Ed Kline's Letter
Urthwyse
Obviously none of this was quoted for brevity (and I'd spend more
time snipping it out than responding). Thanks for posting this letter.
There's been a lot of rants about the lack of first-person accounts.
Well, here's one, it appears. Quite interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adventure.. excitement.. a Jedi craves not these things.
Although, we do occasionally enjoy a tall, frosty glass of Yoo-Hoo.
cmelv...@aol.com
Wow. Doesn't -that- say everything? And a first-hand account as
well.
Electro
cmelv...@aol.com wrote:
> Wow. Doesn't -that- say everything? And a first-hand account as
>well.
Better, a firsthand account from someone with no obvious axe to
grind.
ele...@minn.net
*********************************************************
Midnight at the huge hotel,my head is filled with fur....
"Nate Bucklin"
cmelv...@aol.com
In article <32FCD6...@primenet.com>, Steve wrote:
>It is well known that you have been on the Internet conversing
>with members of alternative lifestyles and encouraging their =
>
>involvement with the convention. I have absolutely NO problem =
>
>with them or their involvement. I DO however question any one =
>
>or group that you willingly invite to participate in the =
>
>convention that have absolutely no interest or appreciation of =
>
>the premise of the convention, i.e. the love of anthropo-
>morphics of all sorts which was to be, I believe, the original =
>
>idea for the con, unless I am mistaken. It also piss us =
>
>off that you invite this opening on the 'net and yet make no =
>
>mention of this "change" in _InFurNation_. =
This is all news to me, but it certainly sheds a new light on
things... and explains a good deal as well. This was being touted as an
open convention on the alternative lifestyle newsgroups? Was it then also
being announced on any of the SF, fantasy, or Comic newsgroups? If it had
been, it would have at least kept more of a balance, and at least have had
been a fairer invitation. But an open invite to just one segment really
stacks the cards very heavily towards one interest.
And was it even -explained- to these newsgroups just what Confurence
was, or what furrydom was all about!? What purpose does it serve to
dilute the convention with people who aren't even interested in finding
out what the fandom is about? I can understand inviting newcomers in to
participate, but one assumes there would be some latent interest to begin
with, and that they would be coming from more walks of life than just
alternate lifestyles. Is this a furry convention, then, or just an excuse
to have a gay party and humiliate the mundanes?
Suddenly, things begin to click together, and I think that maybe
-both- sides in the recent flames have been operating from incomplete
info; none of us had the complete picture of what was really occuring at
the convention, and that both sides have had valid reasons for their
observations and conclusions. This may have been the missing piece to the
puzzle. We're having an influx of -impostors- attending the con, with
little to no interest in furry at all beyond self-gratification, who will
most likely never indulge in another furry interest until next year's con.
It occurs to me, as an after-thought, that the attendence figures for
the convention can't be fully trusted. We may have had over 1200 members
this year... but how many of these were furry fans, and how many were
there only for the "sex and the parties"? What was the ratio? Three for
one? Five?
Wow. Given this info, maybe I -do- owe an apology for some of my
conclusions; the reason for furrydom's bad image may be coming from a
completely unexpected source! I certainly want to hear more about this,
first, though, and any facts that people can forward about all this.
David G. Bell
In article <5dle44$o...@bonkers.taronga.com>
pe...@taronga.com "Peter da Silva" writes:
> Sounds like the problem at Confurence isn't so much Furries as mundane gay
> guys being encouraged to crash the con.
And _who_ is alleged to be doing the encouraging.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
cmelv...@aol.com
Dr. Cat
cmelv...@aol.com wrote:
: Suddenly, things begin to click together, and I think that maybe
: -both- sides in the recent flames have been operating from incomplete
: info; none of us had the complete picture of what was really occuring at
: the convention, and that both sides have had valid reasons for their
: observations and conclusions. This may have been the missing piece to the
: puzzle. We're having an influx of -impostors- attending the con, with
: little to no interest in furry at all beyond self-gratification, who will
: most likely never indulge in another furry interest until next year's con.
Well, I want to follow Kay Shapero's sage advice on this one and "do my
homework". There were a number of specific instances cited, and very
unfortunate ones, and I'm sad that they've driven some fine, talented
people away from the con. But the allegation that Mark Merlino has been
inviting alternative lifestyle groups en masse were one part that didn't
have specific incidents or evidence provided to support the claim. I'm
not saying that I think it's true or that I think it isn't true, I'm
saying I don't know, and I want to find out exactly what happened before
I decide how to react to it. I do think Gen Cook mentioned something
about seeing a post in some gay lifestyle newsgroup, but the newsgroup
name she mentioned wasn't a valid one so I couldn't track it down through
DejaNews to see what it actually said. Maybe she still remembers enough
about the post to enable someone to track it down, which would be
instructive.
: It occurs to me, as an after-thought, that the attendence figures for
: the convention can't be fully trusted. We may have had over 1200 members
: this year... but how many of these were furry fans, and how many were
: there only for the "sex and the parties"? What was the ratio? Three for
: one? Five?
That's another significant issue - even if a large group of non-furry
fans were invited, how many showed up? A few? A lot? What percentage
of the people at the con did they represent? So far we only have
anecdotal info that some were there - getting an idea of the ratios is a
much harder thing to do.
I can shed a little more light on the "only there for the sex and
parties" line, by the way. I mentioned that to my business partner, and
she says her friend Chris answered someone's question that way and it was
a JOKE. Unfortunate that it was taken the wrong way and upset some
artists, but he doesn't have the experience with the fandom to have known
that people are so sensitive about that issue and would take it like that.
While he's not from the fandom, he isn't from any alternative lifestyle
group and was not there for sex or for parties. He was there to visit my
partner, who has been a close friend of his on AmberMUSH for years, to go
to Disneyland and to check out the con. She did a gorgeous sketch of him
as a ferretmorph, and he's since created a character on her furry themed
MUSH. So I think those outsiders aren't ALL bad... And a casually
overheard line can have different things behind it than you might think,
which just underscores the value of Kay's advice to find out as many
facts as you can, and not to leap to conclusions about the details you
don't know yet.
Still, I must say with regard to the guys who were reported to be
deliberately trying to freak out the heterosexuals in the lobby on
thursday... I have to admit I'd rather think they were non-furry fans
doing that rather than furry fans. Clearly it could be either way from
what little I've heard, but if they were non-furries I'd feel my
world-view that most furries are reasonably polite were further supported
by what actually happens in the world.
I guess what I really want is to see Kishma Danielle come to cons that
I can see her at again. After admiring her stunning, gorgeous zebra
makeup that she dances in for years, this time I finally got a chance to
chat with her, and it would be a shame to never run into her again. For
whatever reasons that might happen. I think whatever rudeness and other
problems there are in the fandom, the artists and dealers tend to run up
against far more of it than the average attending fan does. Ii just hope
Kishma can show up at some of the less extreme cons or something.
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: You don't have to go to cons to be a furry fan. But if you
wanna, just be aware that some of them are better than others, and almost
all of them are better than the sound here. Don't make any blanket
judgements without trying for yourself.)
Chris Johnson
O_O
...glad I didn't go...
I probably could deal with people making advances on 'the cat in the
tight fursuit'. Always figured I could rebuff them gently, laugh at
extreme pushiness, and get a little secret ego-boost from being thought a
desirable feline.
Somehow it hadn't occurred to me that had I gone, wearing my skintight
feline fursuit (no frills, no big 'ol mask, just furry body), people _at_
_the_ _con_ would stare and mutter and think I was a weirdo.
To be blunt- getting 'Come up to my room, and is your fursuit, er,
_ven_tilated in nice places?' is what I'd have expected. I could rebuff
that and feel I was participating in something I understood, just not to
extremes.
'Come up to my room and take that foolish thing _off_' is not something
I'd understand, nor would it be why I came.
There are some photos floating around with my approval- photos of me in
tiger guise. I'm sorry to say that it looks unlikely that anybody will get
to see me that way in person. I may not be promiscuous but I _like_ my
body and think the fursuit complements it nicely. However, it'd already be
quite daring for me to attend a convention dressed that way- if I'm to be
treated like a weirdo on top of that by con attendees, forget it.
*hrumph* I guess I'll keep following the news- frankly, it would be
_fun_ to go to a convention wearing my lovingly tailored furbodysuit, and
it would be _fun_ to get attention and nicely turn down cheerful flirting,
as a cat-person. Hell, I've even been a gay cat in fursuit! A perverse but
quite satisfying pleasure, though I haven't made any effort to repeat it
(or to have het sex).
Going to a con to be a in-your-face human queer just isn't good enough.
Bi I may be, queer if you feel like using the term, but I'm not that sort
of queer and don't feel like being one.
Confurence? Not even if I was invited. Nor any con with this sort of rep.
Jinx_tigr
(aka Chris Johnson)
M Panthera
Well I actually showed up this year for one day (Sat.).
So I read EK's letter. I have to say that I agree with him. From what I
saw, and from what I read I will in all likelyhood not attend next year.
as it is I did not go to CF for several years, it was'nt so bad then or at
least the behavior of the members was'nt so blantent back then. But things
have sadly gone way down hill and are now scraping the bottom..
That's all I have to say on the matter...
M Panthera
WalksFar
I see posts citing the content of Ed's letter, but I have not seen
the letter itself. Is there any place where I can view the letter?
If you say Dejanews, okay ... What is the heading and date? I would
need that to dig it out.
Thanks.
WalksFar ...
cmelv...@aol.com
In article <5dn8d8$a...@bonkers.taronga.com>, pe...@taronga.com wrote:
>That's a good question. Ed Kline seemed to be targeting Mark Merlino, but
I'd
>like to see if someone can dig up posted messages that would help nail
the
>responsible person rather than just pointing fingers.
That's a good point. -If- it were done, it might not have been Mark.
Ed seems pretty sure it was; has he said to anyone, publicly or
privately, if he'd actually read the post, or if he was going by
second-hand information?
Does anybody else remember seeing such a post?
cmelv...@aol.com
In article <5dn0hl$i...@news3.realtime.net>, c...@bga.com wrote:
>So I think those outsiders aren't ALL bad... And a casually
>overheard line can have different things behind it than you might think,
>which just underscores the value of Kay's advice to find out as many
>facts as you can, and not to leap to conclusions about the details you
>don't know yet.
And I agree with that. Ed's letter sort of throws the whole
situation into a flux, and it's very difficult to know what to think. If
the statements are true (and that is to say the reasons for the problems
and attitudes at Confurence), then it shifts the whole emphasis of from
where the difficulties arrive. And if they are -not-, then we're back
where we were before it was posted.
It's going to be difficult, if not outright impossible, to verify
each and every occurence, or to find out the actual stories behind them,
but it would help a great deal towards illuminating things if at least
some could be corroborated. And I'd like to know more about the posted
invitation: was it really made, and was it specifically only to one
special interest group instead of to all potentially interested groups?
Can anybody verify or produce a copy of the post?
Steve Gattuso
cmelv...@aol.com wrote:
> That's a good point. -If- it were done, it might not have been
> Mark.
> Ed seems pretty sure it was; has he said to anyone, publicly or
> privately, if he'd actually read the post, or if he was going by
> second-hand information?
>
> Does anybody else remember seeing such a post?
I think you're making an assumption. This is Usenet, which is only a
small part of the Internet. An action can be taken on the Web or on a
Muck and never be seen here. I believe _that_ is where you will have to
look for such proof.
By the by, I do not claim any veracity of said letter. I was merely
asked by Ed, who is a friend, to post it. Just in case some folks want
to shoot the messenger. =};-3
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <5dlgjh$d...@cobra.Minn.Net>, Electro <ele...@minn.net> wrote:
>cmelv...@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Wow. Doesn't -that- say everything? And a first-hand account as
>>well.
>
>
> Better, a firsthand account from someone with no obvious axe to
>grind.
>
>
Ed's axe to grind is for gays it seems. Just because the guys at the pet
auction sold for more then his mate, Kishna.. Sheesh..-I- could have told
him that guys would sell higher. The majority of the people with MONEY at
the con are from the Bay area. 'nuff said.
First people want us to ban PDA, then outright ban gays...What next?
Ban women? Ban costumes? Ban people with blue eyes? Get a grip people...
Noone wants to go to CensorCon...
(Saw only the letter that was personaly sent to Mark. Mark doesn't read A.F.F.
and I rarely do anymore since its not worth the effort. But I did get phone
calls about the posting of the letter...)
Richard Chandler
Not to remove any blame from Mark, since I can't really speak one way or
another, but I would also like to point to FurryMuck as another vector
steering not-really-furries toward attending CF.
Obligatory out of context overheard quote:
"This is just like FurryMuck in Real life..." (something about finding
someone to play with, but I don't quite recall the exact wording)
MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been touted as a Muck about
sex, even though we all know that more goes on there than that, I think we
all regularly run into newbies who have barely described themselves in
animal terms who are looking for an orgy. And people who if you look at
them, assume that you're sizing them up as a sexual partner.
They all get the idea that ConFurence is the place to go to meet one's
virtual lover in the flesh.
I just thought I'd point out that some unspecified portion of the blame
does not fall on the ConCom. I just have no data for what that portion
is.
--
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog... but they can tell right
off the bat if you're an idiot! -- Me
http://www.teleport.com/~mauser/ Gallery Web Page
"Yeah, I've got ADD, wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"
Arlon Osta
jinx...@sover.net.egg.sausage.and.spam (Chris Johnson) wrote:
CF8 is my 5th CF. And I do admit, that over the years, CF has kinda
gone downhill a little bit with the behavior of the attendees. But,
with any large con, there's always going to be undesireable behavior.
I don't necessairly turn my head when these activities go on. Hell,
i've been known to cuddle in the lobby myself, but that's where i
usually draw the line. I find some forms of PDA, tactless. But where
does one draw the line? Personally, I find that anything beyond
cuddling to be distasteful. Let alone, sucking face or groping one
another in the lobby. Remember that the media usually focuses on the
bad parts of society to make a more interesting story. Confurence has
gotten some bad media in the past. And has at times been touted as sex
convention, and generally a convention of wierdos. Again, mass media
has done it's job wonderfully.
Now, to continue... As I said, this is my 5th Confurence, and the
first that i actually met and spoke, however briefly, with Ed, when a
good friend of mine introduced me to him. Ed was a very nice
gentleman. Or at least in person, It seems, When all is said and done,
i get the impression that Ed is nothing more than a close minded
prude. The behavior that i saw at the con was no worse than I've seen
at any other con. The difference is that, now, we're no longer a small
con, but have progressed into a medium sized con. And as a result,
we've become more visible to all communities. As for this alleged
invite on the alternate liffestyle groups. Until i see irrefutable
proof, i tend to disbelieve the accusation. I've known Mark Merlino
for a few years now. And when I first started delurking to defend the
art auction against Terry Whittier, i spoke about this to Mark. He
told me that he doesn't even read AFF. Let alone, other newsgroups. I
have no reason to doubt his word on this.
As for the pet auction. Jazmyn said it well when she pointed out that
most of the bidders with the money were people from the bay area. Let
me elaborate by pointing out that most of the furs who come from the
bay area are fairly well to do gay males who work in the computer
industry. Myself included. Ed's denial of bitter grapes, makes his
claim all the more invalid. It does indeed sound like bitter grapes.
Ed's tart remarks about Silfur were very uncalled for. Silfur did
nothing wrong, he presented himself just like any other pet, but made
his presentation better. He genuinely entertained the bidders with his
dancing. And as such, commanded the highest bid. I didn't see anyone
else out there dancing. So what if Silfur was scantily clad during
most of the con. If I had a body like his, i'd be showing it off as
well.
As for Ed's comment on the crossdresser.... So what!!! There was much
worse at the con to pick apart than a security guard who was wearing
women's clothing and makeup. At least (s)he wasn't dressed in gaudy
drag queen clothing with a week old beard and a bad dye job. At least
it was tasteful. On a side note, drag aside, (s)he did a very good job
with hir security duties. That should be what's important.
>
> To be blunt- getting 'Come up to my room, and is your fursuit, er,
>_ven_tilated in nice places?' is what I'd have expected. I could rebuff
>that and feel I was participating in something I understood, just not to
>extremes.
You would probably have gotten both responses... Fursuites would make
for interesting sex, but just not practical... Making out with a
fursuit... Now that might be very nice. But for obvious reasons, like
dry cleaning, sooner or later, the suit's gonna have to come off.
>
> Confurence? Not even if I was invited. Nor any con with this sort of rep.
>
> Jinx_tigr
> (aka Chris Johnson)
My friend, don't judge CF on one man's opinion. Or several for that
matter. Go to con, have a good time, and make your own judgements on
whether you'll return. CF is what you make of it. If you're focused
simply on looking for the bad in the con, you'll find plenty of it.
But, if you're focused on having a good time, seeing old friend,
making new friends, and putting a face to the people you've spoken to
on the muck or elseware on the internet. You'll have a wonderful time,
and will most likely return the next year, and the next, and the next.
It's the wise (wo)man that makes their own decisions, rather than
allow others to cloud their judgement.
So sez the buck
Arlon
Brian Henderson
mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) wrote:
>MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been touted as a Muck about
>sex, even though we all know that more goes on there than that, I think we
>all regularly run into newbies who have barely described themselves in
>animal terms who are looking for an orgy. And people who if you look at
>them, assume that you're sizing them up as a sexual partner.
Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on
FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.
-Brian
Brian Henderson
ar...@netcom.com (Arlon Osta) wrote:
<snippage>
>The behavior that i saw at the con was no worse than I've seen
>at any other con.
Um... how many other cons have you been to? :) I've been on the
concom, staff and have volunteered at a *LOT* of conventions ranging
from Loscon to San Diego Comicon to Westercon, all the way through RPG
cons, etc. and none of them that I can think of would tolerate half
the nonsense that goes on at ConFurence. Those two idiots engaged in
the BSDM show in the lobby would have quickly found their badges
pulled at any of the above cons.
>The difference is that, now, we're no longer a small
>con, but have progressed into a medium sized con. And as a result,
>we've become more visible to all communities.
You're absolutely right, and with the increased visibility, our
responsibility to behave in a positive manner increases. You admit
yourself that CF is going downhill (and I've been here since the silly
thing started and you wouldn't recognize the con now from the
standpoint of CF0 and CF1).
Now you bring up another wonderful point Arlon. We're no longer a
small con and we're certainly not the big furry room party that CF0
was envisioned to be. My question is... why are we still being
TREATED like a small con by the con directors? And yes, this is a
totally separate tangent, please disregard for everyone who is just
looking for comments about Ed Kline's letter. :)
Does it seem to anyone else that ConFurence is just being run like a
giant furry party? We really haven't seen any major changes in the
command structure (at least as far as the number of directors) of the
con since... what? CF3? How many times over have we grown since
then? How impossible is it to find someone with any decision-making
ability at the con?
Don't get me wrong, I don't want CF to be a trade show like San Diego
Comicon or *gasp* a Creation con, but sheesh guys, like it or not,
ConFurence is a business, isn't it about time we pretended to run it
like one?
-Brian
Conrad Wong
In article <33023a40....@10.0.2.3X119>, Arlon Osta <ar...@netcom.com> wrote:
>CF8 is my 5th CF. And I do admit, that over the years, CF has kinda
People doing disgusting stuff in the elevators? That's something that's
never been mentioned at a prior con. Downhill, yes... Sort of like a
roller coaster. };)
>As for the pet auction. Jazmyn said it well when she pointed out that
>most of the bidders with the money were people from the bay area. Let
>me elaborate by pointing out that most of the furs who come from the
>bay area are fairly well to do gay males who work in the computer
>industry. Myself included. ...
BZZT!
I'm a Bay Area fur, I'm in the computer industry, but I'm not gay.
Moreover, I know a fair number of Bay Area furs who aren't. Am I saying
that most Bay Area furs are *not* gay? No. I don't know 100% of the Bay
Area furs. But, I suggest, you don't either.
*Labelling Bay Area furs as gay is like labelling furry fandom as gay*
Let me suggest another possibility. The Pet Auction has attracted a
largely gay clientele due to the experiences of past auctions and
ConFurences. This clientele includes a number of furries with money
from the Bay Area. That says nothing about whether the Bay Area is largely
gay or not. It does say something about the current state of the Pet
Auction and the inertia of 'popular expectations' that anyone attempting to
create their own Pet Auction faces.
I make no statement as to whether a Pet Auction that appeals more to
a gay audience is a good or bad thing. I don't go to the things. I will
note however that I would not like my own ConFurence experience marred by
having the con shut down because the con organizers are being charged with
pandering.
-- Lynx (the ky00t one)
--
| __|\ | Conrad "Lynx" Wong | Upstart feline miscreant |
| ._| _ : | 101 First Street, suite 554 | LY Go B Y++ L++ C++++ T++ A-- |
| ( ' | Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 | H+ S++ V+ F- Q+ PP+ B PA+ PL+++ |
| -' ;". |----------------------------------------------------------------|
| ; "' ; | PawPrints: http://www.best.com/~lynx/pawprints.html |
| , |Anything not nailed down is a cat toy, anything the cat can pry |
| *purrrrrr* |up with a crow bar is not nailed down, anything that IS nailed |
| |down is a scratching post. And anything edible is food -- Revar|
Mer'rark
Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
: mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) wrote:
Personally, it passed the line of good taste for me when someone
decided to create a virtual porn theater, and adjoining sex rooms,
showing themselves on the WhereAre like so many bad sores as 'T-port to
SEX'. I really wish those would be gotten rid of. They certainly are
not doing us one bit of good.
: -Brian
--
-- Mer'rark Walk like a dog, talk like a man.
Walk like a dog, like anybody can.
David G. Bell
In article <3300b7df...@news.linkline.com>
BHend...@linkline.com "Brian Henderson" writes:
> mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) wrote:
>
> >MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been touted as a Muck about
> >sex, even though we all know that more goes on there than that, I think we
> >all regularly run into newbies who have barely described themselves in
> >animal terms who are looking for an orgy. And people who if you look at
> >them, assume that you're sizing them up as a sexual partner.
>
> Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on
> FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
> often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
> West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.
I know just what you mean, and while places such as the Purple Nurple
aren't exactly family fun places, they are a hell of a lot more discreet
than the many audience participation live sex shows.
And I'm not claiming to be a saint, but I hope that my character
descriptions are a bit more subtle than some.
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <3300b886...@news.linkline.com>,
Brian Henderson <BHend...@linkline.com> wrote:
>ar...@netcom.com (Arlon Osta) wrote:
>
><snippage>
>>The behavior that i saw at the con was no worse than I've seen
>>at any other con.
>
>Um... how many other cons have you been to? :) I've been on the
>concom, staff and have volunteered at a *LOT* of conventions ranging
>from Loscon to San Diego Comicon to Westercon, all the way through RPG
>cons, etc. and none of them that I can think of would tolerate half
>the nonsense that goes on at ConFurence. Those two idiots engaged in
>the BSDM show in the lobby would have quickly found their badges
>pulled at any of the above cons.
Have you seen WonderCon's Caberet? Its a LOT wilder then CF's. How
about the Cherry Poptart 'official' party at San Diego Comicon? I can also
show you a piece of art from the San Diego Comicon art show with a male
satyr with a FULL ERECTION! San Diego Comicon is well known as the most
prudish of all cons at this time, yet I bid on the piece and won it while
it hung in full public view. I also have a piece I bought at LosCon of
a merman and a human screwing in the sand and a demon with an erection.
I bought these pieces mostly out of amusment at collecting art that got past
the art show censors, more then the content of the pieces..Though they are
rather well rendered and by popular artists. Perhaps the cons were afraid
of confronting these artists? Hmmmmmm...Hard to say..or perhaps they didn't
care or never noticed.
>
>>The difference is that, now, we're no longer a small
>>con, but have progressed into a medium sized con. And as a result,
>>we've become more visible to all communities.
>
>You're absolutely right, and with the increased visibility, our
>responsibility to behave in a positive manner increases. You admit
>yourself that CF is going downhill (and I've been here since the silly
>thing started and you wouldn't recognize the con now from the
>standpoint of CF0 and CF1).
>
>Now you bring up another wonderful point Arlon. We're no longer a
>small con and we're certainly not the big furry room party that CF0
>was envisioned to be. My question is... why are we still being
>TREATED like a small con by the con directors? And yes, this is a
>totally separate tangent, please disregard for everyone who is just
>looking for comments about Ed Kline's letter. :)
Every year Brian goes after us. Sooo....here we go again. Okay, Brian..
Just who is 'we'? You personally? For every complaint we had this year
about the con, there have been 4-5 'Great Jobs! Good Con! I'm Coming Back
Next Year!'...Those people don't count in your 'we', since they don't agree
with you. Out of the 1066 people at the con, how many are part of your 'we'?
May I remind you that while you were on staff, you only came to maybe 2
meetings and never brought up your gripes at the meeting to Rodney or
anyone else who could take them into account. Instead you chose to make your
vague attack here? To what end? Over half the directors and staff avoid
AFF as a 'vaste wasteland' or simply don't have time for it..
>
>Does it seem to anyone else that ConFurence is just being run like a
>giant furry party? We really haven't seen any major changes in the
>command structure (at least as far as the number of directors) of the
>con since... what? CF3? How many times over have we grown since
>then? How impossible is it to find someone with any decision-making
>ability at the con?
>
>Don't get me wrong, I don't want CF to be a trade show like San Diego
>Comicon or *gasp* a Creation con, but sheesh guys, like it or not,
>ConFurence is a business, isn't it about time we pretended to run it
>like one?
You missed some of the things we have been doing..Such as upgrading the
database software (to something that is more configurable and flexible),
security having more reliable radios and being quicker to respond to the
slightest hint of a problem (often beating hotel security there), registration
having its own staff and a PC with the Database onsite to doublecheck any
conflicts from pre-reg (though post reg proved imposible to update at the con
due to lack of staff and the ammount of data..Took me two weeks to sort it out
after the con....Even with PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY on each form, people still
had handwriting that looked like alien script..Must be hard to write with paws)
There are a few other things, but the spliting sinus headache I've had for
a week now prevents me from thinking straight (or bi or gay even), thus perhaps
you should ask Rodney what you missed at those staff meetings?
>
>-Brian
Urthwyse
On Tue, 11 Feb 1997, Jason J. Jensen wrote:
> post). If you and the rest of the CF clique refuse to address these
^^^^^^^^^
From what I've seen here, this is a very good term. Good choice
of wording.
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <lynxE5G...@netcom.com>, Conrad Wong <ly...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <33023a40....@10.0.2.3X119>, Arlon Osta <ar...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>CF8 is my 5th CF. And I do admit, that over the years, CF has kinda
>>gone downhill a little bit with the behavior of the attendees. ...
>
>People doing disgusting stuff in the elevators? That's something that's
>never been mentioned at a prior con. Downhill, yes... Sort of like a
>roller coaster. };)
>
>>As for the pet auction. Jazmyn said it well when she pointed out that
>>most of the bidders with the money were people from the bay area. Let
>>me elaborate by pointing out that most of the furs who come from the
>>bay area are fairly well to do gay males who work in the computer
>>industry. Myself included. ...
>
>BZZT!
>
>I'm a Bay Area fur, I'm in the computer industry, but I'm not gay.
>Moreover, I know a fair number of Bay Area furs who aren't. Am I saying
>that most Bay Area furs are *not* gay? No. I don't know 100% of the Bay
>Area furs. But, I suggest, you don't either.
>
>*Labelling Bay Area furs as gay is like labelling furry fandom as gay*
Okay..So after peering at the database, I'd say %80 are either gay or
bi...The rest are unknown... But I'm only going on the fact that I know
quite a few of them and they would even admit to it. The rest I know of
only because I hear far more about what goes on in fandom then I want to..
You don't EVEN want to get me started on San Diego Fans. :)
>
>Let me suggest another possibility. The Pet Auction has attracted a
>largely gay clientele due to the experiences of past auctions and
>ConFurences. This clientele includes a number of furries with money
>from the Bay Area. That says nothing about whether the Bay Area is largely
>gay or not. It does say something about the current state of the Pet
>Auction and the inertia of 'popular expectations' that anyone attempting to
>create their own Pet Auction faces.
>
>I make no statement as to whether a Pet Auction that appeals more to
>a gay audience is a good or bad thing. I don't go to the things. I will
I think the idea of buying people as 'pets', even if its just in fun
tends to appeal to gays and bi's more then hetrosexuals. I, as a hetrosexual,
don't realy have much interest in it, but that likely cause I don't have the
money and would feel rather embarrassed with a 'human' pet, just in fun or
otherwise. Buying a guy would tend to embarrass me since I'm already rather
attached to my mate (thus not wishing to hurt his feelings), would not know
what to do with the 'pet' (Except perhaps have them work for the art show
for an hour perhaps) and would not like to be the focus of public attention
as the 'bidder' for a 'pet'.
Most bi's and gays I know tend to be less easy to embarrass, thus perhaps
they ARE more attracted to 'pet auctions' and the like. Many hets I know
would simply be to embarrassed or afraid to bid. This is an observation,
not a slam against or praise of any particular lifestyle(s).
>note however that I would not like my own ConFurence experience marred by
>having the con shut down because the con organizers are being charged with
>pandering.
>
Since the 'con organizers' have not even been contacted by any
'athorities', I don't think there is much of a problem myself. Most of the
time we were far too busy to notice any of the things people said happened..
And if it was such a problem, why didn't anyone complain to con security
about it? They might have reacted if they thought there was a problem?
Or is it that there was no real problems, but the rumor mill on usenet
after the con? People just needing something to complain about?
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <5drejr$3...@bonkers.taronga.com>,
Peter da Silva <pe...@taronga.com> wrote:
>In article <lynxE5G...@netcom.com>, Conrad Wong <ly...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>People doing disgusting stuff in the elevators? That's something that's
>>never been mentioned at a prior con.
>
>wasn't even a furry con.
>
>The worst I heard of was a bunch of beauticians or something deciding to have
>a beach party in the hotel's hot tub... complete with sand. Scratch one tub.
>--
A bunch of punks busted up some furniture at BayCon once and were not
even con-goers.
You don't EVEN want to know what goes on at huge business conventions
such as CES or others... Makes some stories by a certain Rolling Stones
writer (can't remember the guys name for some reason) look tame.
Brian Henderson
jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:
>>Now you bring up another wonderful point Arlon. We're no longer a
>>small con and we're certainly not the big furry room party that CF0
>>was envisioned to be. My question is... why are we still being
>>TREATED like a small con by the con directors? And yes, this is a
>>totally separate tangent, please disregard for everyone who is just
>>looking for comments about Ed Kline's letter. :)
> Every year Brian goes after us. Sooo....here we go again. Okay, Brian..
>Just who is 'we'? You personally?
We. ConFurence. The convention. It should have been obvious from
the context where I said, and I quote: why are we still being TREATED
like a small con by the con directors?
> May I remind you that while you were on staff, you only came to maybe 2
>meetings and never brought up your gripes at the meeting to Rodney or
>anyone else who could take them into account.
Um, quite incorrect. I came to the post-con meeting for CF7 with a
*LARGE* list of suggestions, etc. as Rodney had requested. He took
them but has never acknowledged them. I basically decided that it
wasn't worth the effort and hence, so long as every aspect of the
convention is going to be micro-managed to death without any regard
for the opinions of the staff (and this is an annual complaint from a
*LOT* of staffers, I had better things to do with my time.
>You missed some of the things we have been doing..Such as upgrading the
>database software (to something that is more configurable and flexible),
>security having more reliable radios and being quicker to respond to the
>slightest hint of a problem (often beating hotel security there), registration
>having its own staff and a PC with the Database onsite to doublecheck any
>conflicts from pre-reg (though post reg proved imposible to update at the con
>due to lack of staff and the ammount of data..Took me two weeks to sort it out
>after the con....Even with PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY on each form, people still
>had handwriting that looked like alien script..Must be hard to write with paws)
Wonderful start. We should have had these things years ago. The only
reason we have registration working as well as it is is because
DeWayne did it on his own, with his own equipment and very much of his
own accord, mostly because he got sick of waiting and waiting and
waiting for the oft promised but never appearing John Stanley version
of the database. Security? Radios? Where? Zee complained a lot
that there weren't nearly enough radios this year and Rodney was
running around with *NO BATTERIES IN HIS RADIO*! Registration was run
off of DeWayne's cell phone, forwarded from his hotel phone! And the
complaint I heard most often from him was that he had too much money
but he couldn't get ahold of Dean to come do a pickup. Radios?
Where?
-Brian
Brian Henderson
db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk ("David G. Bell") wrote:
>I know just what you mean, and while places such as the Purple Nurple
>aren't exactly family fun places, they are a hell of a lot more discreet
>than the many audience participation live sex shows.
>And I'm not claiming to be a saint, but I hope that my character
>descriptions are a bit more subtle than some.
Oh, I wasn't listing the PN as an example of a live sex show or
something out and out obscene, just as one that oftimes has many more
people than any other place on FM. There are many worse places than
PN and they are lovingly described in their whereare descriptions.
-Brian
Brian Henderson
mer...@netcom.com (Mer'rark) wrote:
> Personally, it passed the line of good taste for me when someone
>decided to create a virtual porn theater, and adjoining sex rooms,
>showing themselves on the WhereAre like so many bad sores as 'T-port to
>SEX'. I really wish those would be gotten rid of. They certainly are
>not doing us one bit of good.
Um... Mer... you're a wizard... :)
Actually, the existence of such doesn't bother me at all. Free will
and all. However, the fact that they draw more people than the
non-sexual places seems to say something about the MUCK community in
general, and that something isn't very nice.
-Brian
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <3300AB...@post.drexel.edu>,
Jason J. Jensen <st94...@post.drexel.edu> wrote:
>Jazmyn Concolor wrote:
>
>> Ed's axe to grind is for gays it seems. Just because the guys at the pet
>> auction sold for more then his mate, Kishna.. Sheesh..-I- could have told
>> him that guys would sell higher. The majority of the people with MONEY at
>> the con are from the Bay area. 'nuff said.
>
>grind with gays, bi's, or hetero's. His main gripe was with the
>absolute lack of regard some of these "sexually expressive" individuals
>had for others at the hotel, and the implied purpose of the Pet Auction,
>which seems to have little to do with its intended purpose.
From what I know of Ed its a case of Pot + Kettle = Black
>
>What you have just expressed, Jazmyn, is a knee-jerk reaction that,
>quite frankly, everyone would expect from you. This has nothing to do
>with repression and sensorship; at least not to the point where everyone
>should be allowed to do anything they want regardless of public reaction
>or consequence.
Was anyone hurt by this (other then bruised egos)? It has a lot
to do with Censorship when a few people are DEMANDING the con ban this group
or that group or limit their activities beyound what any local laws would.
There is NO law in Buena Park against PDA between couples of any gender,
plus no laws against wearing 'sexy' clothing. (There were hookers down on
Beach Blvd who the police barely give a second glance, so why should they
be bothered by the dress or expressiveness of individuals at what ammounts
to a big private party at a hotel? (Yes, anyone can buy a membership, but
only if they A) Know about the con. or B) Are accualy interested in a 'furry'
con.) Noone was accualy in the nude in a public place (except maybe the
Caberet which follows the laws of NOT serving alcohol and doesn't allow
minors, even though the nude beachs in CA do not prohibit minors..go fig..)
No accual sex was going on in any public place or CF Security would have
asked them to clear out. The elevator at the Buena Park Hotel was kinda funky
before the con, so its hard to tell if anyone realy did anything there..
All in all, noone was hurt, including any kids (there were only a very
few, who either didn't care or were not up late enough to see anything). Our
biggest problems were the overuse of silly string around furry costumes and
some annoying mundane selling beer to minors (must have been mundane minors,
since there were only a handful of minors at the con and I don't think they
would be interested in the stuff)...Oh yeah...and someones car getting
broken into, which could happen at ANY con..Mark got his van broken into at
BayCon once and I ended up with damage to my vehicle at a gaming con a long
time ago (OrcCon)...This is just something outside the ability of the con
directors to control.
As far as that goes, the con directors should not have to tell GROWN
PEOPLE how to behave in public. If people had gone to the Con Security,
I'm sure they might have at least talked to the people who were offending
others...Even the security who happened to be in drag, which I for one cannot
see this being a problem at a SF/Fantasy Con or Furry Con where PEOPLE ARE
WALKING AROUND IN COSTUME ALL THE TIME...Who cares if the costume was a dress??
Sheesh!..People gonna start complaining about people dressed as animals next?
What about the guys dressed as FEMALE animals? We have had THOSE for years.
Noone complained about them? Except maybe one guy who got embarrassed after
hitting on one of these for a date. :)
>
>What this has to do with is the direction of the convention and the
>growing concern of lax security (the latter concern which has marked you
>as a major problem, and which you conveniently didn't mention in this
Me? Personaly? I just keep the art show from collapsing under its own weight
and keep the database updated (even if people who sell memberships sometimes
fail to remember I have to get the info to)
Any lax security problems should be directed to the Security director of the
con, since Mark or Rodney had their hands full and didn't personaly handle
security for obvious reasons. They were JUST TOO BUSY trying to keep the con
going...Other directors were just as busy in their own areas. I ended up stuck
in the art show again due to understaffing, when I was supposed to be helping
take some presure off of Mark..Ohhh..well..Such are the plans of mice and men,
I guess...
>post). If you and the rest of the CF clique refuse to address these
>matters and simply choose to gloss them over with the tired "This is
>more repression" excuse, then perhaps CF *has* passed its time as *the*
>furry con to go to.
Clique? Just because we all live in the same state or what? We already
found that when the directors and staff leads are spread all over the
country and can't make it to the monthly planning meetings, things just DON'T
get done. Here I thought we were being more efficiant? I can address the
'matters' but I can do little about them...Its not something -I- can do
anything about, cept perhaps -=ask=- that people tone it down.. Mark asked
that after last year and it only seems to make some people act up more,
just because they were asked not to do something. Human nature perhaps..
Problem is, though YOU might not view us doing anything as Censorship, there
are others who would. You obviously don't know furry fen...
Banning certain groups or dress or harmless public displays would make CF
a target for abuse by those people who don't feel they are doing anything
wrong....and where does it end? Banning people from wearing skimpy or
sexy clothing? Then banning cross-dressing (which would have to include males
dressed as female animal characters)? Then banning all forms of PDA? Then
banning adictive card games in the gaming room?
As long as people are not breaking the law, then what IS the problem? If they
are breaking the law, then they will get NO HELP from the CF staff or Directors
if they are arrested and CF cannot be held accountable for the actions of
ADULTS attending the con, since CF is not responsible for the actions of its
members...
>
>Let's get a grip and address the problem, eh?
First prove there is realy a problem..Other then a few prudes who can't
cope with a few members of the con who are 'different'..
We received NO complaints from hotel staff or mundane visitors who happened
to be staying at the hotel. No complaints were forwarded to us by the hotel
about the actions of ANY of our members. The hotel is VERY happy with us and
wants us back next year. The Atrium had a number of complaints about the
horseplay in the lobby and broken furnishings..I know the people who did it
and they were not running around in skimpy clothing, wearing leashes and collars
or doing any PDA sorts of things...They were however DESTROYING PRIVATE
PROPERTY...
So which would you rather have..a little harmless PDA or people destroying
the lobby with 'macho' behavior, which noone seemed to be bothered by, except
the hotel and us (since we were presented with the bills)...
If PDA was the only problem this year (if you can call it a problem), then
I think we were doing quite well...At least we didn't get any bills for hotel
dammages this time...
So whats the problem anyway?
>
>--Jay
Dr. Cat
Steve Gattuso (Pdoo...@primenet.com) wrote:
: cmelv...@aol.com wrote:
: > That's a good point. -If- it were done, it might not have been
: > Mark.
: > Ed seems pretty sure it was; has he said to anyone, publicly or
: > privately, if he'd actually read the post, or if he was going by
: > second-hand information?
: >
: > Does anybody else remember seeing such a post?
: I think you're making an assumption. This is Usenet, which is only a
: small part of the Internet. An action can be taken on the Web or on a
: Muck and never be seen here. I believe _that_ is where you will have to
: look for such proof.
I dug around with Dejanews and found the one earlier mention of someone
saying they knew of such a post. I said earlier I thought it was Gen Cook
that had posted it, I was remembering wrong. My apologies for that.
The post was by Monika Livingstone, so maybe somebody that knows her
could ask if she remembers more details that could be used to track this
down. Here's an excerpt:
>Subject: Re: Confurence 8 observations
>From: sibe...@cruzio.com (Monika Livingstone)
>Date: 1997/02/03
>Message-Id: <siberkat-030...@trip20.cruzio.com>
>
> When Confurence is promoted on the alt.lifestyles.gay newsgroup at a
>gay/bi conference then it does make it difficult for the others attending
>that are not gay to explain themselves. I am not saying I hate gay's or
>think they should dissappear, but I would like to feel like it's ok to be
>a straight female there.There are some women there,now, that are straight
>but I have found many to be bi.
If she didn't actually see the post in question, but heard about it from
someone else, maybe she could tell some would-be investigator who it was
so that they could be asked where they saw it. It would be nice to track
this down and find out exactly what was posted and where.
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: Sherlock Holmes was not known to be a furry fan. However
there was a cool anime series done portraying him as a furry. Wasn't it
directed by Miyazaki?)
Dr. Cat
Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
: My question is... why are we still being TREATED like a small con by
: the con directors?
[snip]
: Does it seem to anyone else that ConFurence is just being run like a
: giant furry party? We really haven't seen any major changes in the
: command structure (at least as far as the number of directors) of the
: con since... what? CF3? How many times over have we grown since
: then? How impossible is it to find someone with any decision-making
: ability at the con?
Well, I think "run like a giant furry party" may be a pretty accurate
characterization. And it's certainly not a style of management that
suits itself to a con with over a thousand attendees the way it might
have worked for the early Confurences. (I wasn't at the early ones.)
Still, even if there's an approach that's clearly better, like bringing
in more directors or something... I haveta say if the people running it are
determined to stick with their old approach no matter how many problems
it causes, there's probably not anything that anyone can do about it.
They do seem to have shown over the years that they're pretty determined
to keep running the con the way they want to run it, no matter what other
people might have to say about that.
Just like any other skill in life, running a medium sized (or larger) con
is something that only a few people know how to do really well. If
there's some people out there doing one that aren't as good at running
cons, I think it makes more sense to look for new cons if what you want
out of the fandom is a really first rate, professionally run con. Don't
expect a leopard to change its spots, or turn into an ostrich.
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: You probably shouldn't expect an ostrich to change into a
leopard, either. Even if it has bananas in its ears.)
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <33016ffd...@news.linkline.com>,
Brian Henderson <BHend...@linkline.com> wrote:
>jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:
>
>>>Now you bring up another wonderful point Arlon. We're no longer a
>>>small con and we're certainly not the big furry room party that CF0
>>>was envisioned to be. My question is... why are we still being
>>>TREATED like a small con by the con directors? And yes, this is a
>>>totally separate tangent, please disregard for everyone who is just
>>>looking for comments about Ed Kline's letter. :)
>
>> Every year Brian goes after us. Sooo....here we go again. Okay, Brian..
>>Just who is 'we'? You personally?
>
>We. ConFurence. The convention. It should have been obvious from
>like a small con by the con directors?
The con is not being treated as a small con..Small cons don't have near
this much programing or require a hotel this big. Oft the problems lay in the
lack of staff..And RELIABLE staff, having half a brain and a clue or staff
who has the time to dedicate is even harder to find. The smart people who
we would like to see helping out are smart enough to avoid volunteering.
But this is par for the course with most SF cons. You end up with either people
who burned out on con activities and would rather be on staff, newbies who have
no idea what they are getting into and a few people determined to help make
the convention better or at least keep it from getting worse..and a few people
who feel obligated to help keep things going smoothly....Overall, there are
rarely enough people to cover every area at every time they are needed. Some
of us worked the WHOLE con with little or no breaks to make up for the lack.
The directors are certainly aware of the size of the con, but without
enough staff, it tends to look like its run like a small con. Whats needed
are dedicated staff who not only know what they are doing, but have the ability
to train new people DURING the con, since many volunteers cannot make the
meetings due to being from too far away. I have suggested a Staff Mailing List,
but not everyone is on the net either.. Makes things a bit tough.
>
>> May I remind you that while you were on staff, you only came to maybe 2
>>meetings and never brought up your gripes at the meeting to Rodney or
>>anyone else who could take them into account.
>
>Um, quite incorrect. I came to the post-con meeting for CF7 with a
>*LARGE* list of suggestions, etc. as Rodney had requested. He took
>them but has never acknowledged them. I basically decided that it
>wasn't worth the effort and hence, so long as every aspect of the
>convention is going to be micro-managed to death without any regard
>for the opinions of the staff (and this is an annual complaint from a
>*LOT* of staffers, I had better things to do with my time.
So you didn't get your way and gave up? What good are staff who give
up and 'have better things to do'? CF needs DEDICATED STAFF who are willing
to come to at least most of the meetings or be updated on what happened at them,
rather then someone who comes to ONE post con meeting with a gripe list and
is never heard from again.
Maybe if you stuck around and showed some comitment to the con, people
might have started listening to you more..The people who were getting the
most attention were those who WORKED for it and not those who showed up once
to complain and were never seen again.
>
>>You missed some of the things we have been doing..Such as upgrading the
>>database software (to something that is more configurable and flexible),
>>security having more reliable radios and being quicker to respond to the
>>slightest hint of a problem (often beating hotel security there), registration
>>having its own staff and a PC with the Database onsite to doublecheck any
>>conflicts from pre-reg (though post reg proved imposible to update at the con
>>due to lack of staff and the ammount of data..Took me two weeks to sort it out
>>after the con....Even with PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY on each form, people still
>>had handwriting that looked like alien script..Must be hard to write with paws)
>
>Wonderful start. We should have had these things years ago. The only
>reason we have registration working as well as it is is because
>DeWayne did it on his own, with his own equipment and very much of his
Not all his equipment...Dean's PC, my copy of the Database updated
up to Thursday and handed over to Dean. Several calls on the radio or
gopher carried to me about questions on members and a couple notes sent
back down to reg on a couple people who were not in the database due to
their applications being too vague to enter and people not noticing the
postit note I left in the pre reg lists I printed out the night before.
DeWayne did have his cell phone, but the updated reg info came from Dean
and I...and a cool little program called 'My Mail Manager' which is a mailing
list program I'd recommend to anyone who has to keep track of more then 1000
people...over 1900 in our case, including everyone back to CF0
>own accord, mostly because he got sick of waiting and waiting and
>waiting for the oft promised but never appearing John Stanley version
We were promised a database from no less then 4 people...I got fed up
and bought the one we have now from Staples..It turned out to work so
well, the lack of the other promised DBs no longer mattered. MMM is
user configurable and so simple a chimp could use it.
>of the database. Security? Radios? Where? Zee complained a lot
>that there weren't nearly enough radios this year and Rodney was
>running around with *NO BATTERIES IN HIS RADIO*! Registration was run
Last year my radio didn't work due to the person who was in charge of
charging radios forgetting to charge non-security radios. Most of the time
though I had no trouble getting ahold of people on the radio this year. I
would have rather had my cell phone at times, but Mark was using it because
his wasn't programed yet due to having no time to get it done. My pager
didn't work either because my pager company went bankrupt and vanished.
People were using alternatives to the radios where they could. But the
radios were working a lot better this year then last year..And its a lot
better then the time when we didn't have radios at all. Its a good thing
we have people who donate the use of these radios during the con as they are
horribly expensive and prone to being dammaged. Some SF cons our size are
struggling along with radio shack walkie talkies or worse..
>off of DeWayne's cell phone, forwarded from his hotel phone! And the
>complaint I heard most often from him was that he had too much money
>but he couldn't get ahold of Dean to come do a pickup. Radios?
Gophers are supposed to make up for the shortages by running messages.
Someone could have been sent to find Dean or someone who could reach Dean.
Dean also had a cell phone and DeWayne could have called him. Concidering
I was stuck in the art show, someone could have came up and took my place
for a bit while I did a pickup, since I am authorized to do them if noone
else can be reached (since I knew where the money went and had the keys to
put it there). My radio worked however for most of the con (except a period
where the charger got misplaced) and I was never hard to find (being chained
to the art show most of the time and never far away for long).. Mark was
hard to find since he was off-site driving equipment back and forth, getting
supplies, etc., but was reachable via pager and cell phone. Rodney was on the
radio a lot from what I could hear, which perhaps is why his batteries ran
down so fast...Perhaps next year staff people can be handed a list of
alternatives to the radio, such as places where certain people might most likely
be found, cell phone numbers, pager numbers, room numbers, etc. and not always
be dependant only on the radios..As for getting more radios, they are on loan,
except for two of them which are Mark's (for work, not CF, but used at CF
anyways) and are expensive and not given out to just anyone on staff. Only
certain staff people and directors get them due to not wanting to hand them
out to people we don't know. CF would have to pay for dammage or loss of
any of them, so we have to be careful.
>Where?
Where? In the hands of directors, security leads and one for the art show,
which was used by whomever was working the art show at any given time, being
mostly passed between Vicky, Sherri and me. It oft became the one place people
KNEW they could find someone with a radio to call the others who were more
mobile then us. I tended to take it with me a couple times, but mostly because
I was using it to track down someone else and people in the art show were told
where I was going before I left in case I was needed. I make an effort to be
'findable'..Mostly when I know other directors may not be findable. I can not
be real sure of just where each radio and its caretaker was at any time though,
since that wasn't my dept. I think Dean and Zee handled most of it.
>
>-Brian
guitar
jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) writes:
I would just like to state, I have attended the CES more than once.
What people are complaining about at ConFurence would be considered part
of a display at a CES. Naked porn stars, naked models, people doing their
best to be enticing and erotic no matter who or what was passing by. And
this is something that is considered normal. The shows get very favorable
write-ups in such places as The Wall Street Journal, Time, Newsweek. What
goes on off-scene at a CES would squick many people on FurryMUCK. Been
there, done that. :)
guitar
David G. Bell
In article <5drejr$3...@bonkers.taronga.com>
pe...@taronga.com "Peter da Silva" writes:
> In article <lynxE5G...@netcom.com>, Conrad Wong <ly...@netcom.com> wrote:
> >People doing disgusting stuff in the elevators? That's something that's
> >never been mentioned at a prior con.
>
> They pretty much destroyed an elevator at one con I went to. And that
> wasn't even a furry con.
>
> The worst I heard of was a bunch of beauticians or something deciding to have
> a beach party in the hotel's hot tub... complete with sand. Scratch one tub.
The worst I ever heard of were accountants.
The Colliery Overmen, Deputies, and Shot Firers may have _looked_ a
rough bunch when they arrived, but if they were irresponsible types they
wouldn't have got the jobs they had.
qu...@wcinet.net
In article <jazmynE5...@netcom.com>,
jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:
>
> In article <lynxE5G...@netcom.com>, Conrad Wong <ly...@netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> >>As for the pet auction. Jazmyn said it well when she pointed out that
> >>most of the bidders with the money were people from the bay area. Let
> >>me elaborate by pointing out that most of the furs who come from the
> >>bay area are fairly well to do gay males who work in the computer
> >>industry. Myself included. ...
> >
> >BZZT!
> >
> >I'm a Bay Area fur, I'm in the computer industry, but I'm not gay.
> >Moreover, I know a fair number of Bay Area furs who aren't. Am I saying
> >that most Bay Area furs are *not* gay? No. I don't know 100% of the Bay
> >Area furs. But, I suggest, you don't either.
> >
> >*Labelling Bay Area furs as gay is like labelling furry fandom as gay*
>
> Okay..So after peering at the database, I'd say %80 are either gay or
> bi...The rest are unknown... But I'm only going on the fact that I know
> quite a few of them and they would even admit to it. The rest I know of
> only because I hear far more about what goes on in fandom then I want to..
> You don't EVEN want to get me started on San Diego Fans. :)
>
Most S.F. Bay Area furry fans, like most S.F. Bay Area residents,
_aren't_ gay, bi, or of any other alternative lifestyle. I don't know
where the hell you got an "80%" figure for percentage of SFBA furs being
gay, since I think it's probably reverse that (20% being GBL/alt.) or
less, just more _noticable_ (like a sore thumb)... I get sick and tired
of Northern Californians, _especially_ those in the Bay Area, of being
automaticly being considered gay/bi/whatever _just_because_ they happen
to be from the San Francisco Bay Area, surrounding areas, or points
further north. A resounding majority _aren't_. Being someone who _does_
live an alternate lifestyle, I'm an exception, not the rule, even here in
the upper half of the State of California. (And please, don't even
consider me as part of the Bay Atrea contigent-- Eureka, where I'm from,
is some 300 miles north of San Francisco, where we up here usually refer
to the SFBA as being in "Central" California...)
>
....Quozl!
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Fhaolan
BHend...@linkline.com (Brian Henderson) wrote:
>mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) wrote:
>>MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been touted as a Muck about
>>sex, even though we all know that more goes on there than that, I think we
>>all regularly run into newbies who have barely described themselves in
>>animal terms who are looking for an orgy. And people who if you look at
>>them, assume that you're sizing them up as a sexual partner.
>Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on
>FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
>often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
>West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.
Just for a moment, Fhaolan jumps in, "Aye, tha's true. Bu' for tha'
last few months tha most popular place on FurryMuck has been
'HoneyBadger's Burrow.' Consistantly beatin' WCoP every nigh'. The
Burrow is jus' the livin' room o' one o' tha' nicest furs in
existance, HoneyBadger. Many o' tha people who hang out there, are
there tae *escape* from all tha' sex-sites on tha' Muck. The Burrow is
pretty much a G tae PG area. It's gettin' *so* popular, tha'
HoneyBadger has added a guest room just for disconnected furs tae
sleep in, in order tae reduce the spam from tha room contents list
when walkin' intae tha' Burrow. As it is gettin' more an' more popular
all tha' time, I think this migh' be a good sign tha' furs who
*aren't* interested in R tae XXX are still attracted tae FurryMuck."
The wolf grins, "Now, I'm nae arguin' with anyfur. FurryMuck does have
an' inordinant number o' XXX places, I'm jus' sayin' tha' nae
*everyfur* who is on tha' Muck is interested in them."
-
Fhaolan the Celtic Wolfie
ark...@istar.ca
http://rat.org/pub/furry/kempal/index.htm
"An nae! I dinn'a have tae eat Dr. Ballards tae have a nice shiny coat!" - Fhaolan
FurryCode: FCW3admrswA++CD+H++M+PR+T+++W-ZSm+ RLCTacw++d+e++f+h*i+psm-
Elisabeth B. Shaw
>>The worst I heard of was a bunch of beauticians or something deciding to have
>>a beach party in the hotel's hot tub... complete with sand. Scratch one tub.
>
> A bunch of punks busted up some furniture at BayCon once and were not
>even con-goers.
>
> You don't EVEN want to know what goes on at huge business conventions
>such as CES or others... Makes some stories by a certain Rolling Stones
>writer (can't remember the guys name for some reason) look tame.
>
>
fraternity convention going on at the same time and hotel as Coastcon, and
there was some major damage going on. The frat blamed it on Coastcon, until
I'd heard from my sister's then father-in-law, who was chief of security for
the hotel, that we were actually a well-behaved crowd. (his words.)
I know a little about what goes on at major business conventions. Try
organising a riverboat cruise for 5000 people.
Aki. :3
(who did exactly that for the 1988 Worldcon.)
Gary Burke
In article <3300b7df...@news.linkline.com>, Brian Henderson
<BHend...@linkline.com> wrote: >mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard
Chandler) wrote: > >>MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been
touted as a Muck about >>sex, even though we all know that more goes on
there than that, I think we >>all regularly run into newbies who have
barely described themselves in >>animal terms who are looking for an orgy.
And people who if you look at >>them, assume that you're sizing them up as
a sexual partner. > >Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the
whereare listings on >FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are
directly sex-related and >often, places like the Purple Nurple have more
people in them than the >West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.
Sorry about this, for some reason my linefeeds got screwed up. Anyways, I
could be totally wrong here. I'm not sure what char. you play on
furrymuck or whether you have been to the PN very much, but this is the
second time you have slagged my club. Rigel and I put a lot of work into
making the PN one of the most popular sites on furrymuck, and it is NOT
and was never intended to be directly sex-related. YES, there are TS
rooms in the basement (@agelocked). But the main room has a definite
policy regarding sexual activity that is by and large respected.. if its
NOT respected, Rigel or I are usually on hand to quiet things down. The
PN was built by Slinky back in 1994 as a gay/lebian/bi/straight gathering
spot and support centre, where people could go and be themselves without
politics and worrying about whether they were saying the right thing or
not. The T/D pools were too spammy and organized around playing T/D
(only logical). We just wanted someplace to TALK and make friends. And by
and large that worked. It's now a popular spot for LOTS of furries, many
of whom NEVER ts, but just like the atmosphere. Lots of snuggling, little
to zero actual snogging.
I'm seeing a definite trend here towards scapegoating gays for all the
evils of the fandom. It's always preceded with "I don't care if someone is
gay BUT...." It happens in RL and it happens here and it happens at cons
and it happens on furrymuck. Frankly if 'mainstream' gays found out about
Confurence and decided to attend for 'the parties and sex' they would stay
about 5 minutes before running out the door, not because we are freaks,
but because we are BORING!! Go to a circuit party in new york or west
hollywood or south beach miami.. or a bondage club in the Castro, or a
warehouse afterhours party in Toronto. You will see stuff there that will
curl your hair. Not just naked male dancers, but plenty of alcohol, heavy
drug use and practically-open sex. If you folks think Confurence is some
kind of Sodom and Gomorrah, man, you ain't seen NOTHING. Furries on the
whole don't drink, don't do drugs, barely even smoke, don't get in
fistfights and trash hotel rooms, and tend not to have vicious screaming
catfights in the parking lot at 4am. Am I saying we should DO these
things? Of course not. It's why I'm in furry fandom instead of going to
circuit parties once a month. But let's just have a little PERSPECTIVE.
When I run stuff like the Purple Nurple online and at CF, it is not to
provide a place for people to cruise for sex. Of course that happens.
People would cruise for sex in CHURCH if there was no other option. What
I am TRYING to do is provide a little fun. A little bit of the COOL parts
of the 'gay' community to people who might not get to experience it too
often but would like to. And keeping out the crappy parts that aren't much
fun. Everyone is welcome at the PN, except homophobes. People clumsily
cruising for sex are often ridiculed (usually in such a way that they
can't tell) and people who do meet each other and form happy relationships
as a result, are the reason I do this in the first place.
>
>-Brian
Lynn Davis
:>Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on
:>FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
:>often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
:>West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.
: Sorry about this, for some reason my linefeeds got screwed up.
I fixed them up a bit when I snipped.
: Anyways, I
: could be totally wrong here. I'm not sure what char. you play on
: furrymuck or whether you have been to the PN very much, but this is the
: second time you have slagged my club. Rigel and I put a lot of work into
: making the PN one of the most popular sites on furrymuck, and it is NOT
: and was never intended to be directly sex-related.
I've seen far far more sex-related activity in the West Corner of the
Park then in the Purple Nurple. Granted, I've only been on FM for about
a week or so, but even when PN looks busy on a whereare it's pretty
quiet in there. Maybe it's the time's I'm there, but I'd think evenings
would be when business picked up.
: YES, there are TS
: rooms in the basement (@agelocked). But the main room has a definite
: policy regarding sexual activity that is by and large respected.. if its
: NOT respected, Rigel or I are usually on hand to quiet things down. The
: PN was built by Slinky back in 1994 as a gay/lebian/bi/straight gathering
: spot and support centre, where people could go and be themselves without
: politics and worrying about whether they were saying the right thing or
: not. The T/D pools were too spammy and organized around playing T/D
: (only logical). We just wanted someplace to TALK and make friends. And by
: and large that worked. It's now a popular spot for LOTS of furries, many
: of whom NEVER ts, but just like the atmosphere. Lots of snuggling, little
: to zero actual snogging.
That's why I stop by. It's a friendly place. One of the places where
furs actually say 'hi' to the fur that just came in.
--
Tephra
Daughter of Teras
Owner/Proprietor of The Alternative Dragon
DC.D(?) f+ s+ h-- Cw(?) a $ d+++ WL++* Fr(^) l(Bax) Bmag
Stormwind
guitar <fu...@iglou.com> wrote:
>jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) writes:
>> You don't EVEN want to know what goes on at huge business conventions
>>such as CES or others... Makes some stories by a certain Rolling Stones
>>writer (can't remember the guys name for some reason) look tame.
>
>What people are complaining about at ConFurence would be considered part
>of a display at a CES. Naked porn stars, naked models, people doing their
>best to be enticing and erotic no matter who or what was passing by.
it should at this point be noted that
CES had distinctly seperate areas that
were held in *different buildings*.
one building housed the gamer oriented
booths; yes, there were a few 'booth babes',
but nothing that was extreme. mostly
miniskirts. then there was the consumer
electronics building, which housed everything
from pagers to home sound systems. and
*then* there was the adult market, which
had a whole hotel just for itself.
at NO POINT did any of the porn stars
or naked models wander into any other
area of CES other than their own hotel.
keep in mind i've worked several CES
shows by now, and while i've heard about
the adult section, i've *never* seen
anyone from that area present unclothed
in any other area of the show.
after hours i'm really not so sure about.
when you're working the booth you're
generally too exhausted after the shows
to do much besides get something to eat
and then collapse, preferably outside
where you can try to recover from the
nasty allergic reaction to the hotel's
cleaning solutions that all of us working
the booth developed.
--
stormwind
hell's amazon
lord of the frozen realm
Brian Henderson
c...@bga.com (Dr. Cat) wrote:
>Well, I think "run like a giant furry party" may be a pretty accurate
>characterization. And it's certainly not a style of management that
>suits itself to a con with over a thousand attendees the way it might
>have worked for the early Confurences. (I wasn't at the early ones.)
Running it like a furry party, especially with only a few attendees,
results in a wonderfully friendly convention. I still think CF0 was
one of the most intimate, friendly gatherings of any kind I have ever
been to. This approach works when you only have 100 people to worry
about, it fails miserably when you're talking about 1200 people or
more.
>Still, even if there's an approach that's clearly better, like bringing
>in more directors or something... I haveta say if the people running it are
>determined to stick with their old approach no matter how many problems
>it causes, there's probably not anything that anyone can do about it.
>They do seem to have shown over the years that they're pretty determined
>to keep running the con the way they want to run it, no matter what other
>people might have to say about that.
Then perhaps ConFurence's time is past. I honestly think that one of
the reasons that ConFurence has started to fall apart is because
everyone knows that only Mark and Rodney can make any decisions and
half the time, neither of them can be found. Therefore, why not run
wild? No one can do anything to you.
If you want my opinion, it isn't more DIRECTORS who need to be added,
but the directors need to pick out a few people who have proven
abilities, hopefully in RL applications (ie. people who manage people
and businesses in RL), give them a position and LEAVE THEM ALONE!
Ideally, the directors shouldn't have any direct responsibilities at
the con, they are there to keep the cohesive whole running. Right
now, Mark and Rodney have so many things to do that they cannot
conceivably do them all and it results in very little actually getting
done.
I don't think anyone is suggesting throwing Mark and Rodney out of
their jobs, just having other people come in, take over some of their
responsibilities and maybe, just maybe, give them a chance to enjoy
the convention as well. I really think that if there were more people
with real responsibility over the convention, the bad behavior issue
would pretty much clear itself up.
-Brian
Brian Henderson
jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:
> The con is not being treated as a small con..Small cons don't have near
>this much programing or require a hotel this big.
You're right, a small con doesn't require these things, because
ConFurence isn't a small con. But that doesn't mean that ConFurence
is being run like a mid-sized convention either. It's basically being
run by 2-3 people with a lot of helpers.
>Oft the problems lay in the
>lack of staff..And RELIABLE staff, having half a brain and a clue or staff
>who has the time to dedicate is even harder to find. The smart people who
>we would like to see helping out are smart enough to avoid volunteering.
Ah, but now we're talking bodies, not staffers. In all of the
conventions that I have worked, helped organize, volunteered at, etc.
there have never been enough volunteers, that's just a fact of life.
But these are people who would normally be stuck in the video room to
watch it or who would be assigned to unload boxes or something like
that. These people have no responsibilities. I'm talking about
people who are responsible for a particular section of the convention.
Where is the individual responsible for the art show? Where is the
individual responsible for the dealer's room? Where is the individual
responsible for planning and maintaining the lounges? Where is the
guest liason? I'm sure there are people who would be willing to take
these positions and run them well if they wouldn't be micro-managed to
death.
> The directors are certainly aware of the size of the con, but without
>enough staff, it tends to look like its run like a small con. Whats needed
>are dedicated staff who not only know what they are doing, but have the ability
>to train new people DURING the con, since many volunteers cannot make the
>meetings due to being from too far away. I have suggested a Staff Mailing List,
>but not everyone is on the net either.. Makes things a bit tough.
Yes, it does. It also doesn't help that there isn't a specific list
of responsibilities for volunteers in particular areas. I know this
was suggested a number of years ago, but has anyone considered writing
up one-sheet lists of responsibilities for each of the positions? The
strongest point of having one person responsible for each area is that
it makes training someone on the spot pretty simple.
> So you didn't get your way and gave up? What good are staff who give
>up and 'have better things to do'? CF needs DEDICATED STAFF who are willing
>to come to at least most of the meetings or be updated on what happened at them,
>rather then someone who comes to ONE post con meeting with a gripe list and
>is never heard from again.
My way? No, I really don't care about that. Rodney asked that
everyone bring lists of complaints, suggestions, etc. We did. Then
he didn't want to hear any of it. Hate to say it, but everyone in the
world isn't free on Saturday nights. I told Rodney that early on.
> Gophers are supposed to make up for the shortages by running messages.
>Someone could have been sent to find Dean or someone who could reach Dean.
>Dean also had a cell phone and DeWayne could have called him.
Oh, DeWayne *DID* call Dean. I heard DeWayne complaining to Rodney
about how long it was taking Dean to appear with the money envelopes.
Now granted, Dean had a lot to do, but really... where was the radio
base station for registration? If anyone in the con should have one,
shouldn't it be the one with all the money?
>Concidering
>I was stuck in the art show, someone could have came up and took my place
>for a bit while I did a pickup, since I am authorized to do them if noone
>else can be reached (since I knew where the money went and had the keys to
>put it there). My radio worked however for most of the con (except a period
>where the charger got misplaced) and I was never hard to find (being chained
>to the art show most of the time and never far away for long)..
Hey Jazmyn, I'm not blaming you. You were stuck in the art show all
weekend and didn't get to see a lot of what was going on downstairs.
>.As for getting more radios, they are on loan,
>except for two of them which are Mark's (for work, not CF, but used at CF
>anyways) and are expensive and not given out to just anyone on staff.
Considering the hotel space this year was free, I think we can afford
to spring for a few radios, or better yet, purchase our own. It
certainly doesn't cost $12,000 for radios, which is the figure Mark
gave for the hotel cost for CF7, money we didn't have to put out this
year at all.
-Brian
Brian Henderson
gbu...@interlog.com (Gary Burke) wrote:
>Sorry about this, for some reason my linefeeds got screwed up. Anyways, I
>could be totally wrong here. I'm not sure what char. you play on
>furrymuck or whether you have been to the PN very much, but this is the
>second time you have slagged my club.
I went back in a second message and corrected myself, noting that PN
was only a place that routinely got more characters in a whereare
listing than WCOP. It isn't an expressly sex-related site (although,
as you note, there are TS rooms available). It is, however, an
alternate lifestyle area.
-Brian
Steve Gattuso
Brian Henderson wrote:
> If you want my opinion, it isn't more DIRECTORS who need to be added,
> but the directors need to pick out a few people who have proven
> abilities, hopefully in RL applications (ie. people who manage people
> and businesses in RL), give them a position and LEAVE THEM ALONE!
> Ideally, the directors shouldn't have any direct responsibilities at
> the con, they are there to keep the cohesive whole running. Right
> now, Mark and Rodney have so many things to do that they cannot
> conceivably do them all and it results in very little actually getting
> done.
The events of the past two years have finally sunk in to them the need
for deliniating the responsibilities of the con to other persons. Jobs
ranging from control of sections of the con to things as simple as
somebody else learning from Mark how to set up that damned pole have
started to be set out. For example: Kurt Miller is in charge of Gaming
at the con. Anyone have any complaints other than the room should have
been bigger? Not that I've heard. Dewayne Stuart and Karl Maurer have
done a splendid job running registration. [_You_ try doing 1000+
memberships in one night and see if you don't crack up.] That is what
we had last time.
> I don't think anyone is suggesting throwing Mark and Rodney out of
> their jobs, just having other people come in, take over some of their
> responsibilities and maybe, just maybe, give them a chance to enjoy
> the convention as well. I really think that if there were more people
> with real responsibility over the convention, the bad behavior issue
> would pretty much clear itself up.
More is being done. Next year, the control of the Dealer's Den,
Publisher's Row and Artist's Alley are being transferred to another
person, which will lessen Rod's load. Namely, me. And I've already
decided to make a few changes, such as enforcing a brown-wrapper rule in
the Artist's Alley. In addition, registration for dealers will take
place in the most logical spot, the Den itself. Other changes will be
made as needed.
P.S.: The microphone [also known to those in the Den as 'The experiment
in terror'] will not be connected. You may cheer. =};-3
Jason J. Jensen
Jazmyn Concolor wrote:
> From what I know of Ed its a case of Pot + Kettle = Black
It doesn't make his point any less valid, Jazmyn.
> Was anyone hurt by this (other then bruised egos)? It has a lot
> to do with Censorship when a few people are DEMANDING the con ban this group
> or that group or limit their activities beyound what any local laws would.
Nobody was demanding that anyone ban any group, Jazmyn. A problem was
identified with certain people who have no regard for others who think
differently, and another problem was identified with the convention
becoming something which it was not originally intended to be. There
was nobody physically hurt, no. However, the reputation of furry
fandom, the convention, and everyone involved with the convention was
indeed hurt. I would imagine that the hookers on Beach Blvd. you
mentioned weren't all that interested in attending CF.
> As far as that goes, the con directors should not have to tell GROWN
> PEOPLE how to behave in public.
I would have to disagree there. On the contrary, many people who are
grown need frequent reminders on just how their actions are percieved by
the rest of society. Your security is supposed to be proactive enough
that it can handle such things without con members having to go
searching for them. And perhaps you find it easy, but I particularly
find it hard to take any member of security seriously if he's dressed in
drag.
> Me? Personaly? I just keep the art show from collapsing under its own weight
> and keep the database updated (even if people who sell memberships sometimes
> fail to remember I have to get the info to)
Yes, we all know you're entirely too overworked to the point where you
cannot claim responsibility for anything that goes wrong with the
artshow. Ever since I started going to CF, I believe I've heard you use
this excuse when anyone brought up problems with the artshow. One would
think by now that you'd bring in enough help that you could alleviate
that problem.
I should mention here that I used the term "clique" because there seem
to be a select few who maintain positions of influence despite their
actual qualifications, and seem to hold onto those positions with
jealous abandon despite the fact that delegation would smooth operations
and make their lives easier. The fact that holding on to that authority
makes them overworked enough to deny responsibility for that which
they've neglected seems to outweigh the benefits of delegating
authority.
> First prove there is realy a problem..Other then a few prudes who can't
> cope with a few members of the con who are 'different'..
If that were the problem, I think Ed would've never attended past the
first CF.
No, the problem, Jazmyn, as stated before and many times since, is; (1)
The assertion that upper management of CF is actively recruiting
alternate lifestylists who have no interest in furry fandom, and are
simply coming for a weekend of sexual deviance, (2) The convention is
doing very little to keep displays that mainstream society would
consider lewd from public view within its area of responsibility, and
(3) Security itself is becoming lax.
The only answers to these problems which you've offered is that you are
all too overworked to deal with it, and no mundane ever brought it to
your attention (which doesn't mean that people were disturbed by the
actions -- just that they never brought it to your attention). Other
than that, you've tried to redefine the problem to that of people
wanting to ban other groups, which has nothing to do with anything here.
I would also note that I've been an active supporter of CF since #3.
I've been a dealer, a super sponsor, and have contributed to the art
shows. I believe that gives me some qualification as knowing furry fen,
and I'd hope those qualifications would have you take my arguments in a
more serious light.
Thus far, you've given me no reason to return for CF9.
--Jay
Mer'rark
Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
: mer...@netcom.com (Mer'rark) wrote:
: > Personally, it passed the line of good taste for me when someone
: >decided to create a virtual porn theater, and adjoining sex rooms,
: >showing themselves on the WhereAre like so many bad sores as 'T-port to
: >SEX'. I really wish those would be gotten rid of. They certainly are
: >not doing us one bit of good.
: Um... Mer... you're a wizard... :)
Er, not on FurryMUCK I'm not. Perhaps that's a good thing, too.
Since I might be too tempted to recycle the place out of hand. =)
: Actually, the existence of such doesn't bother me at all. Free will
: and all. However, the fact that they draw more people than the
: non-sexual places seems to say something about the MUCK community in
: general, and that something isn't very nice.
: -Brian
It's too bad, too. I keep saying we need more substance and less sex,
and no that doesn't mean more violence. It means more character
development, and interaction.
Character... hmm, how where have I heard that word used before?
--
-- Mer'rark Walk like a dog, talk like a man.
Walk like a dog, like anybody can.
Captain Packrat
"David G. Bell" <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<855700...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk>...
> In article <3300b7df...@news.linkline.com>
> BHend...@linkline.com "Brian Henderson" writes:
>
> > Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on
> > FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
> > often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
> > West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.
At the moment (2-12, 8:07 p.m. FurryTime), the WA list reads:
WhereAre: Scanning 307. Minimum to display: 2. Command:
Room Name ## Comments
Palace of Dragons T/D pool #1 - Sta 4 Truth or Dare Pool! (taxi,PoD,Pool)
Food Chain Lobby 3 *Voraephile/Macro/micro Club
Otterpaws 2 Otterpaws...not just for otters :)
Giants' Club 9 What it says! (t lc, n)
HoneyBadger's burrow 13 Friends, old and new, always welcome
Gold Table of Power <Articer's Pala 2 M:TG beta playing table <taxi, ap,
gold>
The Young and the Restless 3 *Little ones need fun too...
The Leash and Collar: Main Lounge 4 *Adult/Conversation/BDSM (t tlc)
Twilight Alehouse 2 A gargoyle's tavern (tport twa)
Coyote's Den 3 A country tavern
Underground Nexus 5 Almost the Center of the Furryverse.
North Corner of The Park 2 FTP Board
West Corner of The Park 10 Center of the Furryverse
The Purple Nurple 9 A gay/lesbian/bi/etc. hangout.
(t tpn)
Green Table of Life <Artificer's Pa 3 M:TG playing table <taxi, ap, green>
-- End WhereAre list --
The most popular place on FM every evening is HoneyBadger's Burrow.
Nothing sexual goes on there, it's just a place for friends to gather
and talk. And plenty of hugs. :) HB's Burrow regularly beats out
not only the Park, but almost all the adult areas as well!
--
Captain Packrat (Captain on FurryMUCK)
Fur Central ---> http://www.sandiego.sisna.com/captpakrat/
Furry Code 1.2 (available from the above site)
FRM4 A++>+++ C>+ D++ H+++ M+++ P++++ R+ T++++ W Z+>+++
Sm+ RLTI a cn++ d- e+ f++++ h+ iwf+++ sm#
If you're furry and you know it, Hug the Mouse!
O. .O
==V==
Dr. Cat
Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
: Then perhaps ConFurence's time is past. I honestly think that one of
: the reasons that ConFurence has started to fall apart is because
: everyone knows that only Mark and Rodney can make any decisions and
: half the time, neither of them can be found.
: If you want my opinion, it isn't more DIRECTORS who need to be added,
: but the directors need to pick out a few people who have proven
: abilities, hopefully in RL applications (ie. people who manage people
: and businesses in RL), give them a position and LEAVE THEM ALONE!
: I don't think anyone is suggesting throwing Mark and Rodney out of
: their jobs, just having other people come in, take over some of their
: responsibilities and maybe, just maybe, give them a chance to enjoy
: the convention as well.
Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that only Mark and
Rodney are in a position to make those changes, yes? And if that's
what's needed, either Mark and Rodney will decide to do those things, or
they won't decide to do those things, and no amount of discussing or
suggesting or arguing or analyzing the issues to death on alt.fan.furry
is going to change what happens. Purrhaps talking to Mark or Rodney is
the only thing anyone could do that might really have an effect, and
maybe not even that if they don't want to listen or aren't willing to
change their minds. In which case about the only thing that's left to
do is decide whether to keep going or pass it up.
Still, I have this theory that long public debates about how to change
Confurence are engaged in largely for catharsis and/or recreational
value. In which case the discussion is likely to continue on and on. :X)
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: I am going to go put bananas in my ears now, so if you want
anything, yell real loud so I can hear you! (Or if Pee Wee says the
secret word.))
Brad Austin
Dr. Cat wrote:
> Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
> : If you want my opinion, it isn't more DIRECTORS who need to be added,
> : but the directors need to pick out a few people who have proven
> : abilities, hopefully in RL applications (ie. people who manage people
> : and businesses in RL), give them a position and LEAVE THEM ALONE!
>
> : I don't think anyone is suggesting throwing Mark and Rodney out of
> : their jobs, just having other people come in, take over some of their
> : responsibilities and maybe, just maybe, give them a chance to enjoy
> : the convention as well.
>
> Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that only Mark and
> Rodney are in a position to make those changes, yes? And if that's
> what's needed, either Mark and Rodney will decide to do those things, or
> they won't decide to do those things, and no amount of discussing or
> suggesting or arguing or analyzing the issues to death on alt.fan.furry
> is going to change what happens. Purrhaps talking to Mark or Rodney is
> the only thing anyone could do that might really have an effect, and
> maybe not even that if they don't want to listen or aren't willing to
> change their minds. In which case about the only thing that's left to
> do is decide whether to keep going or pass it up.
>
> Still, I have this theory that long public debates about how to change
> Confurence are engaged in largely for catharsis and/or recreational
> value. In which case the discussion is likely to continue on and on. :X)
In this particular case, it's just a transparent attempt by
B.H. to posture himself into a position of authority at CF.
Brad Austin
Phoenix, AZ USA
<ar...@dancris.com>
Plushophilia home page: http://www.dancris.com/~artax
D. A. Graf
: Jazmyn Concolor <jaz...@netcom.com> wrote:
: > Have you seen WonderCon's Caberet? Its a LOT wilder then CF's. How
: >about the Cherry Poptart 'official' party at San Diego Comicon? I can also
: >show you a piece of art from the San Diego Comicon art show with a male
: >satyr with a FULL ERECTION!
: Yep. The last con I went to was in Dallas, and the art show was chockablock
: full of centaurs fucking. No, it wasn't a furry con. Regular "straight" SF.
: SF is an alternate lifestyle, didn't you know that?
: FIAWOL.
To shed a bit more light on the illo Jazmyn talked about in capital
letters, it was a satyr, yes...HOWEVER, the reason the erection slipped by
the artshow director that year was simple: at first glance, even at
looking at it for a little, the pernicious penis is hidden among the
foliage. You see the satyr standing in leaves and branches, similar in
colour to the foliage, and unless you looked REEEEAL close, as Jazmyn
obviously did, you'd miss it.
It wasn't as blatant as she made it out to be. I remember her showing it
off proudly, pointing out the erection gleefully, and laughing over how it
slipped by the director.
Make of it what you will.
--Tygger
--
******************************************************************************
gr...@primenet.com
www.av.qnet.com/~canuss/tygger www.av.qnet.com/~canuss/tygger/gk.htm
******************************************************************************
"Hey, I'm just an ex-Guard with a bad attitude...."
Random quote from Saraenae Kohiino, Guardian Knights
Urthwyse
On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Jason J. Jensen wrote:
> Jazmyn Concolor wrote:
> > As far as that goes, the con directors should not have to tell GROWN
> > PEOPLE how to behave in public.
>
> grown need frequent reminders on just how their actions are percieved by
> the rest of society. Your security is supposed to be proactive enough
Though this is a little to the side, try teaching a college course
to see how you really do have to keep grown people in line. I'm a TA and
teach a lab course. I've also taught my subject to 4th graders as
volunteer service. I have a harder time getting the college students to
behave than the 4th graders. (The 4th graders usually score higher on the
same tests too- go figure.)
You wouldn't think you'd have to really work to remind adults to
behave, but you really do. With children, you at least have an authority
factor to help quell their behavior. Adults are generally just as bad a
children with the added attitude of "I don't have to listen to you or
anyone."
Richard Chandler
In article <5dso06$c...@gold.interlog.com>,
Gary Burke <gbu...@interlog.com> wrote:
<snip>
>curl your hair. Not just naked male dancers, but plenty of alcohol, heavy
>drug use and practically-open sex. If you folks think Confurence is some
>kind of Sodom and Gomorrah, man, you ain't seen NOTHING. Furries on the
>whole don't drink, don't do drugs, barely even smoke, don't get in
>fistfights and trash hotel rooms, and tend not to have vicious screaming
I dunno about drugs, but there was a lot more drinking at CF8 than I've
ever noticed before (As Elf observed as well, although his own performance
was fairly memorable). CF6 I broke up a fistfight on the balcony that
probably would have resulted in Metalhead either going through a window or
over the edge. And lord knows there's enough psychodrama over FurryMuck
relationships (although the worst example I can think of was a certain
young woman).
The hotel rooms at the Buena Park came pre-trashed.
--
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog... but they can tell right
off the bat if you're an idiot! -- Me
http://www.teleport.com/~mauser/ Gallery Web Page
"Yeah, I've got ADD, wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"
Sean Malloy
jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:
> A bunch of punks busted up some furniture at BayCon once and were not
>even con-goers.
>
>such as CES or others... Makes some stories by a certain Rolling Stones
>writer (can't remember the guys name for some reason) look tame.
I remember a WesterCon in Phoenix years ago where the JayCees had had
their convention the previous weekend -- but couldn't resolve a vote
for some top office and held vote after vote without result, except
that they were still there when the WesterCon started. Sometime
Saturday the hotel management told the concom that if they knew of
WesterCon attendees who needed rooms, they'd be _happy_ to throw out
some of the JayCees to make room for them. I remember the damn duck
calls up and down the halls at two in the morning when they finally
managed to come up with a winner (the 42nd vote, which amused the
Hitchhiker's Guide fans enormously). The parties the JayCees were
running were causing no _end_ of complaints. Jazmyn is right. Fans are
downright sedate compared to businessmen.
--
Sean R. Malloy | American Non Sequitur
Naval Medical Center | Society
San Diego, CA 92134-5000 |
mal...@cris.com | "We may not make sense,
srma...@snd10.med.navy.mil | but we do like pizza"
*NOTE* Remove the '_' in my email address for replies;
it is there to stop automatic remailers
Richard Chandler
>bi...The rest are unknown...
Is THAT kind of information in the CF database? Sheesh! And people were
getting on Trish Ny's case for trying to score the status of every
player's @age status on FurryMuck!
Brian Henderson
mer...@netcom.com (Mer'rark) wrote:
>Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
>: Um... Mer... you're a wizard... :)
> Er, not on FurryMUCK I'm not. Perhaps that's a good thing, too.
>Since I might be too tempted to recycle the place out of hand. =)
Yeah. Dunno why I was thinking you were, musta had SPR confused with
FM for a split second. no offense. Especially after all the fun we
had together on SPR the other night. :)
> It's too bad, too. I keep saying we need more substance and less sex,
>and no that doesn't mean more violence. It means more character
>development, and interaction.
I've been saying the same. Too bad far too many people use the MU*s
to act out their baser instincts. I would have thought, or at least
hoped, that some people were more mature than that.
Guess not.
> Character... hmm, how where have I heard that word used before?
It's that thing that most people don't have nearly enough of? :)
-Brian
Brian Henderson
c...@bga.com (Dr. Cat) wrote:
>Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that only Mark and
>Rodney are in a position to make those changes, yes? And if that's
>what's needed, either Mark and Rodney will decide to do those things, or
>they won't decide to do those things, and no amount of discussing or
>suggesting or arguing or analyzing the issues to death on alt.fan.furry
>is going to change what happens. Purrhaps talking to Mark or Rodney is
>the only thing anyone could do that might really have an effect, and
>maybe not even that if they don't want to listen or aren't willing to
>change their minds. In which case about the only thing that's left to
>do is decide whether to keep going or pass it up.
Well, since Mark and Rodney have both shown by their inaction that
they are not really interested in changing, talking to them would
likely be a waste of time. And so, if one person talking to them
won't make a difference, perhaps 20 or 50 or 100 people talking to
them, or at least making their feelings known in a public forum such
as this one will make a difference. Grassroots campaigns work.
-Brian
Brian Henderson
Steve Gattuso <Pdoo...@primenet.com> wrote:
>The events of the past two years have finally sunk in to them the need
>for deliniating the responsibilities of the con to other persons. Jobs
>ranging from control of sections of the con to things as simple as
>somebody else learning from Mark how to set up that damned pole have
>started to be set out. For example: Kurt Miller is in charge of Gaming
>at the con. Anyone have any complaints other than the room should have
>been bigger? Not that I've heard. Dewayne Stuart and Karl Maurer have
>done a splendid job running registration. [_You_ try doing 1000+
>memberships in one night and see if you don't crack up.] That is what
>we had last time.
Well, there were a lot of complaints about Kurt at CF7, but at least
some of it wasn't his fault (ie. the incredible vanishing gaming
room), but this year, he did a fine job and I didn't hear a thing bad
about the way he was running it.
So far though, the only parts of the con that have been handed off to
others have been tiny little elements like gaming and the video room.
>More is being done. Next year, the control of the Dealer's Den,
>Publisher's Row and Artist's Alley are being transferred to another
>person, which will lessen Rod's load. Namely, me. And I've already
>decided to make a few changes, such as enforcing a brown-wrapper rule in
>the Artist's Alley. In addition, registration for dealers will take
>place in the most logical spot, the Den itself. Other changes will be
>made as needed.
Hallelujah! Steve, that's wonderful. Dealer check in just didn't
work at all this year, I think your idea about having them check in in
the Den is perfect.
Do you think the brown-wrapper rule will be tolerated by the
dealers/artists in the alley? We all remember one particular example
this year of someone who was terribly argumentative about painting a
large virtually nude piece in public view. How would you handle that?
-Brian
Brian Henderson
Brad Austin <ar...@dancris.com> wrote:
>In this particular case, it's just a transparent attempt by
>B.H. to posture himself into a position of authority at CF.
Sorry, absolutely no interest. If they offered to make me a director,
I'd turn it down. Do I want to help? Yes. Do I want ConFurence to
succeed? Of course. Do I want to run the silly thing? Hell no!
-Brian
Brian Henderson
"Jason J. Jensen" <st94...@post.drexel.edu> wrote:
>Jazmyn Concolor wrote:
>> As far as that goes, the con directors should not have to tell GROWN
>> PEOPLE how to behave in public.
Ya know... I have to agree here. The con directors SHOULD NOT HAVE to
tell grown people how to behave in public. Unfortunately, as Jason
correctly notes below, these grown people don't seem to UNDERSTAND how
to behave in public. Maybe their mommies and daddies didn't do a very
good job on them or something, I don't know.
>I would have to disagree there. On the contrary, many people who are
>grown need frequent reminders on just how their actions are percieved by
>the rest of society. Your security is supposed to be proactive enough
>that it can handle such things without con members having to go
>searching for them. And perhaps you find it easy, but I particularly
>find it hard to take any member of security seriously if he's dressed in
>drag.
Fantastic point Jason. The only time that con
security/directors/staff should step in and correct behavior is when
it crosses the bounds of acceptability. And it does that for some
individuals every year. Apparently, some people just don't know any
better.
>Yes, we all know you're entirely too overworked to the point where you
>cannot claim responsibility for anything that goes wrong with the
>artshow. Ever since I started going to CF, I believe I've heard you use
>this excuse when anyone brought up problems with the artshow. One would
>think by now that you'd bring in enough help that you could alleviate
>that problem.
Hey, I'm going to defend Jazmyn this year. I thought that this was
the first year that the art show actually ran somewhat smoothly and
there were no glaring problems. I've got to hand it to her this year,
other than the art show pickup, which was better than it has been in
past years and the problems were certainly not her fault.
Now, if we can keep working on the last few problems, I'll be happy.
>No, the problem, Jazmyn, as stated before and many times since, is; (1)
>The assertion that upper management of CF is actively recruiting
>alternate lifestylists who have no interest in furry fandom, and are
>simply coming for a weekend of sexual deviance,
An assertion that, I should remind people, has not been proven at this
point. Anyone have any luck with DejaNews?
>(2) The convention is
>doing very little to keep displays that mainstream society would
>consider lewd from public view within its area of responsibility, and
I'll agree with that one.
>(3) Security itself is becoming lax.
Um, not really. Security is not becoming lax, security's hands are
tied in what they are permitted to do. There were occasions during
CF8 where the head of security wanted to do her job, but was not
permitted to, or was over-ruled by a director.
-Brian
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <5dufeu$7...@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>,>: In article <jazmynE5...@netcom.com>,
>: Jazmyn Concolor <jaz...@netcom.com> wrote:
>: > Have you seen WonderCon's Caberet? Its a LOT wilder then CF's. How
>: >about the Cherry Poptart 'official' party at San Diego Comicon? I can also
>: >show you a piece of art from the San Diego Comicon art show with a male
>: >satyr with a FULL ERECTION!
>
>: Yep. The last con I went to was in Dallas, and the art show was chockablock
>: full of centaurs fucking. No, it wasn't a furry con. Regular "straight" SF.
>
>: SF is an alternate lifestyle, didn't you know that?
>
>: FIAWOL.
>
>To shed a bit more light on the illo Jazmyn talked about in capital
>letters, it was a satyr, yes...HOWEVER, the reason the erection slipped by
>the artshow director that year was simple: at first glance, even at
>looking at it for a little, the pernicious penis is hidden among the
>foliage. You see the satyr standing in leaves and branches, similar in
>colour to the foliage, and unless you looked REEEEAL close, as Jazmyn
>obviously did, you'd miss it.
>
>It wasn't as blatant as she made it out to be. I remember her showing it
>off proudly, pointing out the erection gleefully, and laughing over how it
>slipped by the director.
>
>Make of it what you will.
>
>
wern't hiding in the foliage... The one character didn't have anything
in the scene to hide behind.. The other scene was as obvious as the
two screwing centaurs at San Francisco World Con..Which by the way were
done by an artist who conciders furry fans to all be purverts.
(The centaurs were bronze statues in the middle of a public area, just
outside the entrance of the art show in the 'art display' area..)
And only a blind person would have mistaken the satyr's 'member' for
a mushroom...:)
My 'laughing' was due to the fact the director was prudishly turning
pieces away that year, much to the disgust of artists I talked to.. I
wasn't impressed with the art show director that year..Neither were the
artists..
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <5dukrp$lun$1...@linda.teleport.com>,
Richard Chandler <mau...@teleport.com> wrote:
>In article <jazmynE5...@netcom.com>,
>Jazmyn Concolor <jaz...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>bi...The rest are unknown...
>
>Is THAT kind of information in the CF database? Sheesh! And people were
>getting on Trish Ny's case for trying to score the status of every
>player's @age status on FurryMuck!
>
No...I just personaly KNOW most of those people, having met them and their
'mates' before. Don't forget how many people I've met online and off over the
years. And run into at BayCon each year..
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <3302daef...@news.linkline.com>,
You were offered it at CF1...The art show director position..You
dropped the ball and Rodney had to do your job. You wouldn't be very likely
to be offered a director position again after failing to do the job the
first time..
Mark Freid
----------
> As far as that goes, the con directors should not have to tell
GROWN
> PEOPLE how to behave in public. If people had gone to the Con Security,
> I'm sure they might have at least talked to the people who were offending
> others...Even the security who happened to be in drag, which I for one
cannot
> see this being a problem at a SF/Fantasy Con or Furry Con where PEOPLE
ARE
> WALKING AROUND IN COSTUME ALL THE TIME...
Define costume. Do normal street clothes count? no? Here's the Websters
definition:
cos.tume \'ka:s-.t(y)u:m, ka:s-'\ n [F, fr. It, custom, dress, fr. L
consuetudin-, consuetudo custom] 1: the prevailing fashion in coiffure,
jewelry, and apparel of a period, country, or class 2: a suit or dress
characteristic of a period, country, or class 3: a person's ensemble of
outer garments; esp : a woman's ensemble of dress with coat or jacket -
costume vt
OKay, then... so normal clothes DO count? I guess it depends on your
opinion... so where do we draw the line? Is bondage gear a costume? I
guess, we're coming prettly close with cross-dressing... even if it is
"normal clothes"...
Is that the point, though? The difference is, this is a con about
anthropomorphics... so we can expect, heck even WANT to see animal
costumes. It's not a "fetish" con. I can go down to Santa Monica blvd. and
see this too... but there's nothing that interests me on Santa Monica Blvd.
Anthropomorphics interests me.
If someone wants to use the cons (unfortunately less-than-nice) reputation
as an excuse to show off their personal fetish which has nothing to do with
the theme, it seems a little asinine... and downright EMBARRASSING when
that person is acting as con security!
my $0.02 worth.
-Mark
(who has no problem with "risque" stuff, only a problem with making it the
most visible representation of something)
--
Mark Freid ("Canuss"), Anthropomorphic Cartoonist
-------------------------------------------------
Email : can...@qnet.com <> can...@aol.com
Web : http://www.av.qnet.com/~canuss
-------------------------------------------------
Creator & Moderator of the FurRing
(http://www.av.qnet.com/~canuss/furring.html)
Brian Henderson
jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:
> You were offered it at CF1...The art show director position..You
>dropped the ball and Rodney had to do your job. You wouldn't be very likely
>to be offered a director position again after failing to do the job the
>first time..
Now wait just a minute. Right after CF0, I *OFFERED* to take over the
art show for CF1. I *OFFERED*. I never heard squat back from Mark or
Rodney, hence I assumed that someone else had been found to do the
job. Had I thought for one second that, as I found out *AFTER* the
convention, that I had been given the 'job', I would have done it.
Funny how neither Mark nor Rodney said a damn word to me about it the
whole year, huh?
Sorry Jazmyn, doesn't wash.
-Brian
Dr. Cat
Jazmyn Concolor (jaz...@netcom.com) wrote:: >: Jazmyn Concolor <jaz...@netcom.com> wrote:
: >: >I can also show you a piece of art from the San Diego Comicon art
: >
: >: Yep. The last con I went to was in Dallas, and the art show was chockablock
: >: full of centaurs fucking. No, it wasn't a furry con. Regular "straight" SF.
: >
: >letters, it was a satyr, yes...HOWEVER, the reason the erection slipped by
: >the artshow director that year was simple: at first glance, even at
: >looking at it for a little, the pernicious penis is hidden among the
: >foliage.
: Heh...So what are your comments on the two pieces from LosCon? They
: wern't hiding in the foliage... The one character didn't have anything
: in the scene to hide behind.. The other scene was as obvious as the
: two screwing centaurs at San Francisco World Con..
Just to throw a little more fuel on the fire, I happen to have a piece of
art with two centaurs making love that I picked up at a mainstream
sf/fantasy con. It's a print, not a statue like the one Jazmyn
mentioned, and I have it hanging on my wall. I've also picked up some
x-rated comics and videos at sf cons over the years. And zines, and
portfolios, and... Well, you know, STUFF.
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: I used the term "making love" rather than "screwing" because
the piece was very elegant and well drawn, and done by one of my favorite
fantasy artists too. Your mileage may vary. If you prefer to think of the
two centaurs in that print as "screwing" please feel free.)
D. A. Graf
Jazmyn Concolor <jaz...@netcom.com> wrote:
: Heh...So what are your comments on the two pieces from LosCon? They
: wern't hiding in the foliage... The one character didn't have anything
: in the scene to hide behind.. The other scene was as obvious as the
: two screwing centaurs at San Francisco World Con..Which by the way were
: done by an artist who conciders furry fans to all be purverts.
: (The centaurs were bronze statues in the middle of a public area, just
: outside the entrance of the art show in the 'art display' area..)
Since I don't go to LosCon, preferring to go to Silicon, and didn't see
the pieces, no comment. However, I think I know which ones you are
speaking of. Are they statues which are based on an illo of the same
theme? I have seen a set of 4 illos of a centaur couple from their
meeting to the consummation of their meeting. I'm not going to comment on
the statues until I get confirmation its what I'm thinking of.
: And only a blind person would have mistaken the satyr's 'member' for
: a mushroom...:)
I didn't see it at first until you pointed it out to me because I wasn't
looking for a penis to be hiding in the leaves and branches. Once I was
delberately looking for it, I did see it.
My point in poking at your first comment is that you made it out to be
that the erection was very blatant and obviously there. If you weren't
looking for anything naughty to begin with, you didn't see it as I didn't
and I remember several others didn't see it either until it was pointed
out. I found the illo rendered rather tastefully and not offensive. Its
only when pieces are being blatant in an area which IMHO feel they should
not be in that I'll object.
In retrospect, I see how my attitudes towards art, what is and is not
acceptable in public display, have changed from "if you don't want to see
it don't look" of several years ago (in fact, I kinda threw a few bricks
on this rather hard and militantly in my first appearances of Gallery) to
the present "follow the rules and keep in mind the kind of impression
you're giving about yourself and the fandom you're in, be tasteful".
*grins* I guess I've managed to grow up a bit. The first attitude is
rather immature and selfish. You don't care what others feel, you want
what YOU want. The second may be less fashionable in the fandom, but it
can make getting along easier. :)
: My 'laughing' was due to the fact the director was prudishly turning
: pieces away that year, much to the disgust of artists I talked to.. I
: wasn't impressed with the art show director that year..Neither were the
: artists..
Hm...I THINK the director then was Dave Wright...I remember talking to him
about it. If it had been in the rules, which I don't think it was THEN,
then I can see where he would have more of a leg to stand on. After all,
as you know and as I am using for AAC, the Artshow Director's decision is
final. However, since its in the present rules for SDCC NOW, and if the
artist sends in what is considered to be inappropriate art anyway, then
they really don't have room to be annoyed as they had been warned before
hand.
I've come under fire once already over my decision over no NC-17 section
in the AAC artshow. The person claimed it was censoring, and that I
should set up an adult section and card. I explained it was in compliance
with state and city indecency and porn laws and the rating going as high
as R is a compromise. I haven't heard anything back from him on that.
*tosses in a quarter* Just a minor ramble from...
Conrad Wong
In article <jazmynE5...@netcom.com>,
Jazmyn Concolor <jaz...@netcom.com> wrote:
> Okay..So after peering at the database, I'd say %80 are either gay or
>quite a few of them and they would even admit to it. The rest I know of
>only because I hear far more about what goes on in fandom then I want to..
>You don't EVEN want to get me started on San Diego Fans. :)
Er... Jazmyn, far be it from me to say you're making this up, but...
How many Bay Area furry fans are there? 300? 400? Do you seriously
know 80% (240 or 320) of them well enough to declare their sexual
preferences? Directly, not by 'I think so and so is of so and so
preference, because...' third-hand information. People have been known
to make mistakes or to assume on basis of behavior.
If so, I shall account myself most surprised and amazed by your
knowledgeableness.
However, being naturally skeptical, I have to say I wouldn't mind
getting a list of Bay Area furry fans and checking this assertion.
I know, being skeptical is a vice, but someone has to do it! };)
-- Lynx
--
| __|\ | Conrad "Lynx" Wong | Upstart feline miscreant |
| ._| _ : | 101 First Street, suite 554 | LY Go B Y++ L++ C++++ T++ A-- |
| ( ' | Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 | H+ S++ V+ F- Q+ PP+ B PA+ PL+++ |
| -' ;". |----------------------------------------------------------------|
| ; "' ; | PawPrints: http://www.best.com/~lynx/pawprints.html |
| , |Anything not nailed down is a cat toy, anything the cat can pry |
| *purrrrrr* |up with a crow bar is not nailed down, anything that IS nailed |
| |down is a scratching post. And anything edible is food -- Revar|
D. A. Graf
Dr. Cat <c...@bga.com> wrote:
: Just to throw a little more fuel on the fire, I happen to have a piece of
: sf/fantasy con. It's a print, not a statue like the one Jazmyn
: mentioned, and I have it hanging on my wall. I've also picked up some
: x-rated comics and videos at sf cons over the years. And zines, and
: portfolios, and... Well, you know, STUFF.
Hey, sometimes the only place to get stuff IS at cons. I raid Books
Nippon for x-rated and erotica manga and art books cause I don't get up to
L.A. all that often. Same for other things of erotica like art books of
Olivia, Hajime Sorayama, back issues of Playboy specials, Alberto Vargas,
Alphonse Mucha (his work contains nudity and can be considered borderline
erotica by some), and Patrick Nagel. :) I just love to lose myself in the
huge Bud Plant booths, tho I end up gaining a larger wish list each year.
*sighs and grins*
*idly wonders if she can trade art for books again at SDCC....*
: (Disclaimer: I used the term "making love" rather than "screwing" because
: the piece was very elegant and well drawn, and done by one of my favorite
: fantasy artists too. Your mileage may vary. If you prefer to think of the
: two centaurs in that print as "screwing" please feel free.)
That's why I used x-rated and erotica to define the manga and art books I
look for at Books Nippon. Some is really tasteful and nice, but some can
be rather harsh and just plain downright WEIRD! :)
Steve Gattuso
Richard Chandler wrote:
> I dunno about drugs, but there was a lot more drinking at CF8 than I've
> ever noticed before (As Elf observed as well, although his own
> performance was fairly memorable).
This year, we had one person evidently distributing alcohol to minors,
and one individual who went to the hospital for acute alcohol poisoning.
At the post-CF8 meeting, _this_ upset Rod and Mark quite a bit. Steps
will be taken to prevent recurrences of this.
> The hotel rooms at the Buena Park came pre-trashed.
I suppose we should consider that _some_ consolation. If they had asked
for any damages, we'd be able to ask back "How can you tell?" =};-3
Honestly, folks damaging hotel property wasn't a trouble this year. You
have no idea how many nightmares I had about some dingbat breaking that
glass-framed staircase...
Urthwyse
> I've come under fire once already over my decision over no NC-17 section
> in the AAC artshow. The person claimed it was censoring, and that I
> should set up an adult section and card. I explained it was in compliance
> with state and city indecency and porn laws and the rating going as high
> as R is a compromise. I haven't heard anything back from him on that.
The term "censorship" really is getting thrown around a lot. If
you have something like a con, the directors really call the shots. If
they don't want something displayed because they feel it would affect
their event or publication or whatever in a negative way, that's pretty
much their perogative.
The second someone screams "censorship," everyone assumes it's a
hideous thing. It IS necessary some of the time. If I don't want to
display a Maplethorpe in my apartment, someone could scream "censorship."
My apartment, my rules. Likewise, their con, their rules.
Just another glaring abuse of terminology.
Steve Gattuso
Brian Henderson wrote:
> Hallelujah! Steve, that's wonderful. Dealer check in just didn't
> work at all this year, I think your idea about having them check in in
> the Den is perfect.
No, it's just _obvious._ Sometimes, that's the most effective
solution. My main worry will be the registration lines may block access
to the room on Thursday night.
I've also heard some complaints from dealers that they don't _want_ the
con to do anything Thursday except pre-registration and some set-up.
They like to use Thursday for relaxation, and adding that day to the con
will really screw them over. But I'll need to talk with the others about
that.
> Do you think the brown-wrapper rule will be tolerated by the
> dealers/artists in the alley?
Correction: Artist's Alley is supposed to be _just_ that. It is going
to be for artists and artists alone. I will also allow persons who can
prove they are legal agents for specific artists to use the area, but no
dealers or publishers. Publishers can use Publisher's Row, which is
cheaper than a regular Dealer's Den table, but not secure.
> We all remember one particular example this year of someone who was
> terribly argumentative about painting a large virtually nude piece in
> public view. How would you handle that?
Define 'virtually.' Essentially, if sexual genetailia is exposed, it's
covered. Topless or scantily clad material is not the same thing. The
latter can be handled without any trouble. The former will be covered or
the artist will lose their table space. There are plenty of artists who
would love to fill a spot in place of one of the more insistent members.
If there had come a point where the painting in question had crossed that
line, I would have asked it be finished elsewhere. But being nude,
'virtually' or no, will not be the dividing line.
I've got 80 or so dealers who all paid for their tables and who as a
general rule operate without causing any trouble. I also have a number
of folks who use Publisher's Row and who also operate quite tactfully.
Then I have this unruly mob who don't pay the con a dime, often operate
like used car dealers and display the most extreme materials at the con
in full view of everyone, including folks who are not con attendees. I
happen to be a banker. Which group do _you_ think gets preferential
treatment in my eyes?
[With all the wasted space about alternative lyfestyles, might as well
crack a few whips of my own... =};-3 ]
Certainly, not every dealer is perfect. And not every person in the
Alley operates like a combination of a huckster/porn vendor. But I have
to show greater service to those who spent the money. That, aside from
commentary about my vocal talents, was the greatest complaint I was
hearing from the dealers. They paid the bucks, but the folks in the
Alley got first crack at the customers, and often flaunted the rules of
conduct they generally stuck to. Last time, I couldn't do anything.
This year, I can. And will.
There is every possibility that the Artist's Alley will shrink next year.
I don't know how we got past the Fire Marshall _this_ one. But I'm
going to check with the hotel and see if we can allow folks to sell out
of their rooms. That may mitigate matters.
[And before any Dealers scream about the advantage that will be gained by
such folks, I remind you that unless on the first three floors, customers
would have to use the elevators at the Buena Park Hotel to get to them.
What advantage? =};-3 ]
Steve Gattuso
Mark Freid wrote:
> If someone wants to use the cons (unfortunately less-than-nice)
> reputation as an excuse to show off their personal fetish which has
> nothing to do with the theme, it seems a little asinine... and
> downright EMBARRASSING when that person is acting as con security!
Well, it's not important now. That fellow is no longer on con security
for next year. Now we can all go back to bitching about the hotel.
=};-3
D. A. Graf
Urthwyse <ere...@comp.uark.edu> wrote:
: > I've come under fire once already over my decision over no NC-17 section
: > in the AAC artshow. The person claimed it was censoring, and that I
: > should set up an adult section and card. I explained it was in compliance
: > with state and city indecency and porn laws and the rating going as high
: > as R is a compromise. I haven't heard anything back from him on that.
: The term "censorship" really is getting thrown around a lot. If
: you have something like a con, the directors really call the shots. If
: they don't want something displayed because they feel it would affect
: their event or publication or whatever in a negative way, that's pretty
: much their perogative.
*nods* I noticed that about the word, and yes, very true. All the
director can do is try to be as fair to all sides as possible, but do
what's best for the con.
: The second someone screams "censorship," everyone assumes it's a
: hideous thing. It IS necessary some of the time. If I don't want to
: display a Maplethorpe in my apartment, someone could scream "censorship."
: My apartment, my rules. Likewise, their con, their rules.
: Just another glaring abuse of terminology.
*nods* Again, true.
Harry Payne
In article <5dsjq0$q...@uuneo.neosoft.com>
beth...@neosoft.com "Elisabeth B. Shaw" writes:
[snip]
> I know a little about what goes on at major business conventions. Try
> organising a riverboat cruise for 5000 people.
In a similar vein, the 1993 Eurocon at the Hotel de France on Jersey was
followed by a crowd of encyclopedia salespersons. We overlapped for a night -
our Dead Dog Party versus their Arrival Party - and in their first night they
caused more damage than we had for the previous week.
There's a lovely quote from a hotel who was asked about fannish behaviour:
"They drink like a rugby crowd and cause as much damage as chess players." In
nearly a decade of fandom, I've found that to be mostly true. Makes me feel
less defensive than I might be when some idiot tabloid journalist re-hashes the
"Trekkies beam in" article for whatever con I'm at.
--
Harry Payne
To reply, remove .block from address
"When you're up to your eyes in it, don't open your mouth."
- The Flummox collective 1997
Chris Whalen
db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk ("David G. Bell") wrote:
>I know just what you mean, and while places such as the Purple Nurple
>aren't exactly family fun places, they are a hell of a lot more discreet
I don't understand VR sex...isn't it hard to keep up a decent typing pace with
only one hand? :D
-- Chris
Brian Henderson
Steve Gattuso <Pdoo...@primenet.com> wrote:
>No, it's just _obvious._ Sometimes, that's the most effective
>solution. My main worry will be the registration lines may block access
>to the room on Thursday night.
Not if you put the registration table at the far end of the room and
have them all line up inside the doors. It isn't like there isn't
plenty of room in there or anything.
>I've also heard some complaints from dealers that they don't _want_ the
>con to do anything Thursday except pre-registration and some set-up.
>They like to use Thursday for relaxation, and adding that day to the con
>will really screw them over. But I'll need to talk with the others about
>that.
The dealer's room isn't open that day so it really doesn't matter,
does it? If they choose to do whatever is offered, fine. If not,
fine. I don't think we should have regular programming running on
Thursday night, but otherwise, having the video rooms open, etc. gives
people something to do.
>Correction: Artist's Alley is supposed to be _just_ that. It is going
>to be for artists and artists alone. I will also allow persons who can
>prove they are legal agents for specific artists to use the area, but no
>dealers or publishers. Publishers can use Publisher's Row, which is
>cheaper than a regular Dealer's Den table, but not secure.
Well... good luck is all I can say. I think you've got the right
idea, it'll just be interesting to see if you can pull it off. I
hope you can, trust me.
>Define 'virtually.' Essentially, if sexual genetailia is exposed, it's
>covered. Topless or scantily clad material is not the same thing. The
>latter can be handled without any trouble. The former will be covered or
>the artist will lose their table space. There are plenty of artists who
>would love to fill a spot in place of one of the more insistent members.
Um, totally uncovered on top, bottom minimally covered by a g-string,
if I remember right. Remember, we're talking about an uncontrolled
area of the con that anyone from off the street can walk into and see.
And I hope I don't have to remind you about the very liberal sexual
harassment laws that California has (with no cap on settlements, BTW).
All they have to do is *SEE* something that offends them and they can
sue the BPH, ConFurence, Mark, Rodney, and *YOU* for permitting it to
be displayed.
And no, that's not being overly paranoid either. It happens far more
often than you'd think.
>If there had come a point where the painting in question had crossed that
>line, I would have asked it be finished elsewhere. But being nude,
>'virtually' or no, will not be the dividing line.
Zee did ask him to finish it elsewhere, or at the very least, take
some yellow Post-Its and cover up the naughty bits. The artist
refused until Mark said something to him. He covered them until Mark
was out of the area, removed them, and the piece sat in plain view
right across from the Con Information table for the rest of the
weekend.
>Then I have this unruly mob who don't pay the con a dime, often operate
>like used car dealers and display the most extreme materials at the con
>in full view of everyone, including folks who are not con attendees. I
>happen to be a banker. Which group do _you_ think gets preferential
>treatment in my eyes?
Then perhaps we just need to eliminate Artist's Alley all together?
It was never intended to be a poor man's dealer's room. If you want
to sell things, either get yourself a dealer's table or do it in your
hotel room. That would seem to solve all the problems, especially the
lack of space issue, wouldn't it?
-Brian
Dr. Cat
Peter da Silva (pe...@taronga.com) wrote:
: Is that the one by B----- D------?
No, it was by Sondra Sontara, and I think there was actually a copy of it
at Confurence this year for the first time. Though it's been around for
years, prints of it being sold up until now at those shamefully lewd sf
cons. :X) The name of the piece is "A Little Night Music", and I think
it gets away with being displayed openly by being so stylized and elegant.
My Sondra Sontara t-shirts are my absolute favorites, by the way.
They're somewhat beside the point here, being all G rated, but if I could
dress in nothing but Sondra Sontara t-shirts all the time I'd be a happy
cat. I also have two chenille sculptures of winged snow leopards she did
that are pretty darn remarkable.
So who is B----- D------, and have they done some art I should be looking
for? :X)
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Clarification: If you didn't know what chenille is, it's kinda like big
fuzzy pipe cleaners. If you did know, that's still what it is.)
(Disclaimer: The author of this post will not be responsible for what
happens to you if you say "pipe cleaners" around Sondra Sontara when
discussing one of her sculptures.)
Steve Gattuso
Brian Henderson wrote:
> Not if you put the registration table at the far end of the room and
> have them all line up inside the doors. It isn't like there isn't
> plenty of room in there or anything.
I'm worried that the dealers might not even get as far as the doors. But
that's all part of the discussion about registration which we had at the
meeting. Nobody was happy with the location, so we now have to figure
where it will be located for next time. As usual, hashing this stuff out
is all part of the tweaking process.
> >I've also heard some complaints from dealers that they don't _want_ the
> >con to do anything Thursday except pre-registration and some set-up.
> >They like to use Thursday for relaxation, and adding that day to the con
> >will really screw them over. But I'll need to talk with the others about
> >that.
>
> The dealer's room isn't open that day so it really doesn't matter,
> does it? If they choose to do whatever is offered, fine. If not,
> fine. I don't think we should have regular programming running on
> Thursday night, but otherwise, having the video rooms open, etc. gives
> people something to do.
It's more complicated than that, but suffice to say I too would prefer
that the con just do pre-reg and some setup on Thursday. Cripes, we had
folks arrive as early as _Tuesday_ for the thing this year...
> >Define 'virtually.' Essentially, if sexual genetailia is exposed, it's
> >covered. Topless or scantily clad material is not the same thing. The
> >latter can be handled without any trouble. The former will be covered or
> >the artist will lose their table space. There are plenty of artists who
> >would love to fill a spot in place of one of the more insistent members.
>
> Um, totally uncovered on top, bottom minimally covered by a g-string,
> if I remember right. Remember, we're talking about an uncontrolled
> area of the con that anyone from off the street can walk into and see.
That falls on the borderline, and would ultimately be judged in terms of
context. I've seen far more lurid items on display at local comic shops,
and no calls yet for the sexual harassment suits you worry about have
graced my ears.
There is reasonable concern, then there is unreasonable. Graphic images
of somebunny being buggered by a buffalo is reasonable concern. Meeting
the PC requirements of certain members of society is an unreasonable one.
I am not interested in showing off the more extreme elements of art to
the kids, but I am also not a prude, as can be seen from my copious
collection of Brian O'Connell prints. =};-3
> Zee did ask him to finish it elsewhere, or at the very least, take
> some yellow Post-Its and cover up the naughty bits.
Which was within her right. There will be exatly four people who will
have authority to override my decisions. Zee, Kelvandor, Mark and Rod.
Though I will ask that any decision reguarding elements under my perview
be taken up with me prior to announcing them to an artist or dealer.
> The artist refused until Mark said something to him. He covered them
> until Mark was out of the area, removed them, and the piece sat in
> plain view right across from the Con Information table for the rest of
> the weekend.
Mark was all over the place last year, and thuus could not be expected to
keep eyes out for things. That was not the case with me. Had I been
informed, I would have easily been able to cover that trouble. And pull
the artist from the alley.
> Then perhaps we just need to eliminate Artist's Alley all together?
> It was never intended to be a poor man's dealer's room. If you want
> to sell things, either get yourself a dealer's table or do it in your
> hotel room. That would seem to solve all the problems, especially the
> lack of space issue, wouldn't it?
Again, that's something we have to balance against the fact that there
_are_ some artists who cannot afford a table, nor a room at the BPH.
As I said before, not every artist operates in an unethical or unruly
fashion, and I am loathe to simply give them all the boot because a small
handful take advantage of what is offered.
That's one reason I hope we can get a hotel of the Red Lion's size for
the future. I want to set aside one corner of the Dealer's Den and make
_that_ the Artist's Alley, which would negate most of these headaches for
good. But that will have to be for next time. This time, I get to
consume the aspirin.
Felix Lee
geez. as a visible gay male, I already obsessively hide my
furriness to avoid linking furries with the homosexual
conspiracy. (besides, it avoids weirding out the mundane
transvestite queens.)
but I can promise not to attend any furry cons, too.
there. everyone happy now?
(btw, can someone help me? I think my spousal-equivalent
suspects. he keeps asking leading questions about Road
Rovers and showing me pictures of naked morphs.)
--
David G. Bell
In article <5e0a0s$1m...@news.doit.wisc.edu>
c...@prof.slh.wisc.edu "Chris Whalen" writes:
So I have been led to believe.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
Brian Henderson
Steve Gattuso <Pdoo...@primenet.com> wrote:
>I'm worried that the dealers might not even get as far as the doors. But
>that's all part of the discussion about registration which we had at the
>meeting. Nobody was happy with the location, so we now have to figure
>where it will be located for next time. As usual, hashing this stuff out
> is all part of the tweaking process.
What if you put the dealer registration in the FLD room then, over by
the arcade? It's accessable and even at it's worst, the registration
line didn't get that far.
Or, as I was thinking last night, why not put registration downstairs
and let the line run outside by the pool? It's out of everyone's way,
doesn't create the concern of a fire hazard, and no one should
complain too much about lack of air conditioning.
>Mark was all over the place last year, and thuus could not be expected to
>keep eyes out for things. That was not the case with me. Had I been
>informed, I would have easily been able to cover that trouble. And pull
>the artist from the alley.
That's my entire point of not having directors in charge of these
things. They have better things to do than stand around making sure
people follow the rules. When you have someone like yourself taking
over the job, you and you staff can actually *SIT* in and around the
dealer's room all day. Mark and Rod can't.
>Again, that's something we have to balance against the fact that there
>_are_ some artists who cannot afford a table, nor a room at the BPH.
>As I said before, not every artist operates in an unethical or unruly
>fashion, and I am loathe to simply give them all the boot because a small
>handful take advantage of what is offered.
Agreed, and if it can be worked out without losing the Artist's Alley,
that's fine. Otherwise, maybe we could do what was done at CF0 and
just take over the Artist's Lounge space that was used this year and
have an Artist's Jam all weekend. That would rather eliminate the
possibility of people selling things, wouldn't it?
-Brian
M. Mitchell Marmel
Steve Gattuso wrote:
> I've also heard some complaints from dealers that they don't _want_ the
> con to do anything Thursday except pre-registration and some set-up.
> They like to use Thursday for relaxation, and adding that day to the con
> will really screw them over. But I'll need to talk with the others about
> that.
FWIW, Albany's policy is that Thursday is for setup, PERIOD. Time
enough for dealing on Friday-Sunday.
> Correction: Artist's Alley is supposed to be _just_ that. It is going
> to be for artists and artists alone. I will also allow persons who can
> prove they are legal agents for specific artists to use the area, but no
> dealers or publishers. Publishers can use Publisher's Row, which is
> cheaper than a regular Dealer's Den table, but not secure.
Better be prepared to bounce obstreperous types...
> the artist will lose their table space. There are plenty of artists who
> would love to fill a spot in place of one of the more insistent members.
Indeed...
> in full view of everyone, including folks who are not con attendees. I
> happen to be a banker.
I STILL find that frightening.
> Which group do _you_ think gets preferential
> treatment in my eyes?
:)
> [With all the wasted space about alternative lyfestyles, might as well
> crack a few whips of my own... =};-3 ]
"Kinnnky! I LIKE that!" -Hedley LaMarr
> Alley got first crack at the customers, and often flaunted the rules of
> conduct they generally stuck to. Last time, I couldn't do anything.
> This year, I can. And will.
SOMEONE GET THE BUNNY A BFG 5000! HE'S GOING TO TOWN!!!
:)
-MMM-
--
Dealer's Room Director, AAC-1
HTTP://www.wizvax.net/aloyen/AAC97/
(Please cc: any replies via E-mail; my news server is flakier than a
dandruff convention. I will post my replies to your E-mail directly
to the group, unless you indicate otherwise. Thanks!)
========================================================================
M. Mitchell Marmel \ Scattered, smothered, covered, chunked,
Drexel University \ whipped, beaten, chained and pierced.
Department of Materials Engineering \*THE BEST HASHBROWNS IN THE WORLD!*
Fibrous Materials Research Laboratory\ marm...@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu
========================================================================
Kay Shapero
On <Feb 13 14:19>, D. A. Graf <gr...@primenet.com> wrote;
g>I've come under fire once already over my decision over no NC-17
g>section in the AAC artshow. The person claimed it was censoring, and
g>that I should set up an adult section and card. I explained it was in
g>compliance with state and city indecency and porn laws and the rating
g>going as high as R is a compromise. I haven't heard anything back from
g>him on that.
Sheesh - it's even simpler than that: it's your art show, you make the
rules! I'm not sure it isn't time to declare a moratorium on the term
"censorship"; it's so semantically loaded that people tend use it to the
exclusion of more appropriate terms, and have nearly destroyed the actual
definition in the process.
D. A. Graf
Kay Shapero <kay.s...@salata.com> wrote:
: Sheesh - it's even simpler than that: it's your art show, you make the
: rules! I'm not sure it isn't time to declare a moratorium on the term
: "censorship"; it's so semantically loaded that people tend use it to the
: exclusion of more appropriate terms, and have nearly destroyed the actual
: definition in the process.
*nods* His reaction did read more of the knee jerk variety. He asked me
first if the rumours he heard were true about the restrictions in the
dealer's room and the artshow. The answer was a confirm and the reasons
why of it. Next thing, the con is censoring. *rolls eyes*
Gotta love it...just a little bit of decorum and oooooo, its all
censorship.
I tend to agree. That word has been used so much in so many contexts, its
about as bad as using the term "furry".
Brian Henderson
"M. Mitchell Marmel" <marm...@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu> wrote:
>Steve Gattuso wrote:
>> in full view of everyone, including folks who are not con attendees. I
>> happen to be a banker.
>I STILL find that frightening.
What? That people are showing improper art in full view of the
general public, or that Steve is a banker?
Hee hee
-Brian
Richard Chandler
In article <lynxE5K...@netcom.com>, Conrad Wong <ly...@netcom.com> wrote:
>However, being naturally skeptical, I have to say I wouldn't mind
>getting a list of Bay Area furry fans and checking this assertion.
>I know, being skeptical is a vice, but someone has to do it! };)
Actually, I wouldn't mind getting a crack at the CF mailing list just to
correct the 100 or so "Stale Addresses" I have in MY database. There are
artists who were in old issues of Gallery I would LIKE to send royalty
checks to, but I can't, and a few artists I've been wanting to recruit but
the address I've got for them is way out of date.
(I think I've still got Lela Dowling and Ken Macklin as being together, to
give you an idea how far out some of these are).
Hint for anyone with an address database: A Last modified/Verified field
is a very nice thing to have.
--
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog... but they can tell right
off the bat if you're an idiot! -- Me
http://www.teleport.com/~mauser/ Gallery Web Page
"Yeah, I've got ADD, wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"
c.groark
>Dr. Cat <c...@bga.com> wrote:
>: Just to throw a little more fuel on the fire, I happen to have a piece of
>: art with two centaurs making love that I picked up at a mainstream
>: sf/fantasy con. It's a print, not a statue like the one Jazmyn
>: mentioned, and I have it hanging on my wall. I've also picked up some
>: x-rated comics and videos at sf cons over the years. And zines, and
>: portfolios, and... Well, you know, STUFF.
>
FYI, *if* that print is one of a set of six from first encounter to
afterglow (as it were), the artist could well be Christine Mansfield.
(The name and California address I have are both 12 years old: I heard
she'd remarried since that time.)
Charlie
Electro
beth...@neosoft.com (Elisabeth B. Shaw) wrote:
>I remember one year when it was "Coastcon vs. the Frats".
One year we had to share a small con with the Childrens Assembly of
God. They crashed our parties, sponged our beer. Spilled things all
over and generally raised hell. Of course, blaming us all the while.
After a night of this, one of our wits went home and came back with
a bag of buttons that said "Child of God, no assembly required."
ele...@minn.net
*********************************************************
Midnight at the huge hotel,my head is filled with fur....
"Nate Bucklin"
Dr. Cat
c.groark (cgr...@access4.digex.net) wrote:
: FYI, *if* that print is one of a set of six from first encounter to
: afterglow (as it were), the artist could well be Christine Mansfield.
See my earlier reply saying no, it's by Sandra Sontara. There must be a
lot more centaurs-having-sex prints at sf/fantasy cons these days than
the last time I went to one. :X)
By the way, Bonnie Dalzell seems to register as someone I got some
gorgeous fantasy stationery with her art on it at midwestern cons in the
early 80s and then never saw anything else by... Anybody know where I
could find anything by her at all?
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: Dr. Cat can use good grammar if he wants to. But he also
knows when he doesn't have to, like for instance here. :XP )
c.groark
In article <5e70a1$t...@news3.realtime.net>, Dr. Cat <c...@bga.com> wrote:
>c.groark (cgr...@access4.digex.net) wrote:
>: FYI, *if* that print is one of a set of six from first encounter to
>: afterglow (as it were), the artist could well be Christine Mansfield.
>
>See my earlier reply saying no, it's by Sandra Sontara. There must be a
>lot more centaurs-having-sex prints at sf/fantasy cons these days than
>the last time I went to one. :X)
Sorry, I missed/forgot that earlier post. "These days" doesn't apply
though: I bought those prints back around 1985.
>By the way, Bonnie Dalzell seems to register as someone I got some
>gorgeous fantasy stationery with her art on it at midwestern cons in the
>early 80s and then never saw anything else by... Anybody know where I
>could find anything by her at all?
To the best of my knowledge, Bonnie Dalzell basically quit doing art to
devote her time to raising Borzois. She lived on the East Coast (here in
Virginia, I believe), but no one has heard from her at Art Shows here in
years.
Charlie
Kay Shapero
On <Feb 14 03:55>, c...@bga.com (Dr. Cat) wrote;
c>So who is B----- D------, and have they done some art I should be
c>looking for? :X)
Bonnie Dalzell, who was one of the first notable SF artists to design her
fantasy creatures from the inside out, knowing where all the bones, muscles
etc. go, and thus looking like illustrations of real creatures. (I say was
because I don't know her current situation. I do know she was sick at one
point and had to pretty much relearn to draw all over again, but I've seen
none of her work for a long time.) The piece in question was probably
"Missionary Position" and consists of two centaurs making love in a face to
face position. Mind you, very little of her work was of the erotic
variety; this was just something of a special case (and probably an
engineering challenge. :->)
Jason J. Jensen
Brian Henderson wrote:
*snip*
> >More is being done. Next year, the control of the Dealer's Den,
> >Publisher's Row and Artist's Alley are being transferred to another
> >person, which will lessen Rod's load. Namely, me. And I've already
> >decided to make a few changes, such as enforcing a brown-wrapper rule in
> >the Artist's Alley. In addition, registration for dealers will take
> >place in the most logical spot, the Den itself. Other changes will be
> >made as needed.
*applauds at the initiatives taken, and then more snipping*
> Do you think the brown-wrapper rule will be tolerated by the
> dealers/artists in the alley?
Urmmm... What precisely is the brown-wrapper rule? I don't think I've
ever come across that one; at least in the sense of an art show.
--Jay
Jason J. Jensen
Jazmyn Concolor wrote:
> A bunch of punks busted up some furniture at BayCon once and were not
> even con-goers.
>
> You don't EVEN want to know what goes on at huge business conventions
> such as CES or others... Makes some stories by a certain Rolling Stones
> writer (can't remember the guys name for some reason) look tame.
That's all well and interesting, but it still doesn't excuse what's gone
on at CF.
Saying that the goings-on at one convention are alright because much
worse happens at other conventions is hardly much of an excuse, is it?
All it seems to do is allow the subject to drift away from the problems
that had been brought up in Ed's letter.
Are those going to be addressed at all, or is the constaff going to
continue dancing around the issue?
--Jay
Jason J. Jensen
Brian Henderson wrote:
*snip*
> Ya know... I have to agree here. The con directors SHOULD NOT HAVE to
> tell grown people how to behave in public. Unfortunately, as Jason
> correctly notes below, these grown people don't seem to UNDERSTAND how
> to behave in public. Maybe their mommies and daddies didn't do a very
> good job on them or something, I don't know.
Well, figuring that the nature of these cons is to let loose and express
yourself to some degree, Brian, I wouldn't say that it's all a matter of
socially ignorant slobs. In environments such as these, the boundaries
are loosened. It's all too easy, once you've experienced loosened
boundaries, to press beyond those cultural boundaries. Con security is
there to remind us both of those boundaries and of those around us who
haven't had their boundaries relaxed.
Crossing the boundaries is something most of us do in life, Brian. I've
done it, and I'm sure you've done it in some regard in your life. None
of us are saints, and we shouldn't make judgements as such.
*more snipping*
> >(3) Security itself is becoming lax.
>
> Um, not really. Security is not becoming lax, security's hands are
> tied in what they are permitted to do. There were occasions during
> CF8 where the head of security wanted to do her job, but was not
> permitted to, or was over-ruled by a director.
I would hope that security would be permitted to lock up the art show at
night, or at least see to it that it's locked up by someone else. If
they're powerless to do either, then security is lax in my definition.
--Jay
Richard J. Bartrop
On 16 Feb 1997, Dr. Cat wrote:
>
> By the way, Bonnie Dalzell seems to register as someone I got some
> gorgeous fantasy stationery with her art on it at midwestern cons in the
> early 80s and then never saw anything else by... Anybody know where I
> could find anything by her at all?
>
There was a series of paperbacks of Niven's Known Space stories
released in the late 70's/early 80's that featured Bonnie's depictions of
Niven's aliens on the inside covers. Her work also appeared in a
collection of scientific papers on SETI, where she illustrated one on
alien life. Sorry, I can't remember the title
Richard Bartrop
Kay Shapero
On <Feb 15 18:41>, cgr...@access4.digex.net (c.groark) wrote;
c>FYI, *if* that print is one of a set of six from first encounter
c>to afterglow (as it were), the artist could well be Christine
c>Mansfield.
c>(The name and California address I have are both 12 years old: I
c>heard she'd remarried since that time.)
She's Christine Lampe these days. She's still in California though I don't
know her current address.
Kay Shapero
On <Feb 14 22:43>, BHend...@linkline.com (Brian Henderson) wrote;
B>"M. Mitchell Marmel" <marm...@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu> wrote:
>Steve Gattuso wrote:
>> in full view of everyone, including folks who are not con attendees. I
>> happen to be a banker.
>I STILL find that frightening.
B>What? That people are showing improper art in full view of the
B>general public, or that Steve is a banker?
I just want to know if he wears the ears to work. :-> (Might almost make
it worth switching to whatever bank it is he works for...)