *people*, to exchange ideas, to look around and just, y'know,
>get the real world off my shoulders for a while. I had thought that
That's exactly what I go for. However, different sorts of people
attend different sorts of conventions. Thus I go to cons that provide
stuff that is appealing to the sorts of people that I want to hang out
with. It's not that I don't wanna go because they don't have copious
quantities of my favourite brew, it's that I don't want to hang out
with large numbers of the kinds of people who are *attracted* to dry
con suites.
> So ... can anyone explain why you would shell out $20 (or
>whatever) just to hang out at the con suite and gripe about how it's
>not *real* coke or bitch about how they're not serving beer (or the
>*right* beer)?
Well, that's a different question. I wouldn't want to shell out $20
just to hang out and bitch. Instead, I avoid the cons that don't
measure up, and instead shell out $20 to attend the cons that do
provide good hospitality, and hang out with the other beer snobs :-).
Crispin
-----
Crispin Cowan, CS PhD student, searching for a research position
University of Western Ontario
Phyz-mail: Middlesex College, MC28-C, London, Ontario, N6A 5B7
E-mail: cri...@csd.uwo.ca Voice: 519-661-3342
"A distributed system is one in which I cannot get something done
because a machine I've never heard of is down" --Leslie Lamport
Richard McAllister
interesting talks, it's important to serve good beer, soda, and food,
because otherwise many of the interesting people will spend all their time
circulating around looking for a party that has good eats and drinks. I do
the same thing -- a interesting talk with a good beer involved beats a
interesting talk with a dry throat. If a party has good stuff, people
will settle in and talk.
(This is why the Dead Dog is always the best party of the convention. On
the last night, there are few parties to circulate among, everybody's tired,
people will finally sit down and talk.)
Rich
--
Rich McAllister (r...@eng.sun.com)
michael k kring
Martin Schafer <sch...@raistlan.network.com> wrote:
[snip]
>Yes, that's why I go to a con too. However, if I can eat and drink
>something without leaving the con, I get to do more talking to people,
>and I can pretend the real world doesn't exist, much more effectively.
Makes sense. This I understand.
>
>Furthermore, it is an indication of the attitude of the con committee
>that they care about the quality of what they are presenting. And where
>they put their money is an indication of what they value. If the money
>goes for a big film program, it says one thing, if the committe brings
>in tons of guests, it says another. If the committee puts their money
>into the con suite then they are saying that they value people sitting
>around and talking to each other.
But ... fans are some of the biggest complainers when con committees
raise rates to cover inflationary costs. Fans have squealed loud and
long about such doings. Sure, a lot of fans are students and don't
have money, but that means something has to be cut. And since fans
also screech when GOHs (for the most part) are not invited and panels
aren't there, it doesn't leave the concom much choice. I don't think
putting out a vegetable platter and fruit and chips and dips and
reasonably tasting sodas and beer is that much of an insult. And as
much as people in this group may not like it, most people in the US
drink Coors or Bud or Miller.
>Alcohol, used moderately, is a classic social lubricant. Many people
>don't bother with it, but others find that they have better conversations
>after a couple of beers.
>
Agreed.
>It's not the shear gustatory pleasure of consuming pop and chips that
>people are after its a feeling of being welcomed. Food and drink are
>very basic social cues. "Just get what's cheapest, the fans will
>eat/drink anything!" is a pretty negative attitude.
I don't really think that's what most concoms tell their con suite
organizers. I bet what they say is something like "Here's your budget.
Now, make it last for the whole con. And make sure there's always
something to eat and drink, no matter what time it is!" What's he/she
going to do if the budget is really low? (And, truth to tell, I've
been at cons where the fans really did eat and drink anything.) In the
"halcyon days" of being young, I attended a lot of parties with lots
of really great people and all that was available were chips and dips
and Coors and sodas. Didn't phase me a bit because I was going to
have fun being around people I liked. And I like people who hate Coors
and I like people who love it. Again, it's the *people* that are, in
my mind, who are important at cons, not the food in the con suite.
I can sort of see what you mean about feeling welcome, but, if all you
can afford is generic pop and stuff, what's the big deal? And there's
always the chance that the con suite organizer happens to think that
Coors and Sam's Cola are really great stuff and thought they were
putting out "the best". (Not bloody likely, but you never know.)
Thanks for the insight.
Mike Kring mrk...@hydra.unm.edu
Samantha Star Straf
Crispin Cowan <cri...@csd.uwo.ca> wrote:
>I don't know many fen who more than mildly care about who the GoH is,
>and I know quite a few who don't care at all. Just for my preference,
For my 'regular' cons the GOH dosen't matter much, I will goto those cons
no matter who the guest is. Where GOH is important is conventions that
I don't usually go to I might try it out one year if they have a GOH
I would like to meet.
--
------------------- ------------
Samantha Star Straf st...@mcs.com
Richard McAllister
>But why are these interesting people looking for food? Are all
>fans food-aholics? (Argh! I hate that word!) Again, what is this
>fascination/obsession with food?
I believe, yes, almost all fans are addicted to food. Withdrawal
symptoms are generally observed within 24 hours without food, sometimes
less. I don't know of any successful attempts to treat this addiction.
Leaving aside physical dependency, people, not just fans, like to munch and
sip while socializing. This seems to be pretty much universal among humans.
Does anybody know of a culture where it's *not* true? How about
SF stories about such cultures? There was P.K. Dick's "Counter Clock
World", where excreting was a social event but ingesting was private,
but that wasn't terribly convincing.
Daniel W. Butler-Ehle
:
: I don't know many fen who more than mildly care about who the GoH is,
: and I know quite a few who don't care at all. Just for my preference,
: to talk to the fans, not the pros. Your tastes may vary.
Doh! You fool! True or not, you just can't say such
things here! Heresy! We must maintain the illusion
that fandom is made of fans.
Brad Templeton
attracts the fringefen who would not come otherwise, and those people
pay enough money so the con can book all the function space it wants
to.
In spite of the fact that the real con happens at night, only a small
percentage of the con population at a local con seems to be there at night.
--
Brad Templeton, publisher, ClariNet Communications Corp.
The net's #1 electronic newspaper (circulation 60,000) -- in...@clarinet.com
Matt Glidden
> I've been following this "Con Suite" controversy for a while, and
> though it's really amusing, I've got a semi-related question
> concerning the whole thread:
>
> What do you folks go to a con for?
Well, that has changed for me from the time when I started going to
conventions. When I started, it was basically becuase I was into RPG's,
and a couple of my friends said they had interesting gaming sessions
there. I probably attended 4 or 5 cons where this was my only focus
(other than wandering around the dealers' room and art show; usually
interesting). I took about a year off becuase my interest in gaming had
waned. Two years ago, I gained more meaningful interest in things like
costuming, cooking, and media (English TV and Anime, mostly). That, and
I had a different group of friends that thought cons were fun to go to
(including several I had met at cons, no big surprise.)
To actually answer your question, I am now on a con's staff, and have
spent most of the last three cons I attended volunteering or talking to
people. I find that my main emphasis to go these days is based on the
people I can meet there, and helping to run parts of the convention.
That, and I still wander through the dealers' room and art show.
Crispin Cowan
>In article <2sim5r$1...@falcon.ccs.uwo.ca>,
>Crispin Cowan <cri...@csd.uwo.ca> wrote:
>>quantities of my favourite brew, it's that I don't want to hang out
>>with large numbers of the kinds of people who are *attracted* to dry
>>con suites.
>what cons you attend? Why? Con suites vary in quality daily, in
It's a crude approximation, but yes that's true.
>my experience. If what you are saying is true, then I guess cons
>should forget about Guests of Honor and panels and things and just
As far as I'm concerned. I often come away from a con with no clue as
to who the guest was. I simply don't give a shit, unless it's someone
that I'm very particularly interested in.
>serve up some "bitchen'" brew. I just don't get this fascination
I wouldn't trust anyone who described beer as "bitchen'" to select ale.
>with food and drink here. To me, it's *irrelevant*! And to dismiss
What's irrelevant to you and irrelevant to me are different. Despite
the fact that I could care less about who the GoH and FGoH are, I don't
actually suggest that cons drop them. Clearly, other people care. All
I ask is that concom's reccognize that there are those of us who care
about the social amenities of a con, and provide for them as well.
Balance is the key.
>large groups of people because of their drinking preferences is, to
>me, really, well, uh, lame. Con suites are, to my knowledge, run
I don't dismiss them, I just use it as a predictor in selecting my
cons.
>and food. I still don't understand.
It's pretty simple: You do your thing, and I'll do mine. We're both
happy, no problem. If a con says "we don't provide for that sort of
thing", then I may not attend, depending on what "that sort of thing"
is.
Martin Schafer
>
> What do you folks go to a con for?
>
>the con suite, nor do I go to swill back a few beers (nor coke). I go
>to meet *people*, to exchange ideas, to look around and just, y'know,
>get the real world off my shoulders for a while. I had thought that
>was why most people go to cons, but, from this food thread, obviously
>not.
>
Yes, that's why I go to a con too. However, if I can eat and drink
something without leaving the con, I get to do more talking to people,
and I can pretend the real world doesn't exist, much more effectively.
Furthermore, it is an indication of the attitude of the con committee
that they care about the quality of what they are presenting. And where
they put their money is an indication of what they value. If the money
goes for a big film program, it says one thing, if the committe brings
in tons of guests, it says another. If the committee puts their money
into the con suite then they are saying that they value people sitting
around and talking to each other.
Alcohol, used moderately, is a classic social lubricant. Many people
don't bother with it, but others find that they have better conversations
after a couple of beers.
It's not the shear gustatory pleasure of consuming pop and chips that
people are after its a feeling of being welcomed. Food and drink are
very basic social cues. "Just get what's cheapest, the fans will
eat/drink anything!" is a pretty negative attitude.
Martin
To some degree sleep can substitute for food, and a shower can
substitute for sleep. However, food is not a substitute for a shower.
A
Crispin Cowan
>have money, but that means something has to be cut. And since fans
>also screech when GOHs (for the most part) are not invited and panels
I don't know many fen who more than mildly care about who the GoH is,
and I know quite a few who don't care at all. Just for my preference,
I'd rather they cut the GoH and keep the con suite budget, because I go
to talk to the fans, not the pros. Your tastes may vary.
Crispin
David A. Z.
> So ... can anyone explain why you would shell out $20 (or
>whatever) just to hang out at the con suite and gripe about how it's
>not *real* coke or bitch about how they're not serving beer (or the
>*right* beer)?
>
> Tell me. I really want to know. It's very confusing to me.
You are very very confused.
We don't spend shell out $20 to gripe about not getting real coke,
that's just for local cons.
For Worldcons and the like: $145 registration plus
$550 air-fare, plus $600 ($120/night for 5 nights) for hotel rooms
equals $1295 to gripe about hot it's not *real* coke or bitch about
how they're not serving beer.
- Daz
michael k kring
michael k kring
(Yeah, right.)
In article <2snig6...@life.ai.mit.edu>,
David A. Z. <d...@gnu.ai.mit.edu> wrote:
[snip]
>
> You are very very confused.
>
> We don't spend shell out $20 to gripe about not getting real coke,
>that's just for local cons.
>
> For Worldcons and the like: $145 registration plus
>$550 air-fare, plus $600 ($120/night for 5 nights) for hotel rooms
>equals $1295 to gripe about hot it's not *real* coke or bitch about
>how they're not serving beer.
>
> - Daz
Ha! Good one!
But I think this will be my last post on this thread. Obviously, I'll
never "get it" because I think I'm missing something.
Let me use an analogy. (*Shudder.*) Let's say you can go to a party
that you know will have lots of interesting people, and some very
interesting discussions will take place. (I believe that people who
don't drink can be as interesting as people who do.) But you decide
not to go because you heard that the host would be serving Sam's Cola.
To me, that absolutely makes no sense whatsover. That's how I see this
food/drink debate and though lots of folks have been helpful, I still
see it that way.
Like I said, I go to cons for the people and the food/drink is not
even secondary: it's not even in the equation.
I can remember being at parties that lasted until dawn (not that I
could do that now; *jeez*, getting old is a bummer) and all we had
were chips and dips and Coors and sodas. Nothing fancy. But the people
were so great it *did* *not* *matter*. And that's what confuses me
about this thread: people seem to be saying that food and/or drink do
matter more than people!
*Sigh.* I never thought the day would come when I'd have to admit that
I'll never, ever "get it".
Mike Kring mrk...@hydra.unm.edu
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| "BYOFF!" I yelled again and gave a hearty laugh for good measure. |
| It's the laugh that really upsets them. Max Handley, MEANWHILE |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
michael k kring
>That's exactly what I go for. However, different sorts of people
>attend different sorts of conventions. Thus I go to cons that provide
>stuff that is appealing to the sorts of people that I want to hang out
>with. It's not that I don't wanna go because they don't have copious
>quantities of my favourite brew, it's that I don't want to hang out
>with large numbers of the kinds of people who are *attracted* to dry
>con suites.
>
This is what confuses me. Are you saying that con suites determine
what cons you attend? Why? Con suites vary in quality daily, in
my experience. If what you are saying is true, then I guess cons
should forget about Guests of Honor and panels and things and just
serve up some "bitchen'" brew. I just don't get this fascination
with food and drink here. To me, it's *irrelevant*! And to dismiss
large groups of people because of their drinking preferences is, to
me, really, well, uh, lame. Con suites are, to my knowledge, run
the way they are run because of *money* & *insurance*, not for the
lack of taste. Every con suite organizer I've ever talked to has
always moaned about the lack of funds to get the *right* beverages
and food. I still don't understand.
Mike Kring mrk...@hydra.unm.edu
michael k kring
But why are these interesting people looking for food? Are all
fans food-aholics? (Argh! I hate that word!) Again, what is this
fascination/obsession with food?
Mike Kring mrk...@hydra.unm.edu
Crispin Cowan
>were so great it *did* *not* *matter*. And that's what confuses me
>about this thread: people seem to be saying that food and/or drink do
>matter more than people!
You're not getting it because you're not paying attention. At no time
did anyone ever say that the food & drink mattered more than the
people. No. Not. Wrong answer. Bad cop! No donut! :-)
The point is that good food and dring *tend* to attract people who are
more interested in parties than in programming, media, games, etc. The
*kind* of people that I like to meet are those that like to party, and
not so much those that like to, say, play RP games. So if I want to
meet those kinds of people, I go to those kinds of cons.
If I really got off on hanging out with serious Dr. Who fans, then I
would go to the cons that pay big $ for major guests. I don't, so I
stay away from those cons.
It's all about tuning for the kind of people you want to hang out with,
in the abscence of other data. Under the hypothetical situation you
posted, where I knew there was a great party with cool people, but
crappy beer & soda, then I would most certainly go. But I don't always
know that, sometimes all I know is what's being served.
Does that help clear it up?
Samantha Star Straf
Martin Schafer <sch...@raistlan.network.com> wrote:
>>
>point of GOHs. Now I understand that there are a bunch of strange
>people out there who actually allow who the GOH is to influence
>whether they attend a convention. But why in the world would I go
>to a con just to meet X? Why do people stand in line to get books
>autographed? I just don't get this fascination.
>
I let the GOH influence my decision for a variety of reasons.
If I have me the GOH before and had some fun conversantions with them, but
we live on opposite coasts and rarely run into each other.
If I am trying to find a book but that GOH I tend to find their books well
represented in a huksters room when they are GOH
If I like an Artist GOH work and would like more I can assume taht they will
have stuff in the art show
If I am not sure if I want to goto a convnetion and I see someone I know or
would like to meet it will be the extra push to get me to attend.
If I have some friends in a area of the country that I would like to visit
that have been trying to get me to their local con and there is a GOH I
am interested in but have never run into I could be that extra push
--
------------------- ------------
Samantha Star Straf st...@mcs.com
Mr. Blotto at The VIC July 8th - second CD release
Seth Breidbart
>Well, I haven't been to a con outside Minnesota for several years,
>but prior to that, yes, the quality of the con suite one year
>was more important that any other one thing in determining whether
>I was interested in attending next year. Why? because if there
>is a good con suite, that's where I spend my time, and sitting
>around the consuite talking to people is what I do at a convention.
Now define a good con suite: is it one with good food & drink, or one
with lots of interesting people hanging around to talk with? (There
is some correlation between those two, but it certainly isn't
perfect.)
Seth
David E Romm
sch...@raistlan.network.com (Martin Schafer) wrote:
> In article <2sko37$1...@hydra.unm.edu> mkr...@unm.edu (michael k kring) writes:
> >
> >This is what confuses me. Are you saying that con suites determine
> >what cons you attend? Why? Con suites vary in quality daily, in
>
> Well, I haven't been to a con outside Minnesota for several years,
> but prior to that, yes, the quality of the con suite one year
> was more important that any other one thing in determining whether
> I was interested in attending next year. Why? because if there
> is a good con suite, that's where I spend my time, and sitting
> around the consuite talking to people is what I do at a convention.
How do you know in advance how good the consuite will be? Not all cons are
consistent in their committees. While having a good reputation affected
what cons I went to a little, it wasn't much.
> >my experience. If what you are saying is true, then I guess cons
> >should forget about Guests of Honor and panels and things and just
> >serve up some "bitchen'" brew. I just don't get this fascination
>
> Those kind of cons are called relaxicons. Little or no programming,
> One or no GOHs just a weekend of party. Other than as an identification
> tool, saying "these are the kind of people we want to honor", or out
> of a sincere desire to do something for this person, I don't see the
> point of GOHs. Now I understand that there are a bunch of strange
> people out there who actually allow who the GOH is to influence
> whether they attend a convention. But why in the world would I go
> to a con just to meet X? Why do people stand in line to get books
> autographed? I just don't get this fascination.
>
Offhand, the only con I ever went to mainly to meet the GoH was Autoclave
1, because I wanted to meet Donn Brazier. There have been several cons
where the GoH was a major plus, but I probably would have gone anyway.
There have been many cons, including Minicons, where I never actually said
three words to the GoH.
I like meeting new people, especially people I know a little from other
sources, such as books or fanzines. Rarely, however, are those people
GoHs. Especially in the early days, I really enjoyed meeting fanzine fans
from around the country.
Since I don't collect autographs, getting one is merely an excuse to say
hello to the autographer. I've met several people that way, and have no
idea what happened to the autograph. My book collection may be more
valuable than I think. (The only Delany I have autographed is Tides of
Lust... it was worth it just to see the expression on his face when I
presented him with the book...)
>
> Well, one can always use more money. I had the privilege of
> spending $13,000 on the con suite at the last World Fantasy
> Convention. We had about 800 people. I was able to do just
> about everything I've ever wanted to do with a consuite. Good
> chocolate, good cheese, vegies, multiple good beers, hard cider,
> breakfast, lunch and dinner. I'm not sure if I'll ever run
> parties again.
*heh heh heh*
--
Shockwave: The longest running science fiction radio program in Earth's
history. Tapes available.
Martin Schafer
>what cons you attend? Why? Con suites vary in quality daily, in
Well, I haven't been to a con outside Minnesota for several years,
but prior to that, yes, the quality of the con suite one year
was more important that any other one thing in determining whether
I was interested in attending next year. Why? because if there
is a good con suite, that's where I spend my time, and sitting
around the consuite talking to people is what I do at a convention.
>my experience. If what you are saying is true, then I guess cons
>should forget about Guests of Honor and panels and things and just
>serve up some "bitchen'" brew. I just don't get this fascination
Those kind of cons are called relaxicons. Little or no programming,
One or no GOHs just a weekend of party. Other than as an identification
tool, saying "these are the kind of people we want to honor", or out
of a sincere desire to do something for this person, I don't see the
point of GOHs. Now I understand that there are a bunch of strange
people out there who actually allow who the GOH is to influence
whether they attend a convention. But why in the world would I go
to a con just to meet X? Why do people stand in line to get books
autographed? I just don't get this fascination.
>lack of taste. Every con suite organizer I've ever talked to has
>always moaned about the lack of funds to get the *right* beverages
>and food. I still don't understand.
>
Well, one can always use more money. I had the privilege of
spending $13,000 on the con suite at the last World Fantasy
Convention. We had about 800 people. I was able to do just
about everything I've ever wanted to do with a consuite. Good
chocolate, good cheese, vegies, multiple good beers, hard cider,
breakfast, lunch and dinner. I'm not sure if I'll ever run
parties again.
Martin
Chris Croughton
d...@gnu.ai.mit.edu "David A. Z." writes:
> We don't spend shell out $20 to gripe about not getting real coke,
>that's just for local cons.
So you do sometimes shell out $20, for local cons.
> For Worldcons and the like: $145 registration plus
>$550 air-fare, plus $600 ($120/night for 5 nights) for hotel rooms
>equals $1295 to gripe about hot it's not *real* coke or bitch about
>how they're not serving beer.
If you can afford $1295 a year to go to Worldcons, you can damn well buy
your own food and booze and not sponge off me! The only reason I got to
Magicon was because I was treating it as a month's holiday and seeing
other people in the USA afterwards. That's not likely to happen again
in the near future. If I couldn't have afforded to eat there, I
wouldn't have gone - I've missed the last 2 British national cons for
exactly that reason.
As far as I'm concerned, if someone refuses to go to a con because it
has a 'dry' (or 'wet' or no) consuite, they aren't someone I want to be
with. If they are the sort of person I want to be with, and they are
broke, I'll buy them a meal or drink. I've done so, and had it done for
me, many times.
It seems to be a feature of (mainly American, but it's spreading)
culture that people have to have some sort of 'official' organisation to
do anything. I see the consuite as part of this - to me, hospitality
comes from people, not from some organised "hospitality suite".
Yes, I am British, and we don't have consuites with free food and booze
here. If someone wanted to provide free drinks or food out of their own
generosity, we wouldn't object, but that would be true hospitality, not
something provided by charging the members extra...
***********************************************************************
* ch...@keris.demon.co.uk * *
* chr...@cix.compulink.co.uk * FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life) *
* 10001...@compuserve.com * *
***********************************************************************
Martin Schafer
>
>I can sort of see what you mean about feeling welcome, but, if all you
>can afford is generic pop and stuff, what's the big deal? And there's
>always the chance that the con suite organizer happens to think that
>Coors and Sam's Cola are really great stuff and thought they were
>putting out "the best". (Not bloody likely, but you never know.)
>
You're right, if you are doing a budget con, you work with the
resources you have. It is more important that there always be
something to drink, than that it be of the highest quality.
Frankly I haven't heard that much bitching about the price of
con memberships, unless it's getting up into the thirties and
forties prereg, and I don't know what besides worldcon and
world fantasy does that. Membership has to get pretty hefty
before it is a large fraction of room and travel.
If you are taking in around $20
a head and you have more than 150 attendees, you should be
able to afford to spend about $1000 on the consuite (more
as attendance grows) and that's enough to do a good job.
If you can't budget that much, I suspect something else is
eating more money than it should.
You're other point is at least half right. The person running
the consuite should be able to buy what THEY like. However,
the person picking committee heads should select someone whose
tastes have something to do with objective quality, or at
least someone who is smart about buying stuff that other
people like as well as what they like.
Martin
Eugenia Horne
Crispin Cowan <cri...@csd.uwo.ca> wrote:
>In article <2sns7m$g...@hydra.unm.edu> you write:
>>were so great it *did* *not* *matter*. And that's what confuses me
>>about this thread: people seem to be saying that food and/or drink do
>>matter more than people!
I've been reading this for awhile and I'm confused also.
I've never gone to a convention simply for the food
and drink.
>You're not getting it because you're not paying attention. At no time
>did anyone ever say that the food & drink mattered more than the
>people. No. Not. Wrong answer. Bad cop! No donut! :-)
>
>The point is that good food and dring *tend* to attract people who are
>more interested in parties than in programming, media, games, etc. The
>*kind* of people that I like to meet are those that like to party, and
>not so much those that like to, say, play RP games. So if I want to
>meet those kinds of people, I go to those kinds of cons.
Why not just crash a college fraternity rush week? I've
heard they like to party. [Insert proper symbology for
humour here.]
Seriously, I now live quite a distance from any outpost of
fandom. I go to a convention once or twice a year with
the intent of catching up on fandom, meeting new people,
and just relaxing a bit from the "real world".
One of the worst experiences I've ever had started out
in the con suite by a person who was more intent on
partying than general socializing. (It took a while
before I went to another convention but with the additional
cautionary proviso of: "Never invite someone alone into
my room." Until then I felt I could trust the majority
of fandom, now...??)
On the other hand, some of the nicest people I met at
conventions have been in hallways, in the Masquerades,
at the dances (I like the Regency ones) etc.
[Editing...]
>Does that help clear it up?
I'm not sure. I'm still thinking.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Is there no morality left in this world?"
- Vincent Price (Comedy of Terrors)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Joel Polowin
>Now I understand that there are a bunch of strange
>people out there who actually allow who the GOH is to influence
>whether they attend a convention. But why in the world would I go
>to a con just to meet X? Why do people stand in line to get books
>autographed? I just don't get this fascination.
This depends a lot on the details. I haven't gone to a couple of the
more recent conventions in my home town, Ottawa. This was because I
didn't expect to get very much for my money. I get to see a lot of the
attendees fairly regularly anyways, because Ottawa fandom has biweekly
social gatherings. There weren't any GoHs expected that I cared to
see. And I had other things to do.
When I've read and enjoyed several books by someone, I like to have
the chance to tell him/her so in person, and chat a bit about that
work and about what's coming up. Standing in line for the *sole*
purpose of getting an autograph isn't my thing. But the opportunity
to find out a bit more about the artists whose work I've enjoyed,
and to see how that connects to the work in question, is interesting
to me.
>Well, one can always use more money. I had the privilege of
>spending $13,000 on the con suite at the last World Fantasy
>Convention. We had about 800 people. I was able to do just
>about everything I've ever wanted to do with a consuite. Good
>chocolate, good cheese, vegies, multiple good beers, hard cider,
>breakfast, lunch and dinner.
And did a damn fine job of it...
Eli Brian Goldberg
For? by Eugenia Ho...@cwis.isu.e
> Crispin Cowan <cri...@csd.uwo.ca> wrote:
> >In article <2sns7m$g...@hydra.unm.edu> you write:
> >>were so great it *did* *not* *matter*. And that's what confuses me
> >>about this thread: people seem to be saying that food and/or drink do
> >>matter more than people!
>
> I've been reading this for awhile and I'm confused also.
> I've never gone to a convention simply for the food
> and drink.
>
There are actually a few exceptions, if you stretch what you just said a
bit. Musicon (an excellent filk convention in Nashville, TN) got a few
additional members, who are Starving College Students, and could only
afford the con since they could pay for the membership with the money
they'd save by eating in their excellent con suite all weekend. (Come
to think of it, I might have been one of them...) ;-)
Excerpts from netnews.rec.arts.sf.fandom: 6-Jun-94 Re: What Are Cons
For? by Joel Pol...@chem.queens
> In article <1994Jun4.0...@ns.network.com>
sch...@raistlan.network.com (M
> artin Schafer) writes:
> >Now I understand that there are a bunch of strange
> >people out there who actually allow who the GOH is to influence
> >whether they attend a convention. But why in the world would I go
> >to a con just to meet X? Why do people stand in line to get books
> >autographed? I just don't get this fascination.
On an individual basis for *writers*, I agree that it doesn't make much
sense --- Balticon got over 100 additional members (per a formal survey
that we did) in '92 because the con invited Larry Warner as their
unofficial Filk GoH, and all of his fans flocked to hear him, 'cause
he's *excellent*.
However, on a group basis, it makes *lots* of sense of people to come
when a certain GoH attends: for example, this year, Balticon got the
entire Queen's Own contingent of Misty Lackey fans, some of whom came
initially on an individual basis to see her live in the flesh, but then
word spread around about which friends would be there, *their* friends
decided to attend, etc, starting a cyclical process. (Having slept in
the main Queen's Own gathering room, I got to see this process first
hand. ;-)
"The Pledge of Allegiance says, 'liberty and justice for all.'
Which part of 'all' don't you understand?" - Rep. Pat Schroeder
[**-----**]
Internet: if...@cmu.edu GEnie: e.goldberg4 Prodigy: NOT!!!
Aahz
>tool, saying "these are the kind of people we want to honor", or out
>of a sincere desire to do something for this person, I don't see the
>point of GOHs. Now I understand that there are a bunch of strange
>people out there who actually allow who the GOH is to influence
>whether they attend a convention. But why in the world would I go
>to a con just to meet X? Why do people stand in line to get books
>autographed? I just don't get this fascination.
Well, I don't much care about autographs, but some authors (Steven Brust
comes to mind) like to keep up a loud running commentary for the
onlookers as they're signing. To me, the GoH system provides a
mechanism for cross-breeding -- most people (and most authors) don't
have the money to attend cons outside their area frequently.
Seeing/hearing/talking to an author allows many people to get closer to
that author's works. I probably wouldn't have bothered with Parke
Godwin's _Sherwood_ if I hadn't been dragged to a reading he did.
--
--- Aahz (@netcom.com)
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
Androgynous kinky vanilla queer het
Seeking job in Silicon Valley doing database tech support. E-mail for resume.
Chad Childers
>comes from people, not from some organised "hospitality suite".
A valid point, but the consuite is something that is open 24 hours, staffed
and supplied all the time, and people know they can go to and hang out any
time. (At least that's the way we do it at ConFusion.) You can't expect a
single individual to run a party for the length of the con. I think, when
I've run a successful party, there have been at least two, generally more
people helping out. Sure, you can get a large group of people together to
run it, but that's precisely what we're doing when we run a con. It's a
fun thing we do for other fen.
>here. If someone wanted to provide free drinks or food out of their own
>generosity, we wouldn't object, but that would be true hospitality, not
We do that too. There are generally five or ten parties where various
people provide that - maybe more like fifteen or twenty over the course of
the weekend.
>something provided by charging the members extra...
I've never really thought about that. I don't drink, and I'm sure a big
part of our budget goes for kegs of beer and bottles of wine. I don't
mind that other people drink, though, and it's never really bothered me
that I'm not getting the full value out of my membership. You've just got
to get used to it that, in this country, at least, there are lots of things
that include free drinks, and if you want to do them, you just have to
shrug and deal with it. I don't usually supply alcohol for my parties, but
I usually get around that by asking someone who does drink to bring whatever
they like to drink. Works out fine by me.
It's kind of sad that a lot of cons are going dry. ConFusion won't go dry -
although nothing is going to stop me from going to a con that doesn't have
alcohol, it feels very much like a repression of people's freedom by fear
of litigation and political correctness (sorry, it's appropriate inclusivity
now, isn't it?). Never thought I'd see that sort of thing in fandom.
Y-Disclaimer: I am on the concom for ConFusion 10101, but the rest of the
committee usually doesn't agree with me either. 1/2:-)
--
/* Chad Childers */ if (Work) ch...@quality.ta.ford.com else ch...@deep.mi.org;
WWW = http://grimmy.cnidr.org/chad.html;
Bernadette Bosky
>
>But why are these interesting people looking for food? Are all
>fans food-aholics? (Argh! I hate that word!) Again, what is this
>fascination/obsession with food?
>
right kinds of stuff, too. (Corflu did a particularly good job of
stocking the suite with food I could eat and/or needed to eat, for which
I am very grateful. Huzzah!) Even aside from that, *all* people need to
eat every so often, right? And given that, why *shouldn't* it be an
enjoyable experience as well as body-fuel? I personally prefer mostly
arranged parties out for full meals, but then (1) I'm good at
pre-arranging things and mostly like doing the work to do it, (2) I
already know many people at any given con, and (3) money for good
restaurants is in my budget. If any one of these were less true, I would
depend on con-suite food much more than I do.
Bernadette Bosky
Seth Breidbart
Chad Childers <ch...@quality.ta.ford.com> wrote:
>It's kind of sad that a lot of cons are going dry. ConFusion won't go dry -
>although nothing is going to stop me from going to a con that doesn't have
>alcohol, it feels very much like a repression of people's freedom by fear
>of litigation and political correctness (sorry, it's appropriate inclusivity
>now, isn't it?). Never thought I'd see that sort of thing in fandom.
What about, say, a con that decides to have chocolate in the con suite
instead of beer? (Let's assume they can't afford to provide both
free.) What's wrong with that?
Seth
Richard McAllister
>If you can afford $1295 a year to go to Worldcons, you can damn well buy
>your own food and booze and not sponge off me! ....
>Yes, I am British, and we don't have consuites with free food and booze
>here.
Well, I don't consider having part of my membership going to food
and drinks "sponging". I don't use most of the other con services,
but I don't think the people that do are "sponging" off my membership.
You do raise an interesting question: why *do* well-run US cons supply
food and drink, when most US fans are well able to pay for their own?
Here's the reasons I see:
1. As far as drinking goes, the only other choices are:
a. Go to the hotel bar.
People do in fact do this, but it's grossly cost-inefficient. Paying
$5 for a lousy beer in the bar just seems stupid when good beer
is available at $1 retail. I can *afford* to spend $5 for a beer,
but it offends my sense of economy (OK, I'm a tightwad ;-)
Hotel bars at large US hotels also tend to be inhospitable places
for fans. They're full of smoke, and often have loud music.
I believe this works better at British cons, since the bar is far more
likely to be conducive to conversation, have decent beer at a
half-decent price, and more British fans smoke and tolerate smoke.
b. Drink in your own room
May as well stay home, unless you....
c. Run a private party
Also happens, but it's pretty inconvenient, especially for
out-of-towners who may not have a car, don't know where to go for
supplies, may want to be able to sleep in their rooms, etc. In my
view, what a con that supplies a decent con suite is doing is saving
me the time and effort required to throw a party; the money
is definitely secondary.
2. For food: I used to think meal-type food in the con suite was a bad idea
-- useful only for parasites, after all most people I know like to go out
to nice restaurants during conventions. But after the wonderful World
Fantasy Con in Minneapolis, I'm changing my mind. For breakfast and even
lunch, I really don't want a full restaurant-type meal every day. It was
really nice -- again, saving me time, more valuable than money -- to just
drop by the con suite, have a bagel or a sandwich in pleasant company,
and go on about my fannish business.
When it comes right down to it, what it means to me when a con doesn't serve
food and drink in the con suite is that folks running the con isn't
particularly interested in having me and my sort attend; this is fine,
they'd probably not be interested in attending the kind of con I'd put on
either.
Simon H Le G Bisson
In article <aahzCr1...@netcom.com> aa...@netcom.com (Aahz) writes:
>Well, I don't much care about autographs, but some authors (Steven Brust
>comes to mind) like to keep up a loud running commentary for the
>onlookers as they're signing. To me, the GoH system provides a
>mechanism for cross-breeding -- most people (and most authors) don't
>have the money to attend cons outside their area frequently.
There's a tradition in UK fandom that, when bidding for the national
convention, the GOHs aren't announced until after the vote. As part of a team
bidding for '96, voted for at Sou'Wester the '94 con, it was interesting to
note the reaction of folk to our guest list (Vernor Vinge, Colin Greenland,
Bryan Talbot and Dr. Jack Cohen). Quite a few people who up to that point had
been fairly negative (we're the folk who are reclaiming the Brighton Metropole
for fandom!) suddenly became *very* positive...
It pays to have good guests: folk that people want to see - and especially folk
who are good in front of people. The GOHs are a resource that programming
should use. With Vernor as a GOH folk shouldn't be suprised if we programme
something on the Singularity, with Colin items on reinventing the space opera
and the new wave, with Bryan items on comic art and alternate histories, and
with Jack, alien design.
>Seeing/hearing/talking to an author allows many people to get closer to
>that author's works. I probably wouldn't have bothered with Parke
>Godwin's _Sherwood_ if I hadn't been dragged to a reading he did.
To true. It's how I became a firm M. John Harrison fan (that man can *read*!),
or how I discovered Geoff Ryman...
Simon
---
Simon H Le G Bisson: si...@fehen.demon.co.uk
Programme Manager, Evolution: The Next Step - the 1996 UK National Sf
Convention
Steve Glover
: To true. It's how I became a firm M. John Harrison fan (that man can *read*!),
Er, thanks?
Okay, so X-asm may have made a loss of ca. 200 quid because of local fen
who ghosted (see other thread) rather than joining (which jenny and I
carried because it was the con we wanted to run), but we did do some stuff
people liked... It was good to have Mike Harrison, and it's just a pity
that Rastoslav Durman was pressured into returning to 'Yugoslavia' after
all the effort we went to to get him and his family out, but at least the
whisky tasting was good...
Steve, saying nothing about the fractal light show and polish vodkas...
--
((@@@*@@@)) All the Steve Glover
(*@|||@*) Talk (Fan programme, Intersection: 1995 Worldcon)
||| Of the __ (This space intentionally left blank)
\\|||// Market (\/
Jim Kasprzak
>What about, say, a con that decides to have chocolate in the con suite
>instead of beer? (Let's assume they can't afford to provide both
>free.) What's wrong with that?
What? Are you crazy? Providing free chocolate in the con suite will just
attract a bunch of EATERS. Yuck. I can't stand them, especially the ones
who'd come to the con just to get free chocolate.
Besides, I don't know any REAL fans who like to eat.
--
__ Live from the bustling metropolis of the Big Apple...
___/ | Jim Kasprzak, just a guy from New York.
/____ | try to hold it like rain in a river everything is getting
\_| bigger better this won't last forever touch me fall
*==== e-mail: jim...@panix.com
The Unknown Fan
Richard McAllister <r...@urth.eng.sun.com> wrote:
>(This is why the Dead Dog is always the best party of the convention. On
>the last night, there are few parties to circulate among, everybody's tired,
>people will finally sit down and talk.)
I'll second that. The casual con-goers are all gone, and the ones who are
left are much more likely to be interesting fannish people. Also, there's
no dance or masquerade to distract attention, there's no events to attend,
and anyone can start a conversation with anyone else just by rehashing the
con. (Half smiley on the last reason.)
--
Scott Sanford, wyv...@agora.rain.com <<witty.quote not found>>
Alison Scott
si...@fehen.demon.co.uk "Simon H Le G Bisson" writes:
>It pays to have good guests: folk that people want to see - and especially folk
>who are good in front of people. The GOHs are a resource that programming
>should use. With Vernor as a GOH folk shouldn't be suprised if we programme
>something on the Singularity, with Colin items on reinventing the space opera
>and the new wave, with Bryan items on comic art and alternate histories, and
>with Jack, alien design.
Tell us more, Simon. We want details. Entire programme items, where
possible... :*)
>Simon H Le G Bisson: si...@fehen.demon.co.uk
>Programme Manager, Evolution: The Next Step - the 1996 UK National Sf
>Convention
>
--
Alison Scott Ali...@moose.demon.co.uk
Confabulation is the 1995 UK national SF convention (Eastercon)
Docklands, London. For details email con...@moose.demon.co.uk
Del Cotter
S.S.B....@bradford.ac.uk (Steve Glover) writes:
>Steve, saying nothing about the fractal light show and polish vodkas...
Nail polish? Metal polish? After the stroh, I'll believe anything :-)
--
',',',',',',',' Del Cotter mt9...@brunel.ac.uk
',', ,' Transatlantic Culture Gap #32
',', ,' "of course, alcohol is not absolutely necessary to
',' a con, although it is nice to have around" *Huh?*
Seth Breidbart
> What? Are you crazy? Providing free chocolate in the con suite will just
>attract a bunch of EATERS. Yuck. I can't stand them, especially the ones
>who'd come to the con just to get free chocolate.
>
> Besides, I don't know any REAL fans who like to eat.
OK, so far we know that fans don't eat, drink, or talk to pros.
That's going to make cons a lot easier to run in the future :-)
Seth
Chris Krolczyk
: In article <2t2lsm$n...@panix3.panix.com> se...@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
: >What about, say, a con that decides to have chocolate in the con suite
: >instead of beer? (Let's assume they can't afford to provide both
: >free.) What's wrong with that?
: What? Are you crazy? Providing free chocolate in the con suite will just
: attract a bunch of EATERS. Yuck. I can't stand them, especially the ones
: who'd come to the con just to get free chocolate.
"Eaters"?
: Besides, I don't know any REAL fans who like to eat.
If y'all insist. Just don't tell me that you don't know any real fans who
like to breathe. I might think some rather strange things after that. >:)
--
-Chris Krolczyk krol...@mcs.com
Disclaimer: I wrote this. MCSNet didn't. Therefore, virtual lawyers are
encouraged to stick their net.suits in a more appropiate, er, "venue".
Crispin Cowan
Seth Breidbart <se...@panix.com> wrote:
>What about, say, a con that decides to have chocolate in the con suite
>instead of beer? (Let's assume they can't afford to provide both
>free.) What's wrong with that?
Well, it's been done, of sorts. ContraDiction has an annual "Death by
Chocolate" party on Friday night at the con. They also provide a lot
of kegs of beer for the con suite.
I don't think that there's anything really "wrong" with going with
chocolate instead of beer, but I think that it's far less effective as
a social lubricant. I don't enjoy bheer solely for it's nutritional
value :-).
Alison_moose...@wmeonlin.sacbbx.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom
From: Ali...@moose.demon.co.uk (Alison Scott)
References: <2sig27$q...@hydra.unm.edu> <2sim5r$1...@falcon.ccs.uwo.ca>
<2sko37$1...@hydra.unm.edu> <1994Jun4.0...@ns.network.com>
<aahzCr1...@netcom.com> <4...@fehen.demon.co.uk>
Organization: None
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
Lines: 24
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 1994 02:08:51 +0000
Sender: use...@demon.co.uk
--
Alison Scott Ali...@moose.demon.co.uk
--
: Fidonet: Ali...@moose.demon.co.uk 1:203/8055 .. speaking for only myself.
: Internet: Alison_moose...@wmeonlin.sacbbx.com
jimcat_p...@wmeonlin.sacbbx.com
From: jim...@panix.com (Jim Kasprzak)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom
Date: 8 Jun 1994 08:41:49 -0400
Organization: The Big Wedge
Lines: 16
References: <770671...@keris.demon.co.uk> <2t236q...@ope001.iao.ford.com>
<2t2lsm$n...@panix3.panix.com>
Nntp-Posting-Host: panix.com
Summary: virtual smileys for the humor impaired
In article <2t2lsm$n...@panix3.panix.com> se...@panix.com (Seth Breidbart)
writes:
>What about, say, a con that decides to have chocolate in the con suite
>instead of beer? (Let's assume they can't afford to provide both
>free.) What's wrong with that?
What? Are you crazy? Providing free chocolate in the con suite will just
attract a bunch of EATERS. Yuck. I can't stand them, especially the ones
who'd come to the con just to get free chocolate.
Besides, I don't know any REAL fans who like to eat.
--
__ Live from the bustling metropolis of the Big Apple...
\_| bigger better this won't last forever touch me fall
*==== e-mail: jim...@panix.com
--
: Fidonet: jim...@panix.com 1:203/8055 .. speaking for only myself.
: Internet: jimcat_p...@wmeonlin.sacbbx.com
Chris Croughton
ch...@quality.ta.ford.com "Chad Childers" writes:
>It's kind of sad that a lot of cons are going dry. ConFusion won't go dry -
>although nothing is going to stop me from going to a con that doesn't have
>alcohol, it feels very much like a repression of people's freedom by fear
>of litigation and political correctness (sorry, it's appropriate inclusivity
>now, isn't it?). Never thought I'd see that sort of thing in fandom.
If by 'going dry' you mean totally banning alcohol, then I certainly
agree. I am very much opposed to banning anything unless it will harm
others (so I would restrict personal weaponry, for instance) - if the
person can handle their drink (or drugs for that matter) and is not
causing trouble, there will be no objection from me. If local
legislation means that things are illegal, then that can hasrm the
convention and potentially the people working and organising it, so if a
con is being held in (for instance) Saudi Arabia where alcohol is banned
then it would have to be 'dry'. Similarly most places, which have
anti-drug laws...
Chris Croughton
>In article <2skocn$1...@hydra.unm.edu>, michael k kring <mkr...@unm.edu> wrote:
>>
>>But why are these interesting people looking for food? Are all
>>fans food-aholics? (Argh! I hate that word!) Again, what is this
>>fascination/obsession with food?
>>
> Well, I'm a diabetic, so I *have* to eat every three hours--& the
>right kinds of stuff, too. (Corflu did a particularly good job of
>stocking the suite with food I could eat and/or needed to eat, for which
>I am very grateful. Huzzah!)
Sorry, but anyone with a medical condition should make certain that they
have what they need with them, and not depend on things being provided
for them. If you went to a con relying on eating at the con-suite, and
found that you could eat none of their food for medical reasons, you'd
be dead - that's not a risk anyone should take. From what you say, I
don't think that you do take that risk, but I know others do.
Some conventions might be able to cater for the needs of all their
guests, but not all. Lets see, you need diabetic, vegetarian, Vegan,
kosher, hallal (sp?), additive-free - and that's only a few of the
common requirements. For drinks, include alcohol-free, caffeine-free
and sugar-free variants (and all combinations), and while you're about
it have some pure water as well. I don't think that is really feasible,
unless each person books their requirements in advance, or you have a
massive budget.
Another problem is that if you do lay in special food, you either have
to keep it for that group only (which once again means advance booking
etc.) or risk it being eaten by those not in that group. I have been at
parties where there were people who could only eat a small variety of
foods, and have been left hungry because other people (who could eat
other things) ate their food as well.
>Even aside from that, *all* people need to
>eat every so often, right? And given that, why *shouldn't* it be an
>enjoyable experience as well as body-fuel?
Well, my preference is going out for meals that 'just happen', rather
than really arranged. I must admit, though, that as far as I'm
concerned eating is a thing to be done with as little time wasted as
possible, and if I can get away without it I won't bother (I understand
that you and many others can't do that; I'm fortunate in that I can).
At several cons I have been forcibly abducted to eat after a day or
so...
Kathryn Daugherty
> But why in the world would I go
> to a con just to meet X? Why do people stand in line to get books
> autographed? I just don't get this fascination.
I went to my first con just to meet the GoH. I liked his first book
(Sundiver by David Brin) and was busy handing out copies to my friends. I
enjoyed listening to him read from his latest manuscript. After a while I
started attending cons to see fanfriends, but you have to start somewhere.
I still get books autographed. I don't think they have anymore intrinsic
value that way and I don't particularly go around telling everyone,
"Ooooooh, I got a copy of X signed by Y." But I am a mainly a SF reader
and somehow presenting a book to a writer for an autograph shows that I
have bought a copy and if asked, I can even make a few complimentary
comments about the book since I have generally read it first. It's a way
of more personally saying, "Thank you for writing this book." Though I
know writers looking at a line of a thousand at a Worldcon would just as
soon all of us would just buy the next book and not make the writer suffer
from hand cramp. ;-)
KD
Northern California
Crispin Cowan
Chris Croughton <ch...@keris.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <2t26vj$5...@panix.com> b...@panix.com "Bernadette Bosky" writes:
>> Well, I'm a diabetic, so I *have* to eat every three hours--& the
>>right kinds of stuff, too. (Corflu did a particularly good job of
>>stocking the suite with food I could eat and/or needed to eat, for which
>>I am very grateful. Huzzah!)
>Sorry, but anyone with a medical condition should make certain that they
>have what they need with them, and not depend on things being provided
>for them. If you went to a con relying on eating at the con-suite, and
>found that you could eat none of their food for medical reasons, you'd
>be dead - that's not a risk anyone should take. From what you say, I
gotta eat, and the con suite hospitality is lame--gotta go find some
food." You're denying her full access to the con, not her safety.
>Some conventions might be able to cater for the needs of all their
>guests, but not all. Lets see, you need diabetic, vegetarian, Vegan,
>kosher, hallal (sp?), additive-free - and that's only a few of the
A straw man. You don't "have" to cater to the needs of every single
individual. Cover as much as you can, and hope that it's enough to
keep the fen happy. If it isn't, then they'll let you know :-).
>For drinks, include alcohol-free, caffeine-free
>and sugar-free variants (and all combinations), and while you're about
>it have some pure water as well. I don't think that is really feasible,
Sounds reasonable to me. In fact, it sounds normal: 4 to 6 different
kinds of soda, some bheer, and if the con is going all out, booze to
mix with the soda. No problem, it's done all the time.
>Well, my preference is going out for meals that 'just happen', rather
Often that is my preference, too. But when I'm working the Saturday
night art auction, access to food in 15 minutes or less is Very
Important(tm).
>than really arranged. I must admit, though, that as far as I'm
>concerned eating is a thing to be done with as little time wasted as
>possible, and if I can get away without it I won't bother (I understand
Clearly a difference of opinion on the value of hospitality as a social
lubricant. Breaking bread together is a rather old ritual, and it
still works.
>* ch...@keris.demon.co.uk * *
As usual, fans on both sides of Ye Pond should stay aware of the basic
fact that, for whatever reason, North American cons provide a lot more
con suites than UK cons (who apparently don't need them), so all
comments must be taken in context.
Thomas G. Digby
: In article <2skocn$1...@hydra.unm.edu> mkr...@unm.edu (michael k kring) writes:
: >But why are these interesting people looking for food? Are all
: >fans food-aholics? (Argh! I hate that word!) Again, what is this
: >fascination/obsession with food?
[stuff deleted ]
: Leaving aside physical dependency, people, not just fans, like to munch and
: sip while socializing. This seems to be pretty much universal among humans.
[stuff deleted]
Carnivores that run in packs share large kills, and I think the same is
true of omnivores. So I'd expect carnivore-evolved or omnivore-evolved
races to make eating a social event. So if you want science-fictional
counter-examples, you might need to evolve them from herbivores or
filter-feeders or something else that doesn't share kills.
--
-- Tom
bub...@well.sf.ca.us
stan...@delphi.com
> For Worldcons and the like: $145 registration plus
>$550 air-fare, plus $600 ($120/night for 5 nights) for hotel rooms
>equals $1295 to gripe about hot it's not *real* coke or bitch about
>how they're not serving beer.
Pikers. It's really incredible that a Worldcon happens at all, considering
how little money they really receive. When I was interviewing for my
current job as Executive Director of a non-profit software developers
organization, I explained that the Worldcon was five days, with hundreds of
program items, a dealers room, art show, exhibits, and so forth, and that
most people considered the $150 at-the-door price way too expensive.
The president of this organization said, "That seems a little high to me,
too."
I replied, "For five days? Fifteen different panels going on at any time?
hundreds of total panels?"
Comprehension dawned: "Oh, thought you meant it was $150 PER PANEL."
The last trade show I attended was $1100 per person. There you DID get free
food, and lots of it. (Not that I got to see much of it--we exhibitors (who
paid $2500 for our booth--weren't allowed into the food tent; however, we did
get to attend the parties that Microsoft and Symantec held, where there was
plenty of food.)
Kevin Standlee
Replies to k.sta...@genie.geis.com
Chris E. Becht
: Richard McAllister (r...@urth.eng.sun.com) wrote:
: : In article <2skocn$1...@hydra.unm.edu> mkr...@unm.edu (michael k kring) writes:
: [stuff deleted ]
<more stuff deleted>
: [stuff deleted]
: Carnivores that run in packs share large kills, and I think the same is
: true of omnivores. So I'd expect carnivore-evolved or omnivore-evolved
: races to make eating a social event. So if you want science-fictional
: counter-examples, you might need to evolve them from herbivores or
: filter-feeders or something else that doesn't share kills.
Most terrestrial herbivores are herd animals, so eating for them is
indeed a social endeavor. As for filter feeders, at least salt water
ones, a case could be made for the idea that they all share the same
meal anyway.
--
Life is like a cow.
You get out of it what you put in. cali...@crl.com
But, umm... different somehow.
Chris E. Becht
: David A. Z. <d...@gnu.ai.mit.edu> writes:
<snip>:
: >
: The last trade show I attended was $1100 per person. There you DID get free
: food, and lots of it. (Not that I got to see much of it--we exhibitors (who
: paid $2500 for our booth--weren't allowed into the food tent; however, we did
: get to attend the parties that Microsoft and Symantec held, where there was
: plenty of food.)
And unless you accounting dept. is cosmically inept you deducted
it from you taxes as a business expense. As did everyone else there, it
WAS a TRADE SHOW, wasn't it?
Had you had to pay for it out of pocket, with no way to deduct it, or
amortize it through your product sales, you wouldn't be so smug.
Seth Breidbart
>stan...@delphi.com wrote:
>: David A. Z. <d...@gnu.ai.mit.edu> writes:
> <snip>:
>: >
>: The last trade show I attended was $1100 per person. There you DID get free
>: food, and lots of it. (Not that I got to see much of it--we exhibitors (who
>: paid $2500 for our booth--weren't allowed into the food tent; however, we did
>: get to attend the parties that Microsoft and Symantec held, where there was
>: plenty of food.)
>:
> And unless you accounting dept. is cosmically inept you deducted
>it from you taxes as a business expense. As did everyone else there, it
>WAS a TRADE SHOW, wasn't it?
> Had you had to pay for it out of pocket, with no way to deduct it, or
>amortize it through your product sales, you wouldn't be so smug.
You apparently haven't dealt with taxes much.
The fact that it's deductible means the government pays around 35% of
the cost (or whatever the appropriate tax bracket is).
Seth
Debra Fran Baker
>Some conventions might be able to cater for the needs of all their
>guests, but not all. Lets see, you need diabetic, vegetarian, Vegan,
>kosher, hallal (sp?), additive-free - and that's only a few of the
>common requirements. For drinks, include alcohol-free, caffeine-free
>and sugar-free variants (and all combinations), and while you're about
>it have some pure water as well. I don't think that is really feasible,
>unless each person books their requirements in advance, or you have a
>massive budget.
Well, I just ran a con suite (admittedly for a very small filk
convention, but hey, ya gotta start somehwere) which was, in fact,
kosher. Since I didn't provide meat, hallal was not a problem, nor was
vegeterian. Vegan was sort of, but I had lots of food with neither milk
nor eggs, so they were served. I didn't look after the diabetics,
although I did have lots of vegebals and snacks like pretzels. I didn't
avoid additives, but those who did found what to eat in my con suite.
The con suite was dry (I've only been to one con with a wet con suite,
and my budget was wrecked without beer) but I had a full assortment of
sodas soaking in ice in the bathtub.
I'm not saying my con suite was all things to all people - I kept it
kosher because I'm an Orthodox Jew and didn't feel comfortable doing it
any other way. The rest was just a side-effect. No one was told to
stay away from the kosher table (we had one table labeled "kosher" and
one labeled "trayf" - we spelled the word three different ways - and it
was generally assumed that food on the treyf table was treif and food
elsewhere was kosher, and that was that.) and people were permitted to
donate their own food if they wished. I don't know if it would work as
well with a larger convention, but I think it could, with careful
planning. I will say that I had no complaints, lots of compliments and a
small group of friends who felt like they could fully participate in a
convention for the first time. And I am already wondering how I'll do it
better next time.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
* For its ways are ways of pleasantness and all its paths are peace. *
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Debbie Baker dfb...@panix.com
Bernard Peek
My own back of an envelope calculations five years ago put the cost of
a commercially run convention at about $1500 per person for a 1000
attendee con in the UK. That included the assumption that the con
would get a kick-back from the hotels.
The costs included paying the committee and pre-con workers at their
usual hourly rates and paying gophers peanuts (but not *in* peanuts).
--
Bernie Peek
Science Fiction Foundation database jockey.
-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Dick Smith
>:
>: I don't know many fen who more than mildly care about who the GoH is,
>: and I know quite a few who don't care at all. Just for my preference,
>: I'd rather they cut the GoH and keep the con suite budget, because I go
>: to talk to the fans, not the pros. Your tastes may vary.
Daniel W. Butler-Ehle <dwbu...@mtu.edu> wrote:
>Doh! You fool! True or not, you just can't say such
>things here! Heresy! We must maintain the illusion
>that fandom is made of fans.
It's the definition of fan that is the problem here. Mr. Butler-Ehle is
confused when he thinks that the point of fandom is (or is even supposed
to be) the admiration of professional science fiction writers. It's
not... a person is a fan when s/he is actively communicating with other
fen.
That's why conventions have members rather than audience... and why the
term "tickets" is used by media conventions which feature stars and make
money for their promoters. That's why traditional fanzines stress
trades and "letters of comment" from their recipients, rather than
requiring subscriptions. That's why people are encouraged to help out
on a con... and why many will just stop and help if they see something
that needs doing, even without such rewards as a t-shirt or membership
refund.
Then again, Mr. Butler-Ehle can't tell Coke from Pepsi, so he's excused
from taste or sense. I rest my case.
--
Dick Smith sm...@ast.dsd.northrop.com
Software Unit Manager home: di...@smith.chi.il.us
Northrop ESD
P Nielsen Hayden
>It's the definition of fan that is the problem here. Mr. Butler-Ehle is
>confused when he thinks that the point of fandom is (or is even supposed
>to be) the admiration of professional science fiction writers. It's
>not... a person is a fan when s/he is actively communicating with other
>fen.
>That's why conventions have members rather than audience... and why the
>term "tickets" is used by media conventions which feature stars and make
>money for their promoters. That's why traditional fanzines stress
>trades and "letters of comment" from their recipients, rather than
>requiring subscriptions. That's why people are encouraged to help out
>on a con... and why many will just stop and help if they see something
>that needs doing, even without such rewards as a t-shirt or membership
>refund.
Dick Smith could not be more correct. Well put. Applause. Laurels.
If SF fandom were entirely focussed on the honor and the glory of
professional SF, it would be a lot less interesting. As would bem I
daresay, professional SF.
-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@panix.com
senior editor, Tor Books : opinions mine
Eric Wilner
: Carnivores that run in packs share large kills, and I think the same is
: true of omnivores. So I'd expect carnivore-evolved or omnivore-evolved
: races to make eating a social event. So if you want science-fictional
: counter-examples, you might need to evolve them from herbivores or
: filter-feeders or something else that doesn't share kills.
Many herbivores graze in herds, the better to avoid/repel carnivores.
Perhaps the counter-examples need to evolve from *spiny* herbivores...
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Eric J. Wilner (Silicon Gulch Gumby) er...@iptcorp.COM |
| Avian upper stage: Aratinga S. ("Tinga") Bird |
| work: 415-494-7500 home: 408-744-1845 flames: 900-767-1111 |
+------------ DISCLAIMER -------------+------------- PROVERB -----------------+
|Not responsible for typogarphical |Chaotic evil means never having to say |
|errors. Cannot be shipped by air. |you're sorry. |
|No exit. Don't try this at home. | |
+------ The author is insane. Any beables are those of Great Cthulhu. ------+
Casey Hamilton and E.A. Graham Jr.
: Pikers. It's really incredible that a Worldcon happens at all, considering
: how little money they really receive. When I was interviewing for my
: current job as Executive Director of a non-profit software developers
: organization, I explained that the Worldcon was five days, with hundreds of
: program items, a dealers room, art show, exhibits, and so forth, and that
: most people considered the $150 at-the-door price way too expensive.
<snip>
: Comprehension dawned: "Oh, thought you meant it was $150 PER PANEL."
I used to work for the Texas Attorney General's office in the Conference
Unit before I learned I shouldn't do for a job what I do in my hobby.
These not-for-profit conferences generally ran $100 for a one-day event,
and approximately $500 for a three-day event. The really funny part was
that my (then) boss couldn't believe how much work it took to organize a
three-track/three-day event. I just laughed (probably part of why I don't
work there anymore).
Casey Hamilton
-------------------E. A. (Ed) Graham, Jr./Casey Hamilton--------------------
crac...@io.com
"This is another fine mess you've gotten us into!" -- OH to SL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gabe Helou
: Daniel W. Butler-Ehle <dwbu...@mtu.edu> wrote:
: >Doh! You fool! True or not, you just can't say such things here!
: >Heresy! We must maintain the illusion that fandom is made of fans.
:
: It's the definition of fan that is the problem here. Mr. Butler-Ehle is
: confused when he thinks that the point of fandom is ...
Dick, I think your sarcasm meter needs recalibrating. It completely failed
to pick up on the tongue in Dan's cheek.
: Then again, Mr. Butler-Ehle can't tell Coke from Pepsi, ...
Well, there is that. On the other hand, he's been trying to reconstruct
the DNA of extinct soft drinks, so it might be a good idea to have some
other people doing the taste-testing.
--
----- ---- --- -- - - - - - - - <ga...@mystery.com>
"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who
are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton,
they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."
-- Carl Sagan
Daniel W. Butler-Ehle
:
: >Doh! You fool! True or not, you just can't say such
: >things here! Heresy! We must maintain the illusion
: >that fandom is made of fans.
:
: It's the definition of fan that is the problem here. Mr. Butler-Ehle is
: confused when he thinks that the point of fandom is (or is even supposed
: to be) the admiration of professional science fiction writers. It's
: not... a person is a fan when s/he is actively communicating with other
: fen.
Um...no. My point was that we should at least make it look like
we hold cons for reasons other than just partying. If there isn't
even a thin thread of sf holding us together, we've drifted too far.
Like the poster of the article I originally responded to, my
reasons for coming to cons have almost nothing to do with sf or
authors, but I don't generally advertise this. Maintain the
illusion that there's some altruistic sf reason for the season.
If I had meant "fen" (not "fans"), I would have *written* "fen"
(not "fans"). I *did* mean "fans" in the mundane sense of
"afficianados", not "members of our extended family".
(There's a "return to fanly values" joke in there somewhere.)
: Then again, Mr. Butler-Ehle can't tell Coke from Pepsi, so he's excused
: from taste or sense. I rest my case.
Mr. Smith, don't argue semantics with me. Sure, you'd probably
win...but I warn you: I'm not unarmed...we would leave a trail
of casualties. :) (Smiley provided courtesy of the Committee to
Give a Clue to the Humor Impaired; we know you're out there.)
By the way, I am one of the fewer than 10% of Americans who
*can* tell which is Coke and which is Pepsi (I much prefer Coke).
I never said there was no difference in flavor, just very little.
Time to sleep,
Dan Butler-Ehle
<dwbu...@mtu.edu>
Simon H Le G Bisson
In article <771041...@moose.demon.co.uk> Ali...@moose.demon.co.uk (Alison
Scott) writes:
>Tell us more, Simon. We want details. Entire programme items, where
>possible... :*)
Now, now, Alison... We gave you a whole convention full of programming at your
programming party... And you want more? ;-)
Anyway, with well over a year to go, I'm still brainstorming!
Simon H Le G Bisson: si...@fehen.demon.co.uk
Programme Manager: Evolution, the 1996 UK National Sf Convention
Dick Smith
%Doh! You fool! True or not, you just can't say such
%things here! Heresy! We must maintain the illusion
%that fandom is made of fans.
I (at my office address) disagreed with this concept, saying:
: It's the definition of fan that is the problem here. Mr. Butler-Ehle is
: confused when he thinks that the point of fandom is (or is even supposed
: to be) the admiration of professional science fiction writers. It's
: not... a person is a fan when s/he is actively communicating with other
: fen.
So now, Daniel W. Butler-Ehle <dwbu...@mtu.edu> responds:
>Um...no. My point was that we should at least make it look like
>we hold cons for reasons other than just partying. If there isn't
>even a thin thread of sf holding us together, we've drifted too far.
>Like the poster of the article I originally responded to, my
>reasons for coming to cons have almost nothing to do with sf or
>authors, but I don't generally advertise this. Maintain the
>illusion that there's some altruistic sf reason for the season.
I don't agree with this. Certainly there are often other reasons to
attend some SF conventions, including seeing the pro guests. But then
we have relaxacons. While this term is sometimes used by conventions
that have guests, art shows, etc., at least the most relaxed of the
relaxacons have only fen. Talking with each other. Swimming with each
other, and doing odd things together in the jacuzzi. Partying. And
that is the entire point of the con, to provide a venue for this stuff
which goes on between fen.
Such a relaxacon, Midwestcon, is my favorite convention. The 45th one
happens later this month. It doesn't need any such illusion... who
would we be trying to fool, anyway? Certainly not ourselves. Maybe
you're referring to what we tell our bosses when we put in for the
vacation time to go to WorldCon???
Now, I *do* agree with you about the common thread of SF throughout
fandom. And that that thread holds us together. But it's a thin
thread, and doesn't need to be very strong, once a fan is a fan.
Maybe what you're trying to say is that we sometimes put up a front of
bookishness, or at least scientifictionality, to keep our pleasant
events from being overrun with outsiders who don't have the common
thread.
>If I had meant "fen" (not "fans"), I would have *written* "fen"
>(not "fans"). I *did* mean "fans" in the mundane sense of
>"afficianados", not "members of our extended family".
>(There's a "return to fanly values" joke in there somewhere.)
I understood you that way, which is part of the reason I was careful to
use "fen" when I responded. And you're agreeing with the way I think
about extended family, so I guess I don't mind... although this is *not*
what I got from the first posting.
"Return to fanly values" is a good term the subject of a lot of
discussion these last several years about very large cons, and the fact
that it's difficult for non-fen (I first wrote "non-fans", but I want to
be clear that I'm writing about people who are members of the sect, not
some kind of groupies!) to get connected up to fandom through them. The
fans who run Boskone took some very strong steps a bit ago, to reduce
the size of their con, and orient it more to "literary" fans; that fight
is still raging. We read here in this newsgroup about Minneapolis fen
considering that Minicon is too large, that too many of its attendees
are non-fans by some definition or another (that was DDB, last year's
Minicon chair, I think, saying that only 1000 out of 3000 were fans),
or that drunken whatevers have discovered SF conventions as good places
to hang out and drink a lot of bheer (which, of course, they call beer),
and barf. I find the discussion particularly interesting because
proposed changes need to be balanced against restrictions which would keep
out people who would become fen if only they could find out about fandom.
And I don't have any perfect ideas, either.
It's true, I ragged Butler-Ehle unmercifully, saying:
: Then again, Mr. Butler-Ehle can't tell Coke from Pepsi, so he's excused
: from taste or sense. I rest my case.
And he replied:
>Mr. Smith, don't argue semantics with me. Sure, you'd probably
>win...but I warn you: I'm not unarmed...we would leave a trail
>of casualties. :) (Smiley provided courtesy of the Committee to
>Give a Clue to the Humor Impaired; we know you're out there.)
>By the way, I am one of the fewer than 10% of Americans who
>*can* tell which is Coke and which is Pepsi (I much prefer Coke).
>I never said there was no difference in flavor, just very little.
I sure thought that he was saying that nobody could tell the difference,
and I recall a number of people posting that they could indeed tell.
Those posters all seemed to have the same impression I did.
It's true that there are cons which can not justify budget for Coke
brand soft drink beverage, and get along with serving generic. And
other cons get 17 flavors of root beer. And other cons serve lunch.
But arguing that you shouldn't bother because nobody can taste the
difference just because you're involved in a con which has made a
difficult budget choice is a mistake. Instead, you should admit to your
difficult choices, and reconsider them if the complaints for what you
dropped outway the praise for what you kept.
I don't think that I'm arguing semantics. We have, in fandom, like in
computing or anything else, some specialized vocabulary. The use of
"fan" to mean a member of "fandom" is part of that vocabulary. We know
it has another meaning outside of fandom. Fancyclopedia II (Dick Eney,
1959, based on earlier work by Jack Speer) included the following in its
definition of fan: "... Introspectives like fans naturally do much
speculating on what and why fans are. ..."
We use smileys because humor works so poorly on the net. Your smiley,
Mr. Butler-Ehle, has no nose. No wonder it can't tell Coke from Pepsi.
Satire is even worse. I don't know why, but it's so. 8-)
Peace.
--
Dick Smith di...@smith.chi.il.us
office: sm...@atfs0.dsd.northrop.com
Daniel W. Butler-Ehle
Dick Smith (di...@smith.CHI.IL.US) wrote:
:
: So now, Daniel W. Butler-Ehle <dwbu...@mtu.edu> responds:
: >Like the poster of the article I originally responded to, my
: >reasons for coming to cons have almost nothing to do with sf or
: >authors, but I don't generally advertise this. Maintain the
: >illusion that there's some altruistic sf reason for the season.
:
: I don't agree with this. Certainly there are often other reasons to
: attend some SF conventions, including seeing the pro guests. But then
: we have relaxacons. While this term is sometimes used by conventions
: that have guests, art shows, etc., at least the most relaxed of the
: relaxacons have only fen. Talking with each other. Swimming with each
: other, and doing odd things together in the jacuzzi. Partying. And
: that is the entire point of the con, to provide a venue for this stuff
: which goes on between fen.
:
: Such a relaxacon, Midwestcon, is my favorite convention. The 45th one
: happens later this month. It doesn't need any such illusion... who
: would we be trying to fool, anyway? Certainly not ourselves. Maybe
: you're referring to what we tell our bosses when we put in for the
: vacation time to go to WorldCon???
You seem to have some idea that I think that authors and GoHs hold
some essential role in conventions. I said no such thing. I said
that sf should be essential to sf fandom, not author worship.
: Now, I *do* agree with you about the common thread of SF throughout
: fandom. And that that thread holds us together. But it's a thin
: thread, and doesn't need to be very strong, once a fan is a fan.
Well put.
(But the thread should be strong enough to hold the shadow squares
in orbit.)
Anyway, I've known for years that there are sf enthusiasts who are
not fhans [I've added the "h" here for the purpose of clarity]
(I was, myself, once) [so much for clarity], but with increasing
frequency, I'll meet someone who is "a fhan among fen" but is *not*
an sf enthusiast. The lines blur. (I'm sure that's old news.)
: Maybe what you're trying to say is that we sometimes put up a front of
: bookishness, or at least scientifictionality, to keep our pleasant
: events from being overrun with outsiders who don't have the common
: thread.
Yeah, I guess so. The "yamhead problem" (TM, FLH) has got me
thinking about it much of late. I just don't like it when
someone is particularly obvious about the fact that their
attendance has nothing to do with sf. Good thing Joe McCarthy
wasn't a fan; can't you just imagine the committee he'd set
up to deal with the problem?
: It's true that there are cons which can not justify budget for Coke
: brand soft drink beverage, and get along with serving generic. And
: other cons get 17 flavors of root beer. And other cons serve lunch.
: But arguing that you shouldn't bother because nobody can taste the
: difference just because you're involved in a con which has made a
: difficult budget choice is a mistake. Instead, you should admit to your
: difficult choices, and reconsider them if the complaints for what you
: dropped outway the praise for what you kept.
I probably should note that ours is a small, one-day con on a
college campus. And perhaps I should mention again that we
don't have budget-brand soda in our consuite; we have Coke and
the ilk.
: I don't think that I'm arguing semantics.
If you're arguing meaning, then you're arguing semantics. But yes,
your point about the meaning of "fan" within the context of fandom
is well taken, I should have been more precise.
: We use smileys because humor works so poorly on the net. Your smiley,
: Mr. Butler-Ehle, has no nose. No wonder it can't tell Coke from Pepsi.
: Satire is even worse. I don't know why, but it's so. 8-)
Oooh! You got me! B=) (two noses to make up for it)
Cheers,
Dan Butler-Ehle
Crispin Cowan
that bear no resembalance to reality. Colour me cynical, and I
apologize if I'm completely out to lunch on this.
In article <2u30ef$7...@gilligan.hu>,
Daniel W. Butler-Ehle <dwbu...@mtu.edu> wrote:
>Yeah, I guess so. The "yamhead problem" (TM, FLH) has got me
>thinking about it much of late. I just don't like it when
>someone is particularly obvious about the fact that their
>attendance has nothing to do with sf. Good thing Joe McCarthy
I have this suspicion that "yamhead" or "someone particularly obvious
about their attandance having nothing to do with sf" is synonomous with
"younger fans not wearing traditional (boring) fannish garb". I hold
up as evidence the reactionary statements that were made here about
"those bondage types" invading "our" cons, and how obvious it was that
they weren't fans. Sorry, we're fans, too, we just don't dress like
you. Unless you're willing to go engage someone in a broad selection
of SF-oriented discussion, it is *never* obvious that a person has no
interest in SF. I know a fan who spend the whole weekend in a suit--he's
as true-fan as they come, having pub'd letters in Astounding. I know
fans who are major literary authorities on SF, who happen to wear a lot
of black leather and body piercings. You cannot tell a fan by their
colours.
Now that I'm done presuming upon what you (Daniel) meant, perhaps you
could describe what makes it obvious that an individual is not
interested in SF?
no depression
=By the way, I am one of the fewer than 10% of Americans who
=*can* tell which is Coke and which is Pepsi (I much prefer Coke).
=I never said there was no difference in flavor, just very little.
Is this true!?! Only 10% can tell the difference? That seems really
odd. I personally almost gag on the total sugar sweet flavor of
Pepsi. (I must admit though that Coke isn't exactly sour :)
To be honest the free coke is one of the reasons I go to cons. I
mean so much just waiting to be consumed with all these interesting
people around! I'm sure that if a con served Pepsi it would not be
as enjoyable for me. Just can't live that lifestyle of those
Pepsi-gens out there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Prock "There's a bottle of asprin
pr...@teetot.acusd.edu on the table by the Playboys.
Did you seen Miss April,
God I feel so old." - The Rugburns
Arthur Hlavaty
: To be honest the free coke is one of the reasons I go to cons. I
: mean so much just waiting to be consumed with all these interesting
: people around! I'm sure that if a con served Pepsi it would not be
: as enjoyable for me. Just can't live that lifestyle of those
: Pepsi-gens out there.
No, you mean free Coke. If cons gave out free coke, there'd be
lots more attendance and lots more problems.
--
Arthur D. Hlavaty hla...@panix.com
"The Mason's face is ajar."--Firesign Theater
A Adams
: Disclaimer: I may be unfairly ascribing unpleasant attitudes to Daniel
: that bear no resembalance to reality. Colour me cynical, and I
: apologize if I'm completely out to lunch on this.
: In article <2u30ef$7...@gilligan.hu>,
: Daniel W. Butler-Ehle <dwbu...@mtu.edu> wrote:
: >Yeah, I guess so. The "yamhead problem" (TM, FLH) has got me
: >thinking about it much of late. I just don't like it when
: >someone is particularly obvious about the fact that their
: >attendance has nothing to do with sf. Good thing Joe McCarthy
: I have this suspicion that "yamhead" or "someone particularly obvious
: about their attandance having nothing to do with sf" is synonomous with
: "younger fans not wearing traditional (boring) fannish garb". I hold
: up as evidence the reactionary statements that were made here about
: "those bondage types" invading "our" cons, and how obvious it was that
: they weren't fans. Sorry, we're fans, too, we just don't dress like
: you. Unless you're willing to go engage someone in a broad selection
: of SF-oriented discussion, it is *never* obvious that a person has no
: interest in SF. I know a fan who spend the whole weekend in a suit--he's
: as true-fan as they come, having pub'd letters in Astounding. I know
: fans who are major literary authorities on SF, who happen to wear a lot
: of black leather and body piercings. You cannot tell a fan by their
: colours.
: Now that I'm done presuming upon what you (Daniel) meant, perhaps you
: could describe what makes it obvious that an individual is not
: interested in SF?
Aren't you being a tad over-sensitive Crispin? There was no mention
whatever of how people dress in the article you were replying to.
There may be some fans who (like some non-fans) place a great
emphasis on how you dress - whether it's expecting a suit at work
or expecting jeans and a t-shirt with an SF logo at a con.
The 'Yamhead' problem referred to above was almost certainly
referring to those (mainly 18-21 yr olds I think) who seem to be
invading US cons because they can get served alcohol, rather than
because of an interest in SF. I agree that attracting a large minority
(or, ghu forbid a majority) of people with no interest in any aspect
of SF to an SF con means that you've gone wrong. The odd few can be
absorbed (assimilated even ;-)) without spoiling the con - after all
you've always got the hotel staff who're mostly mundanes.
Basically it's obvious that someone has no interest in SF when no-one
can talk to them about SF. Fans have a common background of knowledge.
Not everyone has the same grounding, since you can get people who
only watch, and therefore only know Star Trek, Dr Who etc. and you
get those who only read, so they know Alfie Bester and Jack Vance
or whatever, but they'll be able to find people (like me) who have
an interest in both aspects (and more) who they can both talk to.
--
TTFN, A^3 *************************E-mail*a...@scs.leeds.ac.uk********
************************************snail*Flat 18,26 Brudenell Road**
**"If you're not here to kick *******mail*Leeds,LS6 1BD,UK***********
**ass, get out." - jms ***************Tel*UK-0532 789237*************
Bob Ives
it occurred to me that this great Polish SF author may no longer
be with us... Can anyone out there let me know if Lem still lives,
is still writing. I will be a great loss to the sf community if
he is not.
____
Bob
Daniel W. Butler-Ehle
:
: I have this suspicion that "yamhead" or "someone particularly obvious
: about their attandance having nothing to do with sf" is synonomous with
: "younger fans not wearing traditional (boring) fannish garb".
Clothing has nothing to do with it. I, myself, usually wear mundane
clothing rather than fannish garb. The "yamheads", though, are those
who assume that "conventioneering" means "getting rowdy and destructive."
Leave that for the Shriners and the fratboys. (hmm...guess I'll get
flamed for that one, too.)
: I hold
: up as evidence the reactionary statements that were made here about
: "those bondage types" invading "our" cons, and how obvious it was that
: they weren't fans. Sorry, we're fans, too, we just don't dress like
: you.
Oh, guess I missed your meaning. You mean there are people who say
that dressing in non-mundane garb is not fannish? That's a switch.
That attitude is major unhealthy. You got a petition for me to sign
on that one?
: Now that I'm done presuming upon what you (Daniel) meant, perhaps you
: could describe what makes it obvious that an individual is not
: interested in SF?
A good clue is when someone says "I'm not interested in scifi [sic],
I just came to party." Yes, I heard someone say this. And yes,
the person was only there to party with his high school football
team. He probably couldn't even spell "sf" or "fandom", much less
give a care about it.
Now as for my statement that you just can't say such things...it was
a joke. I guess my humour is sometimes a little too subtle.
I wasn't attacking your fannishness. It's pretty obvious that you're
a fan, 'cuz you care about fandom. For that matter, anyone who cares
enough about fandom to say "we are fen" is a fan in my book. Those
aren't the people I'm talking about. Going to cons "just to party"
is not a sin in Dan's Book of Fandom, I do it all the time.
*Note: more personal opinion follows. It is based on real experience
and I'm entitled to it.*
The people whom I'd personally rather not see at cons are those who
don't even care to get a clue as to what fandom is about. Often,
the existence of these poor souls is our fault. We tend to get
caught up in doing things with the fanily, and we ignore or condemn
the naive ones staring from the sidelines and drawing graffiti on
the carpet. But others just plain like to party and dislike
fandom; I wish they'd go away. (And there's the Church of the
Subgenious...I wish they'd go away, too.)
Dan Butler-Ehle
P.S. - The Shriners is actually a pretty good bunch of folks. I
just used their name (and the term "fratboys") to borrow the
stereotype for mundane perceptions of conventioneers. But I meant
what I said about the Bob Cult.
Crispin Cowan
>that dressing in non-mundane garb is not fannish? That's a switch.
>That attitude is major unhealthy. You got a petition for me to sign
>on that one?
No. We seem to have won that battle, I was just concerned that it
might have been re-emerging.
>A good clue is when someone says "I'm not interested in scifi [sic],
>I just came to party." Yes, I heard someone say this. And yes,
Gotcha. You were reacting to behaviour, not appearance. No problem.
>a fan, 'cuz you care about fandom. For that matter, anyone who cares
>enough about fandom to say "we are fen" is a fan in my book. Those
That's my definition: a fan is anyone who self-identifies as a fan.
We're too diverse a group to get more picky than that.
>fandom; I wish they'd go away. (And there's the Church of the
>Subgenious...I wish they'd go away, too.)
Well, yeah, I agree, but I'd like them to take the gamers with them
:-). Ow! Ok, ok, I take it back :-).
Avery Davis
-> From: mkr...@unm.edu (michael k kring)
-> What do you folks go to a con for?
-> Tell me. I really want to know. It's very confusing to me.
I would like to share something from a very good book that I read a few
years ago. This is an excerpt that expressed something of the essence
of my feelings about SF Fandom and why I attend conventions:
...We need to find a place, just this side of madness and
irrationality, where we can, from time to time, leave the
mundane and move into spontaneity and serendipity, a level
that includes a greater sense of freedom and risk - an
active environment full of surprises, which encourages a
sense of wonder. Here, ideas and feelings which would
otherwise be difficult to state can be expressed freely.
A bond of love is easy to find in an environment of joy...
from _Loving Each Other: The Challenge of Human Relationships_,
p. 116, by Leo Buscaglia (Copyright (C) 1984, by Holt Rinehart
and Winston, New York)
---avery...@ftl.mese.com
* RM 1.3 00504 * Think of it as evolution in action.
Gabe Helou
: The "yamheads", though, are those who assume that "conventioneering" means
: "getting rowdy and destructive." Leave that for the Shriners and the
: fratboys. (hmm...guess I'll get flamed for that one, too.)
I tend to fall back to picking on a group I'm more familiar with: sherrifs.
(Real ones, not the Lisle Hyatt kind.) There was a Minicon a few years ago
where we followed a sherrifs convention (or chiefs of police; I'm not
certain which at the moment). Several of the hotel staff that I talked to
were relieved to have these officers of the law out of their hair and
the science fiction crowd instead.
Whether they're Shriners, frat boys, police officers, undertakers, law clerks,
or Hell's Angels doesn't make much difference to me. If their only reason
for showing up is to party and raise hell, if they have no understanding
of SF or fandom, I'd rather they didn't show up.
For that matter, even if they are interested in SF, I'd rather not have to
contend with people being destructive and/or showing no concern for other
people at the con.
--
----- ---- --- -- - - - - - - - <ga...@mystery.com>
"Actually, this convention is one of the least destructive. You guys attract
a lot of wierd people, but they're _polite_ wierd people."
-- A Radisson employee who had worked several Minicons
no depression
=>(And there's the Church of the
=>Subgenious...I wish they'd go away, too.)
=Well, yeah, I agree, but I'd like them to take the gamers with them
=:-). Ow! Ok, ok, I take it back :-).
Ahh you evil twisted bigoted nazi scum sucking pig!!! How can you say such
a thing and call yourself a member of the openmindend liberal front!?!
Well, maybe not. :)
Actually I used to game at sf cons, but then I disovered there were parties
there and the people outside of the gaming room were often quite interesting
and sometimes even more interesting than the people in the gaming room.
Now I don't game at sf cons anymore, but I do tend to party and do silly
things that some people don't like, but hey: you can't please ...
But I have to say: there are some great games out there. A good way to
kill some time. :)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Prock "There's a bottle of asprin
pr...@teetot.acusd.edu on the table by the Playboys.
Did you seen Miss April,
God I feel so old." - The Rugburns
=
=Crispin
=-----
=Crispin Cowan, CS PhD student, searching for a research position
=University of Western Ontario
=Phyz-mail: Middlesex College, MC28-C, London, Ontario, N6A 5B7
=E-mail: cri...@csd.uwo.ca Voice: 519-661-3342
="A distributed system is one in which I cannot get something done
=because a machine I've never heard of is down" --Leslie Lamport
David E Romm
ga...@glynis.mystery.com (Gabe Helou) wrote:
> Daniel W. Butler-Ehle (dwbu...@mtu.edu) wrote:
>
> : The "yamheads", though, are those who assume that "conventioneering" means
> : "getting rowdy and destructive." Leave that for the Shriners and the
> : fratboys. (hmm...guess I'll get flamed for that one, too.)
>
> I tend to fall back to picking on a group I'm more familiar with: sherrifs.
> (Real ones, not the Lisle Hyatt kind.) There was a Minicon a few years ago
> where we followed a sherrifs convention (or chiefs of police; I'm not
> certain which at the moment). Several of the hotel staff that I talked to
> were relieved to have these officers of the law out of their hair and
> the science fiction crowd instead.
>
I was told this at least second hand, so it must remain somewhat
apocryphal, but I'll pass it on here.
During the course of a Boskone, many many years ago, two guys were staying
at the hotel. During the course of the con, they knocked over a lamp,
breaking it. They went down to the manager and offered to pay damages.
The manager laughed and said, "Last week we had a police convention. They
destroyed two whole rooms. Go away."
--
Shockwave: The longest running science fiction radio program in Earth's
history. Tapes available.
Paul King
> I was told this at least second hand, so it must remain somewhat
> apocryphal, but I'll pass it on here.
>
> During the course of a Boskone, many many years ago, two guys were staying
> at the hotel. During the course of the con, they knocked over a lamp,
> breaking it. They went down to the manager and offered to pay damages.
> The manager laughed and said, "Last week we had a police convention. They
> destroyed two whole rooms. Go away."
second hand "sure, we burn out more lightbulbs but at least we
don't..." stories. How about the one where someone was curious as to
how long the roll of toliet paper was so they held one end and tossed
the other down the large atrium from the sixth or so floor. Missed the
maid by about three feet. A nearby fan went to apologise, for fans in
general, and she explained to him that the mundane conventon the week
befor had been dropping beer bottles down the other side of the atrium
and that it's funny that this group wears armor and throws soft
things.
-Paul
Free Hugs Anyone who has more than a
rumor about eve-con this year
please let me know...
Bernard Peek
pa...@kustanair.cs.odu.edu "Paul King" writes:
>
> second hand "sure, we burn out more lightbulbs but at least we
> don't..." stories.
And hotels dread US Sherrif's conventions. Someone breaks a lightbulb
it can be replaced. Someone shoots a lightbulb and you need to repaint
the wall behind it. (And maybe the one behind that.)
stan...@delphi.com
> And unless you accounting dept. is cosmically inept you deducted
>it from you taxes as a business expense. As did everyone else there, it
>WAS a TRADE SHOW, wasn't it?
> Had you had to pay for it out of pocket, with no way to deduct it, or
>amortize it through your product sales, you wouldn't be so smug.
no need to deduct something from your taxes when you don't have to pay
taxes.
That little five days cost us more then $2500, and there is nearly no way we
can reasonably expect to make the money back. (Oh, we sold about $100
worth of t-shirts, but that's all.)
For that matter, what about the people who "take it off their taxes." At most
they're getting about a third of their cost subsidized by the tax deduction.
You still have to put up a lot of money out-of-pocket.
My whole point is that most conventions/trade shows charge huge sums of
money compared to even a Worldcon. It is truely a miracle that we manage to
pull off a Worldcon at all, given how little resources we have! And before
you say "it's because of the volunteer labor," let me say that I KNOW THAT
ALREADY--after all, I was a division chief for ConFrancisco and will be for
ConAdian. We pull off Worldcons by burning up people's lives, that's how.
Kevin Standlee
reply to k.sta...@genie.geis.com
if you send e-mail to my delphi address, you can expect a substantial
delay before I reply.
F A Levy-Haskell
>: Daniel W. Butler-Ehle <dwbu...@mtu.edu> wrote:
>: >Yeah, I guess so. The "yamhead problem" (TM, FLH) has got me
>: >thinking about it much of late.
>The 'Yamhead' problem referred to above was almost certainly
>referring to those (mainly 18-21 yr olds I think) who seem to be
>invading US cons because they can get served alcohol, rather than
>because of an interest in SF.
I'm not entirely sure how Daniel was framing his thoughts, so I'll leave any
comments about that to him. But when I coined the term "yamhead," I was
referring not to the group you are specifying, but to people, regardless of
their age and regardless of whether they drink, whose thoughtless or
downright stupid behaviour is inappropriate at a convention and who are
therefore spoiling things for the rest of us. It is my guess that most of
these people have little or no interest in sf, but, again, that is really not
the defining factor....
--
Fred A. Levy Haskell | "I do believe you are what you perceive
fa...@maroon.tc.umn.edu | what comes is better than what came before"
| --The Velvet Underground
F A Levy-Haskell
>Crispin Cowan (cri...@csd.uwo.ca) wrote:
>:
>: I have this suspicion that "yamhead" or "someone particularly obvious
>: about their attandance having nothing to do with sf" is synonomous with
>: "younger fans not wearing traditional (boring) fannish garb".
>Clothing has nothing to do with it. I, myself, usually wear mundane
>clothing rather than fannish garb. The "yamheads", though, are those
>who assume that "conventioneering" means "getting rowdy and destructive."
>Leave that for the Shriners and the fratboys. (hmm...guess I'll get
>flamed for that one, too.)
Just so. Nice to know we agree on this. (I was in a fraternity when I was
in college. It had its place. But I certainly wouldn't have invited any
of my fraternity brothers to a con, and I wouldn't have liked to have seen
any of them show up at a con--their attitudes were distinctly, uh,
non-fannish.)
>: Now that I'm done presuming upon what you (Daniel) meant, perhaps you
>: could describe what makes it obvious that an individual is not
>: interested in SF?
>A good clue is when someone says "I'm not interested in scifi [sic],
>I just came to party." Yes, I heard someone say this. And yes,
>the person was only there to party with his high school football
>team. He probably couldn't even spell "sf" or "fandom", much less
>give a care about it.
>I wasn't attacking your fannishness. It's pretty obvious that you're
>a fan, 'cuz you care about fandom. For that matter, anyone who cares
>enough about fandom to say "we are fen" is a fan in my book. Those
>aren't the people I'm talking about. Going to cons "just to party"
>is not a sin in Dan's Book of Fandom, I do it all the time.
Looks like we see closer to eye-to-eye on things than I had originally
thought. This is a Good Thing....