Will some REAL fans please move to Chicago?
L.A.Z. Smith
(Karl Denninger) writes:
>That's refreshing. My Chicago experience is non-typical. That must have
>something to do with the distaste that I've had in the past around here :-)
>
>I have a bunch of fannish friends who are boycotting Chicago cons at present
>due to some of the stupidity displayed by Concoms in this area. One of them
>is FGOH at another con in the midwest!
>
>I stand corrected on the general state of the US. I would have thought that
>it was typical. I'm glad to hear its not.
I'd like to respond to this. To begin with, let me cover my credentials:
a) I live in the Chicago area, and am acquainted with
the local conventions and many of the fans.
b) I have been in fandom for 20 years.
c) I attend an average of 10 conventions a year.
d) I have worked on conventions, including Worldcons
(although not Capricon, Windycon or Chicon).
e) I publish a Hugo-nominated fanzine that is fannish
in content and produced on a mimeograph.
f) I regularly travel to other cities to visit fans
as well as communicating with them by letter,
telephone and e-mail.
g) My husband and I were this year's Down Under Fan Fund
winners. We attended the Australian Natcon in
Perth and visited fans in five cities.
h) I have lived in other cities.
So I think can say that I know whereof I speak when I talk about the
nature of fandom in Chicago in comparison to that of other cities.
Those of you who know me know that I am highly opionionated but not a
raving maniac.
Chicago is atypical in a number of ways. To begin with, there is no dominant
SF club, and no regular gathering of the city's fans. We have no
equivalent to NESFA or LASFS or even the CFG. We have no 'Ton. (There
used to be a group so informal that it didn't even have a name but was
just called "Thursday," but it died some years ago.)
Windycon is run by a corporation called ISFiC. It has a self-perpetuating
board of directors, but no real "members," the way a club has. I believe
Capricon is run by something called Mudlarks of Space that has a similar
arrangement. Recent Chicons have been run by Chicon, Inc., which has
many directors in common with ISFiC.
One of the things I find profoundly disturbing about Chicago conventions
is that, with a few exceptions (you know who you are), the people who run
them are not fans. Some of them used to be fans, but aren't anymore, and
some of them never were. By which I mean they have no connection with
fandom-at-large. They don't communicate with fans outside Chicago, let
alone go to conventions elsewhere, or read fanzines. Some of them read
science fiction, but they have no interest in what people like me think of
as fandom.
I don't know what they do in between conventions besides planning future
ones, but they don't seem to engage in fanac as I know it. Some of them
are very nice people, but I haven't a clue as to why they want to run
these cons. Some of them aren't such nice people. It does seem as if the
people who work on Chicago cons get an unusual number of perqs.
Naturally enough, when conventions are run by people who aren't very
fannish, the cons aren't very fannish either. Windycon has panels on
gardening, among other things. It's boring. But it attracts a large
enough cross-section of people that it can be enjoyable. (I don't mean
this to be an endorsement of large conventions; I mean that as a large
convention, Windycon attracts some of the people I enjoy hanging out with.)
Capricon, for the most part, gets locals. It seems to be targeting
itself toward a younger, more gaming- and media-oriented group. This
group tends to be rowdier than the older, more literary-oriented fans and
Capricon resorts to rather draconian measures in dealing with them. (This
is based on my impression of the last one I attended, two years ago,
which, admittedly, was the first one I'd been to in years). I don't
understand why the people who run the con want that kind of attendee.
I saw lots of people badly treated at the '92 Capricon, from a local pro
to a pair of prominent hucksters to random fans sitting outside the
consuite. So I have to agree with Karl in that it's not a very friendly
convention. Perhaps the committee has changed and it will be better this
year. I don't suppose I'll find out, except by hearsay.
What I find so disturbing about the state of affairs in Chicago is that --
given that there is no general gathering and the local cons are not
fan-oriented -- there is no way for proto-fans coming in to learn fannish
mores and traditions. So they wind up with attitudes like Karl's, not
knowing the customs and not caring about them either, and thinking that
conventions are just a place where they come to buy entertainment.
Chicago, while a wonderful city in many respects, is not a good place to
be a fan. Not if you think of fandom as a participatory experience and of
conventions as parties fans put on for themselves and their friends.
That's not something that anyone is going to learn here.
Chicago has no fandom.
Leah Zeldes Smith le...@smith.chi.il.us
Samantha Star Straf
: I'd like to respond to this. To begin with, let me cover my credentials:
: a) I live in the Chicago area, and am acquainted with
: the local conventions and many of the fans.
: b) I have been in fandom for 20 years.
: c) I attend an average of 10 conventions a year.
: d) I have worked on conventions, including Worldcons
: (although not Capricon, Windycon or Chicon).
: e) I publish a Hugo-nominated fanzine that is fannish
: in content and produced on a mimeograph.
: f) I regularly travel to other cities to visit fans
: as well as communicating with them by letter,
: telephone and e-mail.
: g) My husband and I were this year's Down Under Fan Fund
: winners. We attended the Australian Natcon in
: Perth and visited fans in five cities.
: h) I have lived in other cities.
:
: So I think can say that I know whereof I speak when I talk about the
: nature of fandom in Chicago in comparison to that of other cities.
: Those of you who know me know that I am highly opionionated but not a
: raving maniac.
Let me say ditto on a,c,d,f,h and ammend b with only 10 years
I have been so anoyed at the conventions in Chicago that I am taking a year
break from them. When I want to goto a SF club meeting I fly down to
KC for the weekend.
: Chicago is atypical in a number of ways. To begin with, there is no dominant
: SF club, and no regular gathering of the city's fans. We have no
: equivalent to NESFA or LASFS or even the CFG. We have no 'Ton. (There
There used to be SF clubs at a few of the universities but even those
have faded away over the years to the best of my knowledge.
It feels good to know that at least one other person agrees that Chicago has
no fandom.
--
------------------- ------------
Samantha Star Straf st...@mcs.com
Karl Denninger
>In article <2b8pi3$7...@Notwerk.mcs.com> ka...@Notwerk.mcs.com
>(Karl Denninger) writes:
>
>>That's refreshing. My Chicago experience is non-typical. That must have
>>something to do with the distaste that I've had in the past around here :-)
>
>given that there is no general gathering and the local cons are not
>fan-oriented -- there is no way for proto-fans coming in to learn fannish
>mores and traditions. So they wind up with attitudes like Karl's, not
>knowing the customs and not caring about them either, and thinking that
>conventions are just a place where they come to buy entertainment.
>
>Chicago, while a wonderful city in many respects, is not a good place to
>be a fan. Not if you think of fandom as a participatory experience and of
>conventions as parties fans put on for themselves and their friends.
>That's not something that anyone is going to learn here.
>
>Chicago has no fandom.
>
>Leah Zeldes Smith le...@smith.chi.il.us
Careful Leah; my best convention experiences have been OUTSIDE of Chicago,
and my <first> was Chambanacon many, many years ago.
Impugning my attitude as something that is a product of Chicago conventions
is unwarranted. My attitude towards these things is a result of the idea
that my "contribution" to the party has often exceeded that which I can
reasonably expect as the enjoyment from same, and the attitudes which I find
present in the concom. IF that attitude isn't present, and I'm not
treated like a piece of meat, or a "mark", then I have a different
experience. However, that wasn't the case at Confiasco, and it wasn't the
case at several recent-year Chicago area conventions.
Besides, Leah, you could always do your own con if you really wanted to :-)
Or come to Congenial in Madison next summer and see how you like it up there.
-
Karl Denninger (ka...@MCS.COM) | MCSNet - First Interactive Internet and
Modem: [+1 312 248-0900] | Clarinet feed in Chicago. Send email to
Voice/FAX: [+1 312 248-8649] | "in...@mcs.com" for more information.
Brad Templeton
that have regular parties but they are small. There is still fandom here
though, I would say.
--
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- San Jose, CA 408/296-0366
Jim Rittenhouse
: a) I live in the Chicago area, and am acquainted with
: the local conventions and many of the fans.
Same here.
: b) I have been in fandom for 20 years.
I've only had sixteen-plus, but then, I didn't start when I was 13, like you
did, so you've got a head start on me.
: c) I attend an average of 10 conventions a year.
I was up to thirteen a year - it's fallen down to eight or so.
: d) I have worked on conventions, including Worldcons
: (although not Capricon, Windycon or Chicon).
And you have run or had a VERY major role in at least three that I can think of.
Me, I've just worked on seven different cons, including Windycon, Marcon and
X-Con, not to mention the Cincy Worldcon bid and fonding / running CONGENIAL.
: e) I publish a Hugo-nominated fanzine that is fannish
: in content and produced on a mimeograph.
Well, there you got me. I just sold your ~v[{husband my mimeo and e-stenciler,
so I suppose I can't ever get that high. I do publish an occasional fanzine
(KATMANDU VISIONS) and have run four different apas, and now am in charge of
APA-69. THat's not hugo-nominee level stuff, but it's somethin'.
: f) I regularly travel to other cities to visit fans
: as well as communicating with them by letter,
: telephone and e-mail.
DittoDitto..
: g) My husband and I were this year's Down Under Fan Fund
: winners. We attended the Australian Natcon in
: Perth and visited fans in five cities.
Got me there.
: h) I have lived in other cities.
Same here, and been involved with their fandoms.
: Chicago is atypical in a number of ways. To begin with, there is no dominant
: SF club, and no regular gathering of the city's fans. We have no
: equivalent to NESFA or LASFS or even the CFG. We have no 'Ton. (There
: used to be a group so informal that it didn't even have a name but was
: just called "Thursday," but it died some years ago.)
The 'Thursday night irregulars' was a floating house party that was active for
years, and died out because too many people were unwilling to host it, or
were too busy in their lives to be involved any more. Most of the 'unwilling'
part was due to the fact that there were no bars on attendance. It eventually
became the place were the real outcasts could get some social life, and folks
were unwilling to deal with that....or the outcasts being lumped in their living rooms.
: Windycon is run by a corporation called ISFiC. It has a self-perpetuating
: board of directors, but no real "members," the way a club has. I believe
: Capricon is run by something called Mudlarks of Space that has a similar
: arrangement. Recent Chicons have been run by Chicon, Inc., which has
: many directors in common with ISFiC.
Basically, the con organizations are self-perpetuating, with little turnover.
Not unlike some cons in other places, like, say, Michigan.
: One of the things I find profoundly disturbing about Chicago conventions
: is that, with a few exceptions (you know who you are), the people who run
: them are not fans. Some of them used to be fans, but aren't anymore, and
: some of them never were. By which I mean they have no connection with
: fandom-at-large. They don't communicate with fans outside Chicago, let
: alone go to conventions elsewhere, or read fanzines. Some of them read
: science fiction, but they have no interest in what people like me think of
: as fandom.
I think that that is more than a little harsh. The present chair of Capricon
is a literate, thoughtful and travelled person. Bill Roper is the chair of
ISFIC, and I'd say he's more than a little versed in all fannish areas. There
is a dearth, I'll admit, of trufannish types in department head / worker
positions. There's a trekkie group that does a lot of work for Windy, and
a lot of anume sorts with Capricon.
As to Duckcon and Gavin's new con - I dunno. There's a lot of media people
involved with those, and no trufans that I know of.
: I don't know what they do in between conventions besides planning future
: ones, but they don't seem to engage in fanac as I know it. Some of them
: are very nice people, but I haven't a clue as to why they want to run
: these cons. Some of them aren't such nice people. It does seem as if the
: people who work on Chicago cons get an unusual number of perqs.
I know a lot of briefcase-carrying SMOF types that live to run cons. I don't
agree with the amount of perqs I see with some organizations here, but it's
their friggin' con. Sometimes, people have only time to do certain things,
and can't be 'renaissance man' types.
: Naturally enough, when conventions are run by people who aren't very
: fannish, the cons aren't very fannish either. Windycon has panels on
: gardening, among other things. It's boring. But it attracts a large
: enough cross-section of people that it can be enjoyable. (I don't mean
: this to be an endorsement of large conventions; I mean that as a large
: convention, Windycon attracts some of the people I enjoy hanging out with.)
Well, Fannish is as Fannish does. I'll agree that trufandom isn't pushed much
at cons, but whenever I get to a fannish party, SF or fanzines is not as big a
topic as other things. My first party back in the Chicago area after being
away for two years was dominated by a group of suburban matrons oohing and
aahing away at new babies, sonograms and samples from the new bathroom or
kitchen. How outre, right?
: Capricon, for the most part, gets locals. It seems to be targeting
: itself toward a younger, more gaming- and media-oriented group. This
: group tends to be rowdier than the older, more literary-oriented fans and
: Capricon resorts to rather draconian measures in dealing with them. (This
: is based on my impression of the last one I attended, two years ago,
: which, admittedly, was the first one I'd been to in years). I don't
: understand why the people who run the con want that kind of attendee.
: convention. Perhaps the committee has changed and it will be better this
: year. I don't suppose I'll find out, except by hearsay.
I'll third that motion, as I'd hate to see Cap die, but I've the same opinion
on the con. It is a rowdy, drunken mess, and the concom (so far as I've been
able to see) has doen nothing to stem this. If Capricon is to survive, it
MUST sit on these people.
: What I find so disturbing about the state of affairs in Chicago is that --
: given that there is no general gathering and the local cons are not
: fan-oriented -- there is no way for proto-fans coming in to learn fannish
: mores and traditions. So they wind up with attitudes like Karl's, not
: knowing the customs and not caring about them either, and thinking that
: conventions are just a place where they come to buy entertainment.
Well, there's a lot of truth to that. Karl is more reasonable than he might
{sound to some of you - but yeah, he's never been much exposed to trufandom.
And frankly, not many are. The trufans have sniffed at the newbies for years
and waved their credentials around for years - and the newbies don't give a
damn for no steeking credentials. And the newbie are left to reinvent fandom
on the best terms that they can come up with - on their own. The question
we have to ask ourselvd{s is - what have we done to make trufandom accesable to
the masses? When was the last time we gave out a fanzine to someone not on
the 'A' list? When did we try to set up some sort of discussion group? Who
did we last try to take under our wings?
It's all an individual effort sort of thing, IMHO. Where do we start?
: Chicago, while a wonderful city in many respects, is not a good place to
Jim Rittenhouse
: There used to be SF clubs at a few of the universities but even those
There were sf groups at DePaul and UofI Circle, but they died out long ago.
There is the remnant of one that was a semi-formal group at Northwestern,
but it's not much anymore. There was also a group at NorthEastern Illinois
University, but I'm not sure how active it is now.
But yeah, there is no organized Chicago fandom, and hasn't been for a long-long
time. Even Thursdays were unorganized.
Jim Rittenhouse
: is unwarranted. My attitude towards these things is a result of the idea
: that my "contribution" to the party has often exceeded that which I can
: reasonably expect as the enjoyment from same, and the attitudes which I find
: present in the concom. IF that attitude isn't present, and I'm not
: treated like a piece of meat, or a "mark", then I have a different
: experience. However, that wasn't the case at Confiasco, and it wasn't the
: case at several recent-year Chicago area conventions.
: Besides, Leah, you could always do your own con if you really wanted to :-)
: Or come to Congenial in Madison next summer and see how you like it up there.
Karl, I think that what Leah was trying to say was that she saw your attitude
as representative of people who were 'unchurched' in the ways of fandom.
I dunno. My feeling is that the management of local cons have gotten
too wrapped up in mass-marketing the con that they lost touch with what
the want or should have. The 'piece of meat' description is dead-on. I
know people who work with both cons who would not care for that representation,
and there are folks (like B {ill Higgins) who do give a damn. But there are
too many who don't - and that atmosphere carried over to the con as a whole.
L.A.Z. Smith
(Jim Rittenhouse) writes:
>Well, there's a lot of truth to that. Karl is more reasonable than he might
>{sound to some of you - but yeah, he's never been much exposed to trufandom.
>And frankly, not many are. The trufans have sniffed at the newbies for years
>and waved their credentials around for years - and the newbies don't give a
>damn for no steeking credentials.
Why not? I did when I was a neofan. As I recall, you did
too. We may have grumbled some about the BNFs who ignored us, but we
certainly tried to emulate them.
>And the newbie are left to reinvent fandom
>on the best terms that they can come up with - on their own. The question
>we have to ask ourselvd{s is - what have we done to make trufandom accesable to
>the masses?
Why should we? Fandom wasn't very accessible when I found it.
How accessible was it in Findlay, Ohio, when you found it?
When was the last time we gave out a fanzine to someone not on
>the 'A' list? When did we try to set up some sort of discussion group? Who
>did we last try to take under our wings?
About 10 percent of STET's print run goes out as spec copies. Probably
half of them go to people whom I met at a con, or who otherwise aren't
already somewhat involved in fanzine fandom. (Of course, they have to
become involved, or they don't get more copies of the zine.) This is
besides the people who send money for a sample.
My 'A' list would surprise you, I think.
Over the years, I think I've been responsible for bringing in quite a few
fans. Some of them have since gafiated. Some have done little of note.
Some have become BNFs. At least one got nominated for a Hugo long
before I did. And at this year's Windycon, three or four people will
be attending their first con because Dick and I told them about it.
But it's true that I can't think of a single person whom I brought into
fandom who has an attitude even remotely like Karl Denninger's. I don't
know who his mentors were, but they have a lot to answer for.
Leah Smith le...@smith.chi.il.us
Karl Denninger
>In article <2bh88t$1...@genesis.MCS.COM> jrit...@genesis.MCS.COM
>(Jim Rittenhouse) writes:
>
>>{sound to some of you - but yeah, he's never been much exposed to trufandom.
>>And frankly, not many are. The trufans have sniffed at the newbies for years
>>and waved their credentials around for years - and the newbies don't give a
>>damn for no steeking credentials.
>
>too. We may have grumbled some about the BNFs who ignored us, but we
>certainly tried to emulate them.
>
>>on the best terms that they can come up with - on their own. The question
>>we have to ask ourselvd{s is - what have we done to make trufandom accesable to
>>the masses?
>
>How accessible was it in Findlay, Ohio, when you found it?
More evidence for the exclusive "It's mine, goddamnit, and go away you
child!" attitude that is at the very heart of this problem.
You know what happens when you take this attitude? You don't get to impress
upon people with the ideas you feel others should have. No, most folks
won't bother with people like you in that case - instead, they will form
their own attitudes and opinions, their own synthesis of what works and what
doesn't. And, most importantly, you will have <no> say in the outcome.
As your ranks get thinner and thinner, by your own exclusionary policies,
you will find that the people and groups you thought were a "family" are no
longer represented in any significant number. Things like Moderation show
up at Cons. People like me start defining fandom as <we> see it, not as
<you> see it. For me that means many things -- an air of professionalism in
the way conventions are conducted, tolerance of other's personal lifestyle
choice, and many other ideas and attitudes which I have gone on for many
pages about right here.
>But it's true that I can't think of a single person whom I brought into
>fandom who has an attitude even remotely like Karl Denninger's. I don't
>know who his mentors were, but they have a lot to answer for.
>
>Leah Smith le...@smith.chi.il.us
Mentors? Why do I need one? Can I not find a stellar example of Science
Fiction in the local library? I've been involved in reading SF since I was
a young whip who had to bribe his mom to take him to the library -- because
I didn't have the resources to buy my own books.
Cons came later. Like when I had money. And like most of the things I do,
I think for myself when it comes to them. Nobody "molds" my attitudes.
They can present an example -- as you have done here. That example is not
one I would emulate.
--
mark
>L.A.Z. Smith (le...@smith.CHI.IL.US) wrote:
<buncha reasons they say there's no fandom in Chi-town sacrificed to the BPS>
Austin's similar. It's a weird town. I think everyone's so laid-back, and
"there's so much going on", that *no* *one* wants to "commit" to going
somewhere with a buncha folks *once a month* (but they expect their con
to be there).
When I moved to Austin, I asked around as to when the local sf club meeting
was. It took me a month to find out when FACT met. I made a meeting, and
discovered it wasn't a club, it was a BOD meeting. It had *no* social
or program functions, just an on-going con committee.
About a year later, some folks and I started a club. Oddly enough,
the *same* night, unknowingly, another club organized. We met, and
decided we weren't competing, since we wanted what was sort of an
East Coast type club, with programming. They wanted partying. We ran for
about a year, had some good authors, had some interesting programs,
got as many as twenty-odd folks to come to one meeting. Except for
the core half a dozen or so, nobody would come regularly. The other club
had parties, and even ran a con. (Burnout time) They had their same
core, and the same problem. In neither club was there *anyone* who
wanted to take over, or even join as a new officer. We died after
about a year or a bit more. They lasted about four or five months more.
From things I heard, this has happened in Austin for 20 years, and that there
had been about 10 other clubs that had died in that time.
Ah don't know whut it is 'bout this younger gin-ration of fen....
mark
Jim Rittenhouse
: In article <2bh88t$1...@genesis.MCS.COM> jrit...@genesis.MCS.COM
: (Jim Rittenhouse) writes:
: >And frankly, not many are. The trufans have sniffed at the newbies for years
: >and waved their credentials around for years - and the newbies don't give a
: >damn for no steeking credentials.
: Why not? I did when I was a neofan. As I recall, you did
: too. We may have grumbled some about the BNFs who ignored us, but we
: certainly tried to emulate them.
I did, but I got dropped into the lap of people who were somebody in fandom
at an early age - people like Dick, or Kurt Erichsen, or Mark Evans, or
Ross Pavlac. I learned very early on that sort of respect for hard work
and where the BNF status came from. But that was 1977 or thereabouts, and
I had a lot of patient teachers.
: >And the newbie are left to reinvent fandom
: >on the best terms that they can come up with - on their own. The question
: >we have to ask ourselvd{s is - what have we done to make trufandom accesable to
: >the masses?
: Why should we? Fandom wasn't very accessible when I found it.
: How accessible was it in Findlay, Ohio, when you found it?
Actually, I had heard of {fandom and cons before I moved to Findlay, Ohio
(which for the unknowing, is way-the-heck-out-in-the-middle-of-nowhere for
that state). But it was the boredom in Findlay that got me to go to a con
in Cincinnati - Midwestcon. Dropped into the middle of the largest collection
of zine and con-running SMOFs in the country. I got ruined. And I had to
continue to go over two hours away from home - minimum - to any kind of fannish
gathering for the next seven years. In short, I went out and dragged in
fandom and zine stuff kicking and screaming. There are people who still think
that I'm too much of a newbie for their taste.
Why should we make the effort? Because we lose a lot of our right to complain
if we don't. I do. I have a fanzine room at CONGENIAL and do a one-shot
every year that is put together from people's contributions - and every year,
it sells out (and gets paid circulation with a lot of people who don't otherwisesee a fanzine). And I pass my perzine around to a lot of people who are fanzinefans - and some that aren't.
Jim Rittenhouse
: In article <11...@smith.chi.il.us>, L.A.Z. Smith <le...@smith.chi.il.us> wrote:
: >
: >>And the newbie are left to reinvent fandom
: >>on the best terms that they can come up with - on their own. The question
: >>we have to ask ourselvd{s is - what have we done to make trufandom accesable to
: >>the masses?
: >
: >Why should we? Fandom wasn't very accessible when I found it.
: >How accessible was it in Findlay, Ohio, when you found it?
: You know what happens when you take this attitude? You don't get to impress
: upon people with the ideas you feel others should have. No, most folks
: won't bother with people like you in that case - instead, they will form
: their own attitudes and opinions, their own synthesis of what works and what
: doesn't. And, most importantly, you will have <no> say in the outcome.
: As your ranks get thinner and thinner, by your own exclusionary policies,
: you will find that the people and groups you thought were a "family" are no
: longer represented in any significant number. Things like Moderation show
: up at Cons. People like me start defining fandom as <we> see it, not as
: <you> see it. For me that means many things -- an air of professionalism in
: the way conventions are conducted, tolerance of other's personal lifestyle
: choice, and many other ideas and attitudes which I have gone on for many
: pages about right here.
*sigh* Minus your more personal grumbles at Leah, there's a whole lot of
truth in what you're saying. Fanzine fandom _has_ become thinner and thinner,
and more self-referential - and clubbish - and scornful of the peons outside.
Many fanzine fans are not so, but the haughtier ones are enough so that they
discourage people from joining in. And the end result is a lot of unruly
folks like the MODERATION crowd. It is, to me, one of the great sadnesses
of fandom in my time. I hope that people can work towards expanding the
realm of trufandom...and teach the legends and lore and history of fandom.
And some sense of How Things Are Done. If we can, we can keep the
barbarians from the gate. If not, we are a dying breed.
U19...@uicvm.uic.edu
Rittenhouse) says:
>
>Samantha Star Straf (st...@genesis.MCS.COM) wrote:
>
>There were sf groups at DePaul and UofI Circle, but they died out long ago.
As far as UIC's concerned, that's not _quite_ true. I used to run the
SFS (for what _that's_ worth), and the primary problem I had was twofold:
one, I had to deal with UIC's student org bureaucracy (no mean feat in
itself); two, one of the newbies we were forced to pick as an officer acted
like a total head case. Because a previous officer saw fit to cop an attitude
and refused to sign his name to our registration form because he was allegedly
too busy rolling up a character for an RPG he was in, we had to install a
mutant who vandalized our office (getting us booted from it in the process)
and who refused to attend his stu-org orientation (thus getting our registra-
tion-and our status as a student org-put in severe trouble). By losing the
office, we had to park our library in a member's home (luckily, he's now
the President) and our visibility went from low to zero.
With simply _wunnerful_ little problems like this, is it all that hard to
see why college clubs aren't _de_rigeur_ these days?
BTW, there _is_ a SF club at Northeastern Illinois. I'm not sure what their
status is now, but they were in existence in '92-'93. No fooling.
** Chris Krolczyk, Agnostic-at-Large **
** Email: u19...@uicvm.uic.edu / U19...@UICVM.BITNET **
** The above expressed opinions and views are solely my **
** responsibility...so go sue some other college, dope. **
U19...@uicvm.uic.edu
to give out the Email address of the _current_ President. Here 'tis:
Contact Dave Hanley at:
u19...@uicvm.uic.edu _or_
U19...@UICVM.BITNET
For courtesy's sake, please mention that your post has to do with the
Science Fiction Society at UIC. Don't worry, I warned him. >:)
L.A.Z. Smith
(Jim Rittenhouse) writes:
>There are people who still think
>that I'm too much of a newbie for their taste.
For a long time, I thought that some people felt that way about me, too.
Then after awhile, I noticed that some of them hadn't been in fandom any
longer than I had. So I've come to grips with the fact that the reason
these people don't consider me part of their group is that
they just don't like me personally, for whatever reason.
And that kind of thing happens in any social context, not just fandom.
There are always going to be people who don't like you, whoever you are
and whatever you do. That's life.
Leah Smith le...@smith.chi.il.us
Chris Croughton
>I think that that is more than a little harsh. The present chair of Capricon
>is a literate, thoughtful and travelled person. Bill Roper is the chair of
>ISFIC, and I'd say he's more than a little versed in all fannish areas. There
>is a dearth, I'll admit, of trufannish types in department head / worker
>positions. There's a trekkie group that does a lot of work for Windy, and
>a lot of anume sorts with Capricon.
>
>As to Duckcon and Gavin's new con - I dunno. There's a lot of media people
>involved with those, and no trufans that I know of.
What damnation with faint praise! "A trekkie group", "anume sorts"
(presumably 'anime' with a typo), "media people ... no trufans" - I
don't think I want to be associated with these 'trufans' with that sort
of attitude. As much as I hate to admit it, I find myself agreeing with
Karl about 'elitism' - there seems to be far to much "He's not *our*
sort of fan, so he's not a fan really".
Whether this is a net-attitude, or a mainly American phenomenon, I don't
know, but it seems to be mainly absent in the British fans I know, or
perhaps it's just that I only mix with people who are tolerant.
Please, is there anywhere in American fandom that doesn't have this
attitude of "You're not a real fan"?
***********************************************************************
* ch...@keris.demon.co.uk * *
* chr...@cix.compulink.co.uk * FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life) *
* 10001...@compuserve.com * *
***********************************************************************
Charlie Prael
> Please, is there anywhere in American fandom that doesn't have this
> attitude of "You're not a real fan"?
Chris-- Yep. Care to try the Bay Area? <g>
------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlie Prael - da...@shakala.com
Shakala BBS (ClanZen Radio Network) Sunnyvale, CA +1-408-734-2289
mark
>In article <2bh88t$1...@genesis.MCS.COM>
> jrit...@genesis.MCS.COM (Jim Rittenhouse) writes:
>>positions. There's a trekkie group that does a lot of work for Windy, and
>>a lot of anume sorts with Capricon.
>>
>>As to Duckcon and Gavin's new con - I dunno. There's a lot of media people
>>involved with those, and no trufans that I know of.
>
>What damnation with faint praise! "A trekkie group", "anume sorts"
>(presumably 'anime' with a typo), "media people ... no trufans" - I
>don't think I want to be associated with these 'trufans' with that sort
>of attitude. As much as I hate to admit it, I find myself agreeing with
>Karl about 'elitism' - there seems to be far to much "He's not *our*
>sort of fan, so he's not a fan really".
>
>Whether this is a net-attitude, or a mainly American phenomenon, I don't
>know, but it seems to be mainly absent in the British fans I know, or
>perhaps it's just that I only mix with people who are tolerant.
>
>Please, is there anywhere in American fandom that doesn't have this
>attitude of "You're not a real fan"?
>
One of the attitudes I see *much* more of since the smofs took over is
that attitude. When I first got into fandom, the only folks who tended to
get looked down on were Trekkies (and back then, they were all in that
cataglory, no three types, thank you), and *that* was because they tended
to stay away from trufandom, rarely came to cons or clubs, and didn't
want to know about any other universes than Roddenberry's. To a good
extent, this has changed over the years (though there's a *certain*
Trekkie we could have done without, one who's become a smof). But with
the increasing power of smofs, and the growth of fandom itself, it became
impossible to know *everyone*, and some folks, still human (unlike the rest
of us), fought this change by rejecting other fen whose major interests
were video, or gaming, etc., rather than try to bring them into the fold.
Remember that local cons have become, in some cases, regionals, and
those have gone, in the States, from 200-400 people in the late 60's
to 800-2500 (and more!) in the late 80's and early 90's.
There are some cons, and clubs, that do try to cater to all tastes, at
least to some degree. And there are some of us who try to carry on with
that old time religion. But the "fringefen" need to come *into* the
clubs, and broaden them out. Here's a call to arms, for you: assimilate,
assimilate!
mark
Covert C Beach
mark <markbr%rad...@natinst.com> wrote:
>In article <753519...@keris.demon.co.uk>
> ch...@keris.demon.co.uk (Chris Croughton) writes:
>>Please, is there anywhere in American fandom that doesn't have this
>>attitude of "You're not a real fan"?
>*sigh*
>One of the attitudes I see *much* more of since the smofs took over is
>that attitude.
I suppose it is human to blame what you can't control on sinister
conspiracies that are out to get you. But it is not realistic.
Who are thse smofs with attitudes that have taken over?
Certainly not the groups commonly refered to as smofs (the sort of
people who attend smofcon, and talk about how cons, particulary worldcons,
should be run.) These people have no real control over anything, just
a lot of experience and a willingness to work a lot of uncompensated
hours (even Chicon, which got blasted for the perks the committee received,
didn't come close to compensating them for what their time was worth) to
try to run a party.
If they were really in control:
The '94 Worldcon would have been in Louisville.
The '93 Worldcon would have been in Hawaii. (Take a look at Hawaii's
pre-support and committee list in CF's PR1, the conrunning experience
there is almost appalling. :-))
The Boston in '98 (the new one) bid probably wouldn't exist.
> When I first got into fandom, the only folks who tended to
>get looked down on were Trekkies (and back then, they were all in that
>cataglory, no three types, thank you), and *that* was because they tended
>to stay away from trufandom, rarely came to cons or clubs, and didn't
>want to know about any other universes than Roddenberry's. To a good
>extent, this has changed over the years (though there's a *certain*
>Trekkie we could have done without, one who's become a smof).
Does he wear a bow-tie? :-)
If you are referring to who I think you are I will take your critisism
more seriously whan you have worked more than a tiny fraction of what
he has to help out at conventions. But agree or disagree with him, he is
not in control of anything either.
From the impression I get in reading your post, when you got into fandom
the trekkies were probably the only really organized separate branch of
fandom. Costume, Gaming, etc. groups have all matured greatly in the
last decade. I suppose I should revise the statement on human nature
above and refer to humans as a pack animal, like wolves, ready to rend
anyone who they perceive as not belonging to their pack. Unfortunatley
conrunning has become complex enough that it to constitutes a separate
pack.
> But with
>the increasing power of smofs, and the growth of fandom itself, it became
>impossible to know *everyone*, and some folks, still human (unlike the rest
>of us), fought this change by rejecting other fen whose major interests
>were video, or gaming, etc., rather than try to bring them into the fold.
>Remember that local cons have become, in some cases, regionals, and
>those have gone, in the States, from 200-400 people in the late 60's
>to 800-2500 (and more!) in the late 80's and early 90's.
As I said, smof power is not increasing. But otherwise, the above
paragraph is correct. Smofs are still human, with only a limited
amount of energy to spare for the hobby. It has gotten to the point
that anyone who expresses more than minimal interest can find themselves
wearing a half-dozen hats, because a lot of con goers don't volenteer
or have burned out.
As a result I do not bame a conrunning group when a 'fringe' activity
is not well supported. The committee only has so much energy. I have
heard complaints that filkers receive short shrift at Disclave compared
to films or the gamers. That is because there is a group that can and
is willing to do films, and there are current or former gamers at every
level of the committee. There is 1 (count her) one filker. She does
a lot of work, but there is only one of her, so filking tends to not
be a high priority when it come time to allocate space. (and they
are so fussy about their space too)
>There are some cons, and clubs, that do try to cater to all tastes, at
>least to some degree. And there are some of us who try to carry on with
>that old time religion. But the "fringefen" need to come *into* the
>clubs, and broaden them out. Here's a call to arms, for you: assimilate,
>assimilate!
>
In my experience, the cater to every interest groups tend to be in
areas where fandom is still small and not completely split up yet.
But if you don't like how things are done - Get involved! You can
make a difference! It may take a couple of years (or a lifetime
if you are trying to subvert NESFA :-)) but it can be done.
--
Covert C Beach
dra...@access.digex.net
Ahrvid Engholm
>Who are thse smofs with attitudes that have taken over?
no SMOFs (Secret Masters of Fandom). The concept of SMOFs is only used for
fun. Surely there are people that can be called "Masters of Fandom", or
at least influential for fandom, but they can't POSSIBLY be "secret".
The term "SMOF" is a contradiction in terms: if you are a "Master of
Fandom" you can't be that if no one knows you. Some people have a big
influence over fandom, but not because they are "secret" but because they
are known, even well known.
Anyone that knows fandom also knows that fans will often use concepts
just for the fun of it, things that aren't real, that doesn't exist. SMOFs
is such a thing. Talking about SMOFs is like wearing a beanie; it's a joke.
No one wears a beanie. (I have a beanie, but I never wear it... Almost never.)
U19...@uicvm.uic.edu
Croughton) says:
>
>In article <2bh88t$1...@genesis.MCS.COM>
> jrit...@genesis.MCS.COM (Jim Rittenhouse) writes:
>
>>I think that that is more than a little harsh. The present chair of Capricon
>>is a literate, thoughtful and travelled person. Bill Roper is the chair of
>>ISFIC, and I'd say he's more than a little versed in all fannish areas.
>There
>>is a dearth, I'll admit, of trufannish types in department head / worker
>>positions. There's a trekkie group that does a lot of work for Windy, and
>>a lot of anume sorts with Capricon.
>>As to Duckcon and Gavin's new con - I dunno. There's a lot of media people
>>involved with those, and no trufans that I know of.
>What damnation with faint praise! "A trekkie group", "anume sorts"
>(presumably 'anime' with a typo), "media people ... no trufans" - I
>don't think I want to be associated with these 'trufans' with that sort
>of attitude.
I don't want to drive this point into the ground again (and again, and again,
and again..... ), but I have a vehement dislike of the very word "trufan"
due to the fact that it always hinges on the observer's POV, as you pointed
out above. The thing that amazes me is that anybody would fling the damnable
"neofan" word around (like, say, Leah did with Karl) simply because someone
didn't fit a _subjective_ (oik!) definition of "trufandom".
I don't have much love for trekkies or many other "media" fen, but the fact is
that they deserve to be at cons as much as anybody else. My dislike stems from
the fact that they may be into things I don't necessarily like and wrap them-
selves up way too much into this or that single-interest kit bag, but they're
fen, all the same. They're just not fen I'm particularly inclined to be
associated with.
> As much as I hate to admit it, I find myself agreeing with
>Karl about 'elitism' - there seems to be far to much "He's not *our*
>sort of fan, so he's not a fan really".
Another (reiterated) point: some of this "neo"-baiting is merely baiting of
people who (A) aren't part of the observer's personal circle or (B) may've
done something to overstep or even offend the observer's personal circle. To
be perfectly honest, I like meeting people who aren't all associated with
Group X or Group Y. Eclecticism is a definite plus in fandom, especially
concerning the exchange of ideas.
>Whether this is a net-attitude, or a mainly American phenomenon, I don't
>know, but it seems to be mainly absent in the British fans I know, or
>perhaps it's just that I only mix with people who are tolerant.
I'm sure that there are British fans who are just as insular as some of us-
I just think you've been lucky enough not to run into 'em.
>Please, is there anywhere in American fandom that doesn't have this
>attitude of "You're not a real fan"?
Just keep your eyes open. Individuals being as varied as they are, you're
sure to find someone who fits your definition eventually.
dba notes
>>that attitude.
>
>I suppose it is human to blame what you can't control on sinister
>conspiracies that are out to get you. But it is not realistic.
Or if you exist in a local fandom that is ravaged by SMOF politics. I've
existed.. or exist in one myself.
>Certainly not the groups commonly refered to as smofs (the sort of
>people who attend smofcon, and talk about how cons, particulary worldcons,
>should be run.) These people have no real control over anything, just
>a lot of experience and a willingness to work a lot of uncompensated
>hours (even Chicon, which got blasted for the perks the committee received,
>didn't come close to compensating them for what their time was worth) to
>try to run a party.
I agree. SMOFs have NO control.. well, they certainly don't have the power
that they would like you to believe they have anyway. However, they seem to
have an awful ability to control, at least locally, the morale of fans.
Maybe this is the result of a local shrinking fandom which was all but killed
by a SMOF political battle.
>amount of energy to spare for the hobby. It has gotten to the point
>that anyone who expresses more than minimal interest can find themselves
>wearing a half-dozen hats, because a lot of con goers don't volenteer
>or have burned out.
Even though I live in a fandom that seems to be steadly shrinking, it
does seem like a lot of elements are certainly beginning to come together
under fandom. There seems to be explosions in several areas and are catching
up to rest under the one umbrella of fandom. In fact, it seems like the term,
"Science Fiction Fandom" is hard to use any longer. Everyone is using the
generic, all-engrossing term, "Fandom."
I mean to say this because it seems like what were once fringe groups of
SF fandom (by fringe, meaning groups that didn't really have much to do
with SF or Fantasy but seemed to hang out at conventions that had to do
with SF or Fantasy or both) are quickly becoming organized, powerhouse
"fandoms" of their own.
Oh.. let's see. There's comics.. that fandom is booming. True, due in
part to the massive media blitz about Batman's incapacitation and Superman's
decapitation, but it's out there. Even in places like here, there are shows
literally every weekend and the precense at the bigger cons is taking up
more and more dealer and room space. We are seeing the birth of actual
trade shows in the form of conventions (San Diego's ComiCon being one).
Computer Fandom? True! MOre and more fans are spending time on-line!
Creating on-line convetions, TinyMUCKs, and personal appearances by pro
guests have really made many a fan buy a 'puter and modem. At the
regional cons, I've seen BBS Dealer's Tables, computer LAN games set up in
gaming rooms, panels about getting more from on-line, and groups hold room
parties. It's not all SF either! It's fantasy, it's cyberpunk, it's internet.
Heck, at the last regional, I met a hacker group and they told me that they
hang out at cons to meet other Netters. Plus, they are witnessing the birth
of a bonafide trade show, The One BBSCON that's annually held in Colorado.
Fanzine fandom is not dying, though I believe it is changing. Why? ZINEDOM
meaning zines that are of many different topics (pick up a Factsheet Five)
like Fringe, Sex, Occult, Media, Per, etc. etc. is starting to creep into
what was once a SF ground solely. Again, regional cons have showed me this.
What I feel is happening is because these other types of zines are creeping
in, more and more people are starting to publish. It's just coincidental
that they may see a Bruce Campbell fanzine at a local convention, or a
zine about sex.. but they may feel like they can publish something other
than SF and distribute at a SF con.. and it just snowballs.
Movie fandom is expanding to other areas of SF Fandom. Bad Film Fests,
independent video markets, collectibles, etc.. are popping up at cons
that may have been only Sf movies at one point. It's like zines in a
respect because it's the same snowball of someone doing something different, doing it themselves or something equally as different. Etc.
This is not to mention that world communication is becoming easier, thus
the big booms of British Fan Fandom (meaning fans here who like British
items) and Anime' Fandom. Plus, some may be able to mention more.
These seem to be forcing conventions to conform.. conform by becoming
more and more generic offering side tracks to panels that pertain to most
of these topics.
When will it end? Who knows? A lot of it simply has to do with the fact
that a lot of the things that were talked about in SF and F books in the past
are now reality (ie Computer on line.. space (like the boom of Pro Space
Fandom)).
This is just my perception mind you.
>As a result I do not bame a conrunning group when a 'fringe' activity
>is not well supported. The committee only has so much energy. I have
>heard complaints that filkers receive short shrift at Disclave compared
>to films or the gamers. That is because there is a group that can and
>is willing to do films, and there are current or former gamers at every
>level of the committee. There is 1 (count her) one filker. She does
>a lot of work, but there is only one of her, so filking tends to not
>be a high priority when it come time to allocate space. (and they
>are so fussy about their space too)
That's right. If there were more, then it would have to conform. Or,
they'd do there own.. but the process would start again. Let's say Fan A
starts a con. It specializes in filking. For years it grows. Now, while
it grows, a small group of local gamers form. A few of them are filk fans
as well. So, they meet at the convention with promises to do some late night
gaming. Other people who attend the con find out about the games and join
the group at the con, starting other games or playing one. Eventually, this
group will volunteer to do panels (and might get some) stirring up more
intereste.. time goes on and more space is given. THen it become known
for its great filking AND gaming.. etc.
>>that old time religion. But the "fringefen" need to come *into* the
>>clubs, and broaden them out. Here's a call to arms, for you: assimilate,
>>assimilate!
Agreed.
>In my experience, the cater to every interest groups tend to be in
>areas where fandom is still small and not completely split up yet.
>But if you don't like how things are done - Get involved! You can
>make a difference! It may take a couple of years (or a lifetime
>if you are trying to subvert NESFA :-)) but it can be done.
I think that's changing, obviously. We have a small fandom here and
almost all of it media. Go figure. :)
Mike...
--
-----
Fulcrum - That Sassy Sassy Style...
The Internet Experience: Ful...@Neosoft.Com
"If food could talk, I wonder what this would say...?"
Lynn Gold
>ch...@keris.demon.co.uk (Chris Croughton) writes:
>
>> Please, is there anywhere in American fandom that doesn't have this
>> attitude of "You're not a real fan"?
>
>Chris-- Yep. Care to try the Bay Area? <g>
Thanks, Charlie. :-)
Seriously, at my brother's wedding rehearsal dinner, the women in the
party who my sister-in-law (-to-be) knew through east coast media cons
were REALLY snooty. They started talking down to me, referring to ME as a
"mundane."
I remarked, "WHO are you calling 'mundane,' Keemosabe?"
One of them replied, "Oh, YOU wouldn't UNDERSTAND that kind of stuff."
"Uh, excuse me, but have you ever heard of 'WorldCon?'"
The same one remarked, "Uh, yeah." The eyebrows of the two raised a bit.
"I was an invited guest last year. I filk." Their eyebrows raised
higher.
They then asked me if I'd heard of some east coast media/creation con. I
said I hadn't. They then said, "Well YOU don't COUNT, then."
On the other hand, the men in the wedding party, all fannish friends of my
brother's, all overheard this and INSTANTLY respected me. They EVEN asked
me if I wanted to go to the bachelor's party with them! :-)
--Lynn
--
Lynn Gold "net.fogey" fi...@netcom.com
(415) 968-7366 or lag...@us.oracle.com
"I want patience, and I want it NOW, DAMMIT!"
Jim Rittenhouse
: In article <5s28cc...@shakala.com> da...@shakala.com (Charlie Prael) writes:
: >ch...@keris.demon.co.uk (Chris Croughton) writes:
: >
: >> Please, is there anywhere in American fandom that doesn't have this
: >> attitude of "You're not a real fan"?
: >
: >Chris-- Yep. Care to try the Bay Area? <g>
I seriously doubt it.
: Seriously, at my brother's wedding rehearsal dinner, the women in the
: party who my sister-in-law (-to-be) knew through east coast media cons
: were REALLY snooty. They started talking down to me, referring to ME as a
: "mundane."
Snootiness is something than seems to be everywhere in fandom, and I try not
to be snooty. But when Leah described her parameters as to 'real fan', and
I understand what her parameters are, more or less, the answer is that, no,
there's a dearth of them.
This is not to say that people who are media or filk or whatever special interest fans are not fans, but that the old-style fanzine fan sorts are rare, IMHO.
D. 'Krikket' Krick
>In article <2bh88t$1...@genesis.MCS.COM>
> jrit...@genesis.MCS.COM (Jim Rittenhouse) writes:
>
>>I think that that is more than a little harsh. The present chair of
>>Capricon is a literate, thoughtful and travelled person. Bill Roper is the
>>chair of ISFIC, and I'd say he's more than a little versed in all fannish
>>areas. There is a dearth, I'll admit, of trufannish types in department
>>head / worker positions.
Excuse me while I ROTFL over the Capricon comments... Unfortunately I missed
(so I understand) the bulk of the Cap discussion. I find it rather humorous
that this comment is made regarding Capricon considering how many Chicago Fen
are sick and tired of the crap from Cap. How many times did the hotel have to
tell the ConCom that they cannot legally rezone the smoking/non-smoking areas?
How many huxters are pissed off at the convention, after the comment last year
to fandom at the "How to improve Cap for next year" meeting that was along the
lines of, "We don't care about the huxters. There are always more huxters out
there to replace the ones who are here now."
How many people are pissed about the way room parties were handled by the
ConCom? Need I continue the list? Starting two years ago there were even
enough people who decided to quit Capricon that there was a "Non-ComCom" (or
"anti-ComCon" formed! This year there has been talk of an informal boycott.
(I know that *I* won't be comming back to CapriCon, except possibly to help run
a room party; and then I won't be buying a badge. If someone wants to provide
me with one, I'll take it, but I ain't giving them my money...)
>>There's a trekkie group that does a lot of work for Windy, and a lot of anume
sorts with Capricon.
I've heard a rumor that the Jap Anime people are considering quitting CapriCon.
Note that this is just a rumor, but I've heard it from a couple independant
sources -- Both of which are tied into the anime crowd...
>>As to Duckcon and Gavin's new con - I dunno. There's a lot of media people
>>involved with those, and no trufans that I know of.
There are a lot of media people involved in Duckon and Consanguinuity?
(Forgive me if I mispelled that one, I don't have my dictionary handy.) Odd, I
don't remember any media people at any Duckon related event, or hear about any
of 'em regarding Consanguinuity....
>What damnation with faint praise! "A trekkie group", "anume sorts"
>(presumably 'anime' with a typo), "media people ... no trufans" - I
>don't think I want to be associated with these 'trufans' with that sort
>of attitude. As much as I hate to admit it, I find myself agreeing with
>Karl about 'elitism' - there seems to be far to much "He's not *our*
>sort of fan, so he's not a fan really".
Karl definately got this one right...
>Whether this is a net-attitude, or a mainly American phenomenon, I don't
>know, but it seems to be mainly absent in the British fans I know, or
>perhaps it's just that I only mix with people who are tolerant.
From what I understand, it's a feature of Chicagoland Fandom. This is why
Congenial is in Madison, WI rather than Chicago. It's one of the reasons
Duckon was formed. To get away from the politics and just have FUN!
>Please, is there anywhere in American fandom that doesn't have this
>attitude of "You're not a real fan"?
As I said, I think it's primarily Chicagoland fandom, not American fandom. I
know of several Chicago fen who no longer attend Chicagoland conventions, but
attend them elsewhere in the country, for that very reason.
<><><><><><>
Krikket - kri...@meltdown.chi.il.us -Pager# 708/324-6928
(Prefered Anon Address) - an...@anon.penet.fi -Chicagoland beeps
(I avoid whenever possible)- anon...@twwells.com -returned ASAP.
`My mother used to say you had scaly green skin and terrible halitosis.'
`Really, it seems that the reports of my breath have been greatly exaggerated.'
-- Bernice & Sheldukher in "The Highest Science" by Gareth Roberts
Jim Rittenhouse
: In article <753519...@keris.demon.co.uk>, ch...@keris.demon.co.uk (Chris
: Croughton) writes:
: >In article <2bh88t$1...@genesis.MCS.COM>
: > jrit...@genesis.MCS.COM (Jim Rittenhouse) writes:
: >
: >>I think that that is more than a little harsh. The present chair of
: >>Capricon is a literate, thoughtful and travelled person. Bill Roper is the
: >>chair of ISFIC, and I'd say he's more than a little versed in all fannish
: >>areas. There is a dearth, I'll admit, of trufannish types in department
: >>head / worker positions.
: Excuse me while I ROTFL over the Capricon comments... Unfortunately I missed
: (so I understand) the bulk of the Cap discussion. I find it rather humorous
: that this comment is made regarding Capricon considering how many Chicago Fen
: are sick and tired of the crap from Cap. How many times did the hotel have to
: tell the ConCom that they cannot legally rezone the smoking/non-smoking areas?
: How many huxters are pissed off at the convention, after the comment last year
: to fandom at the "How to improve Cap for next year" meeting that was along the
: lines of, "We don't care about the huxters. There are always more huxters out
: there to replace the ones who are here now."
: How many people are pissed about the way room parties were handled by the
: ConCom? Need I continue the list? Starting two years ago there were even
: enough people who decided to quit Capricon that there was a "Non-ComCom" (or
: "anti-ComCon" formed! This year there has been talk of an informal boycott.
: (I know that *I* won't be comming back to CapriCon, except possibly to help run
: a room party; and then I won't be buying a badge. If someone wants to provide
: me with one, I'll take it, but I ain't giving them my money...)
I will dutifully say that I have only heard fourteenth-hand about the people
who have had problems in re smoking at CAPRICON, and I spoke to the chair of
the con at WINDYCON, and she noted that the whole bloomin' hotel is a big
atrium. No smoking problems there. And I plead ignorance on the hucksters.
I haven't run a huckster's room since 1982 (MARCON), and I'm out of the loop
on such things, by and large. Don't know who said what to who. And you already
have seen my problems on how they (the con-com) have hadled room parties in the
past, and I think I've beaten that horse to death.
My attitude on the con is that I am very, very ambivalent on coming back. I
think highly of the chair, but the instutitional history is terrible. I will
have nothing to do with a boycott.
: >>There's a trekkie group that does a lot of work for Windy, and a lot of anume
: sorts with Capricon.
: I've heard a rumor that the Jap Anime people are considering quitting CapriCon.
: Note that this is just a rumor, but I've heard it from a couple independant
: sources -- Both of which are tied into the anime crowd...
I heard the same rumor, and classified it as 'unsubstantiated rumor.' When
I hear this from, say, Matt Zell or Doug Killings, then I'll listen.
: >>As to Duckcon and Gavin's new con - I dunno. There's a lot of media people
: >>involved with those, and no trufans that I know of.
: There are a lot of media people involved in Duckon and Consanguinuity?
: (Forgive me if I mispelled that one, I don't have my dictionary handy.) Odd, I
: don't remember any media people at any Duckon related event, or hear about any
: of 'em regarding Consanguinuity....
For some people, media = kiss of death. Not me. I don't have the smae }i
same connextions. The people who are involved in Consangunity and Duckcon~r~r
~r
are good people, and hard working people. I thought Duckcon has tried really
hard to do a good job. (The consuite last year was surprisingly good!) But
the old fanzine fans and such have found it to be too heavy on things like
Klingon Love Poetry, and too light on serious SF discussion. *shrug* Can't
please everyone. Some of the same people say CONGENIAL is not a real relaxacon
because it has programming of any kind - like the Silly Bathing Suit Contest.
: >What damnation with faint praise! "A trekkie group", "anume sorts"
: >(presumably 'anime' with a typo), "media people ... no trufans" - I
: >don't think I want to be associated with these 'trufans' with that sort
: >of attitude. As much as I hate to admit it, I find myself agreeing with
: >Karl about 'elitism' - there seems to be far to much "He's not *our*
: >sort of fan, so he's not a fan really".
: Karl definately got this one right...
That wasn't Karl, that was Chris Croughton, and 'anime' was typoed. Don
t get the idea that I personally don't care for people who dig media stuff.
Au contraire. I was answering Leah's original question.
: >Whether this is a net-attitude, or a mainly American phenomenon, I don't
: >know, but it seems to be mainly absent in the British fans I know, or
: >perhaps it's just that I only mix with people who are tolerant.
: From what I understand, it's a feature of Chicagoland Fandom. This is why
: Congenial is in Madison, WI rather than Chicago. It's one of the reasons
: Duckon was formed. To get away from the politics and just have FUN!
CONGENIAL was originally supposed to be the 3rd Chicago con, but the rates
for hotels (and space availability) stunk. We went to Wisconsin because its'
cheap, and the way to get away from all politics is to hide your head in the
ground. The idea is to reduce politics to an absolute minimum. Tricky stuff.
: >Please, is there anywhere in American fandom that doesn't have this
Jimmy Malcolm Pierce
>brother's, all overheard this and INSTANTLY respected me. They EVEN asked
>me if I wanted to go to the bachelor's party with them! :-)
>
>--Lynn
Gee Lynn, you have my sympathies ! This past spring, I was
told I wasn't a 'trufan.' Here I have been reading sci-fi since
before the jerk was born, and I'm not a fan.. oo I was impressed
with the jerk... Not ! Sigh. Later, DJ.
--
Dreamy Jim aka Jim Pierce B.Sc. Disclaimer:Standard.
"We're not shy." Pugsly Addams "We're contagious." Wednesday
Ahrvid Engholm
> Gee Lynn, you have my sympathies ! This past spring, I was
>told I wasn't a 'trufan.' Here I have been reading sci-fi since
>before the jerk was born, and I'm not a fan.. oo I was impressed
>with the jerk... Not ! Sigh. Later, DJ.
some connection with making others reluctant to call you a "trufan"?
Danny Low
: When I entered fandom one of the first things I learned is that there are
: no SMOFs (Secret Masters of Fandom). The concept of SMOFs is only used for
: fun. Surely there are people that can be called "Masters of Fandom", or
: at least influential for fandom, but they can't POSSIBLY be "secret".
The term SMOF dates back to early fandom when conventions were rare
and fanac was almost exclusively through letters and fanzines. Certain people
were very active in their writing but whom no one had ever actually
seen. In some cases this was because the people were fakes but
mostly it was because they were either reclusive or live in obscure
places that were hard to get to or from. So the term SMOF was coined
to describe these people as a joke. Everyone had either heard from
or of them but no one had actually met them. Today the term is usually
given to people who are active in running conventions. The NO SMOFING symbol
is the internal NOT sign over a black bow tie. It is a reference to
a very specific person who appears in the convention staff listings
of a lot of conventions. For a list of SMOFs just check the
Worldcon staff listings. Notice how certain people keep showing up
there regardless of where the con is held. How many of these people
have you actually met? For that matter how many of the people posting
here have you actually met? :-)
Danny Low
"Question Authority and the Authorities will question You"
Valley of Hearts Delight, Silicon Valley
HP NSD dl...@ppg01.sc.hp.com
Patrick Nielsen-Hayden
>The term SMOF dates back to early fandom when conventions were rare
>and fanac was almost exclusively through letters and fanzines. Certain people
>were very active in their writing but whom no one had ever actually
>seen. In some cases this was because the people were fakes but
>mostly it was because they were either reclusive or live in obscure
>places that were hard to get to or from. So the term SMOF was coined
>to describe these people as a joke.
The above may well be true, but in nineteen years of reading old fanzines
and talking to old-time fans I've never heard this version of the genesis of
SMOF. I could be wrong, but it does sound a bit like a back-formation.
----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden, senior editor, Tor Books
p...@panix.com * CIS: 72701,1344 * opinions mine
Laurie Mann
>dl...@sc.hp.com (Danny Low) writes:
>>The term SMOF dates back to early fandom when conventions were rare
>>and fanac was almost exclusively through letters and fanzines. Certain people
>>were very active in their writing but whom no one had ever actually
>>seen. In some cases this was because the people were fakes but
>The above may well be true, but in nineteen years of reading old fanzines
>and talking to old-time fans I've never heard this version of the genesis of
>SMOF. I could be wrong, but it does sound a bit like a back-formation.
I thought "SMOF" came out of convention fandom of the '60s...
can anyone remember when the ancronym came into being?
(extra credit if you know who coined it).
** Laurie Mann * lm...@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu * Laurie.Mann (GEnie) **
** Ignore the irrelevant; it soon falls out of fashion. Robin Morgan **
Richard Price
more tolerant of other types of fandom. But they seem to be "other" types
of fen themselves. I don't have much to do with running cons. But I do
attend them (mostly Chicago area regionals). There are many interesting
people at these conventions. A lot of them are open to meeting new people
and friendly and accepting of other interests. I enjoy meeting these types
of fen. BUT I usually meet this type of fan at partys and in the game rooms.
They aren't in the same "ton" as those less tolerant people contributing
to this thread.
Be advised that, in Chicago at least, fandom is not a large monolithic
FANDOM in which everyone knows everyone. Instead there are a large number
of little fandoms. Fandom (SF fandom in general) seems to be Balkanized
into a number of partially overlapping groups. And I'm not talking about
"special interest" fandom. I'm talking about science fiction readers who
go to cons. If you don't like the current crowd, then walk across the room!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Rich Price | "To stay young requires unceasing cultivation |
| ric...@mcs.com | of the ability to unlearn old falsehoods." |
| (312) 736-8618 | Robert A. Heinlein |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Karen E. Babich
>I think that that is more than a little harsh. The present chair of
Capricon
>is a literate, thoughtful and travelled person. ...and a lot of [anime]
>sorts with Capricon.
Gee, thanks, Jim, you flatterer you. But when I went to England last year,
it was to visit a certain person, not necessarily cram in a log of high-
falutin' intelletual visits to tourist attractions in Bloomsbury. Wehn I
entered the UK, I was quizzed on the purpose of my trip by the fellow who
was to stamp my passport. When he asked how I'd met this person I was
visiting, I started trying to explain fandom -- then gave up and satisfied
him with "mutual friends." Later, my friend Lucy said that I should have
told the truth, declaring: "SEX. I'm here for SEX." (And she's not even a
fan...)
Paul W. Cashman
>>On the other hand, the men in the wedding party, all fannish friends of my
>>brother's, all overheard this and INSTANTLY respected me. They EVEN asked
>>me if I wanted to go to the bachelor's party with them! :-)
>>
>>--Lynn
> Gee Lynn, you have my sympathies ! This past spring, I was
>told I wasn't a 'trufan.' Here I have been reading sci-fi since
>before the jerk was born, and I'm not a fan.. oo I was impressed
>with the jerk... Not !
I get that not-a-trufan-you're-not-worth-talking-to attitude a lot,
too, since I have, err, value-added hair (okay, it's long) and prefer
to wear comfortable clothes, jeans and t-shirts (sometimes
music-related) to cons. Then I betray my secret, by mentioning, say,
Larry Niven or Robert L. Forward or James P. Hogan (three of my
hard-SF faves) and watch the disbelieving stares erupt. Ahh, revenge
is a dish best served.....scattered, smothered and covered. :)
--
Once you're touched you stand alone | Paul W. Cashman
To face the bitter fight | van...@crl.com
Once I reached for love | Dream Theater
And now I reach for life | <- "Learning to Live"
Jim Rittenhouse
: entered the UK, I was quizzed on the purpose of my trip by the fellow who
: was to stamp my passport. When he asked how I'd met this person I was
: visiting, I started trying to explain fandom -- then gave up and satisfied
: him with "mutual friends." Later, my friend Lucy said that I should have
: told the truth, declaring: "SEX. I'm here for SEX." (And she's not even a
: fan...)
This sounds like a violation of some kind of trade agreement with the Brits.
Lessee... <turns pages> um, crossing the Atlantic Ocean for immoral purposes...
H'm - sounds like the Mann Act to me. I'll have to ask Laurie and Jim for a
ruling....
Oh, yeah. I couldn't spell anime, and you couldn't spell 'when'. <grin>
Steve
: I get that not-a-trufan-you're-not-worth-talking-to attitude a lot,
: too, since I have, err, value-added hair (okay, it's long) and prefer
: to wear comfortable clothes, jeans and t-shirts (sometimes
: music-related) to cons. Then I betray my secret, by mentioning, say,
: Larry Niven or Robert L. Forward or James P. Hogan (three of my
: hard-SF faves) and watch the disbelieving stares erupt. Ahh, revenge
: is a dish best served.....scattered, smothered and covered. :)
I'm afraid I don't get this: you've just described one Aspect of the generic
british con-goer. Why do you get disbelieving stares? Revenge??
You'd fit right in at a British con... I hope you're coming to Intersection...
Steve Glover
--
((@@@*@@@)) All the Steve Glover
(*@|||@*) Talk (Fan programme, Intersection: 1995 Worldcon)
||| Of the (Editor, MATRIX: Newsletter of the bSFa)
\\|||// Market ( )
Paul W. Cashman
>Paul W. Cashman (van...@crl.com) wrote:
>: I get that not-a-trufan-you're-not-worth-talking-to attitude a lot,
>: too, since I have, err, value-added hair (okay, it's long) and prefer
>: to wear comfortable clothes, jeans and t-shirts (sometimes
>: music-related) to cons. Then I betray my secret, by mentioning, say,
>: Larry Niven or Robert L. Forward or James P. Hogan (three of my
>: hard-SF faves) and watch the disbelieving stares erupt. Ahh, revenge
>: is a dish best served.....scattered, smothered and covered. :)
>I'm afraid I don't get this: you've just described one Aspect of the generic
>british con-goer. Why do you get disbelieving stares? Revenge??
Because fen here generally don't expect rock music fans to be smart
enough to grok Dr. Robert L. Forward in his fullness. :) Hence, their
surprise....
>You'd fit right in at a British con... I hope you're coming to Intersection...
I'd be surprised if I had the travel money (heck, I doubt I can afford
a passport since they raised the fee), but I'd love to go..... We'll
see what changes by 1995. I've a feeling NASFiC may tap my funds, and
I'm obligated to go; I live there. :)
David A. Z.
<dra...@access.digex.net> wrote [among other things]:
>If [smofs] were really in control:
> The Boston in '98 (the new one) bid probably wouldn't exist.
If Smofs were really in control, Boston in '98 would be an uncontested
shoe-in.
After all, "Noreascon n in 1962+9n" [where n is an integer greater than
zero] was the prophicy brought down from the mountain. No real Smof
would dare contest it.
Besides, the only real thing '98 has going against it is that is has no
good contigious accomidations are available since they lost the hotels
ajacent to the convention center. You certainly can't expect a true
Smof to let a "little thing" like THAT to bother them.
Danny Low
: The above may well be true, but in nineteen years of reading old fanzines
: and talking to old-time fans I've never heard this version of the genesis of
: SMOF. I could be wrong, but it does sound a bit like a back-formation.
Funny. I got this story from old time fans. OTOH it is oral history. :-)
FOO
>I get that not-a-trufan-you're-not-worth-talking-to attitude a lot,
>too, since I have, err, value-added hair (okay, it's long) and prefer
>to wear comfortable clothes, jeans and t-shirts (sometimes
>music-related) to cons. Then I betray my secret, by mentioning, say,
>Larry Niven or Robert L. Forward or James P. Hogan (three of my
>hard-SF faves) and watch the disbelieving stares erupt. Ahh, revenge
>is a dish best served.....scattered, smothered and covered. :)
>
Paul,
I happened to have met these 3 at the National Space Society bash
in Chicago.. :) What a gathering of common folk and famous folk!
A time I will remember fondly. Dr. Forward is a card!! *laugh*
Anyway.. about your last comment.. do you go to the WAFFLE HOUSE alot? ;)
FOO
Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey
> In article <2csepl$i...@crl.crl.com>, van...@crl.com (Paul W. Cashman) writes...
>>Larry Niven or Robert L. Forward or James P. Hogan (three of my
>>hard-SF faves) and watch the disbelieving stares erupt. Ahh, revenge
>>is a dish best served.....scattered, smothered and covered. :)
> in Chicago.. :) What a gathering of common folk and famous folk!
> A time I will remember fondly. Dr. Forward is a card!! *laugh*
Hey! That was a conference *I* ran! (While not technically an SF
convention, many pro-space SF writers attended, and it certainly would
have been impossible without lots of work from Chicagoid SF fans.)
Sure made 1989 a busy year.
One thing, though... if Larry Niven attended, he did so incognito.
Are you sure you're not thinking of Fred Pohl or Ben Bova or Stan
Schmidt?...
Bill Higgins | If we can put a man on the Moon, why can't
Fermilab | we put a man on the Moon? -- Bill Engfer
hig...@fnal.fnal.gov | If we can put a man on the Moon, why can't
hig...@fnal.Bitnet | we put a woman on the Moon? -- Bill Higgins
Martin Schafer
convention running is different from the usage I remember in the
70's. At the time, I thought that the term was intended to be used
for the people who were not actually on the committee and had no
official position, but had a significant influence. People who
happened to be at a party and threw out an idea that was picked
up by a gung-ho con runner and made actual. People who the the
con chair turned to for advice, or a shoulder to cry on. People
who invisibly made things run smoother by dealing with problems in
front of them. That's why they are SECRET Masters of Fandom.
Martin
Mike Scott
lm...@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu "Laurie Mann" writes:
>I thought "SMOF" came out of convention fandom of the '60s...
>can anyone remember when the ancronym came into being?
>(extra credit if you know who coined it).
On this side of the Atlantic, the term was (AFAIK) unknown until Steve
Jackson Games brought out an Illuminati expansion set which featured
the SMOFs as one of the secret societies. But they used a propellor
beanie (with two propellors) rather than Ben's bow tie. They got a
bonus to take over the SF fans, but I would have though a penalty was
more realistic.
--
Mike Scott || Confabulation is the 1995 UK national SF convention
Mi...@moose.demon.co.uk || Mail Con...@moose.demon.co.uk for more details
David Kassover
...
>
>I thought "SMOF" came out of convention fandom of the '60s...
>can anyone remember when the ancronym came into being?
>(extra credit if you know who coined it).
>
A SMOF is someone who knows what lesnerize is.
--
David Kassover "Proper technique helps protect you against
RPI BSEE '77 MSCSE '81 sharp weapons and dull judges."
kass...@aule-tek.com F. Collins
kass...@ra.crd.ge.com
Roxanne Meida
>FANDOM in which everyone knows everyone. Instead there are a large number
>of little fandoms. Fandom (SF fandom in general) seems to be Balkanized
>into a number of partially overlapping groups. And I'm not talking about
>"special interest" fandom. I'm talking about science fiction readers who
>go to cons. If you don't like the current crowd, then walk across the room!
Amen to that.
Before "Real fans" can move to Chicago, or anywhere else, you have to
define what a "real fan" is. Near as I can tell, everyone believes that
*real* fans are fans like them, and the others are all FringeFans.
Once upon a time, Mike Bentley told me of an informal survey he did at
an early Chicago con, where the consensus reply to "What sort of people
attend SF cons?" was "My friends. The rest are a bunch of dweebs."
There does seem to be a general US-vs.-THEM psychology in Chicago Fandom
but I have no idea how to combat it.
After all, that would mean inviting a bunch of THEM over to MY house.
(HHOK!!!;))
- Roxanne
mark
In article <2cr916$a...@panix.com> p...@panix.com (Patrick Nielsen-Hayden) writes:
>dl...@sc.hp.com (Danny Low) writes:
>
>>The term SMOF dates back to early fandom when conventions were rare
>>and fanac was almost exclusively through letters and fanzines. Certain people
>>were very active in their writing but whom no one had ever actually
>>seen. In some cases this was because the people were fakes but
>>mostly it was because they were either reclusive or live in obscure
>>places that were hard to get to or from. So the term SMOF was coined
>>to describe these people as a joke.
>
>The above may well be true, but in nineteen years of reading old fanzines
>and talking to old-time fans I've never heard this version of the genesis of
>SMOF. I could be wrong, but it does sound a bit like a back-formation.
>
As I remember, the term came into currency in the ealry 70's, and referred
to folks who apparently wanted to run the world, and were starting through
fandom. Foolishly, we laughed.
Slowly, these folks, esp in clubs which were in a downturn in activity,
achieved positions of power. They started out doing the jobs, but *very*
rapidly began to alter their approach to, "if there's a problem, rather
than solve it, esp if it requires *work*, try to prevent *any* *chance*
of it's occuring."
In the case of cons, esp, the effect of this was, "well, fen want
this, but somebody complained, so we just won't do that", rather than
let's try to satisfy the fans *and* the complainer, or better yet, try
to find a way so that we can keep doing whatever *without* having
someone complain. In other words, ban the action, regardless of the
desires of fans, based on the actions of a small minority.
Some idiot waves their sword around? Ban any weapons at all (rather than
toss the jerk out, and make sure *everyone* knew the jerk had been tossed
out, and why, and making sure they knew it the year after, as well). The
faintest possibility of liability for drinking? Everything goes dry (rather
than work with fen by say, marking badges for underage or not in hotel).
Fen complain about con suites? Slash them back to nothing, after all, they
can all have parties in their rooms. The media focus on the fringefen in
the sexy/loud/dumb/comic costume? Cut out masquerades - *we're* only
*readers* of sf here! Let's make this *SERIOUS*.
You think I exaggerate? I can name the man the usual "no smoffing" symbol
is based on, a few years ago (2? 3?) at a Lunacon, where, I was informed,
by a reliable source, at the debriefing, he attacked a friend of mine
who was running the daily news sheet for "encouraging rowdiness" by asking
folks to vote for their favorite open party.
On top of all the above, many of them have the attitude of "I *can't*
give up this post, nobody else can do it this well; if I give it up,
however gets it will screw it up".
I'll ignore the egotism of the attitude, and just point out that they
could have *trained* someone else. Never mind that someday they may get
burned out, or bored with it, or move out of town, and thereby screw
the local club.
This is what I mean when I refer to smofs.
And I don't think I qualify as one, either. During the years I ran the
con suite at Philcon, if I had no gopher or helper at 03:00, then *I*
was in the bathroom for the next hour or so, *serving* the bheer. Yes,
I flagged a few folks over the years. Yes, I refused to serve some under
aged kids. I had no problems. I *worked*. I solved the problems, so
that the many could enjoy, without being screwed by the actions of the few.
I trained assistants, so that when I got tired, there were experienced hands
who could take over, and do a decent job at it.
SMOF envy, indeed. I'm *happy* when I see the names of folks I don't know,
who are *new* running functions at cons. It means we've still got the
influx of new blood fandom *needs*, if it's to survive. I'd put the
SMOFs on Adams' ship, along with the politicians & hairdressers.
mark
L.A.Z. Smith
>I thought "SMOF" came out of convention fandom of the '60s...
>can anyone remember when the ancronym came into being?
>(extra credit if you know who coined it).
You may be right -- in terms of the shift to mean someone involved in
convention politics. While the phrase came into use early, the acronym
was later and the modern meaning later still. If I recall correctly,
"Secret Master of Fandom" is in Fancyclopedia II, without the acronym,
and without the con-runner sense (my copy hasn't surfaced since we
moved, but I remember talking about this with Alex Eisenstein last year
and looking it up then). Alex said he first heard "smof" used in
the fanpolitical sense in the '60s around the pool at Midwestcon --
it was applied to Bruce Pelz.
Leah Smith le...@smith.chi.il.us
Paul W. Cashman
>In article <2csepl$i...@crl.crl.com>, van...@crl.com (Paul W. Cashman) writes...
>>I get that not-a-trufan-you're-not-worth-talking-to attitude a lot,
>>too, since I have, err, value-added hair (okay, it's long) and prefer
>>to wear comfortable clothes, jeans and t-shirts (sometimes
>>music-related) to cons. Then I betray my secret, by mentioning, say,
>>Larry Niven or Robert L. Forward or James P. Hogan (three of my
>>hard-SF faves) and watch the disbelieving stares erupt. Ahh, revenge
>>is a dish best served.....scattered, smothered and covered. :)
>>
>I happened to have met these 3 at the National Space Society bash
>in Chicago.. :) What a gathering of common folk and famous folk!
>A time I will remember fondly. Dr. Forward is a card!! *laugh*
He alone of the three I haven't met. His stuff actually helped me
do well in physics; our prof put the occasional bonus question on
exams like "Is it possible to have velocity zero and acceleration
nonzero?" Any SF fan or inveterate Asteroids arcade game player
knows the answer is instinctively YES. hehe
>Anyway.. about your last comment.. do you go to the WAFFLE HOUSE alot? ;)
<innocent look> Who, me? Actually, I'd just returned from my
twice-weekly sojourn. :)
Paul W. Cashman
>In article <2ct9qh...@life.ai.mit.edu>, d...@gnu.ai.mit.edu (David A. Z.)
>wrote:
>Ah, but do you realize that the current Boston in '98 bid is NOT being run
>by MCFI, the group that ran the previous Noreascons, (and is currently
>running the Boston in 2001 bid)? I believe that is what led Covert to
>say that the SMOFs don't support it.
True; in fact, judging from the latest issue of SFC (the con bid
listings), San Antonio in '97 and Baltimore in '98 are the designated
uncontestable shoo-ins.
(I think for '98, I'll be voting for the bid that isn't using a
convention center. :))
Susan Levy Haskell
>Actually, I think the modern use of SMOF for people doing a lot of
>convention running is different from the usage I remember in the
>70's. At the time, I thought that the term was intended to be used
>for the people who were not actually on the committee and had no
>official position, but had a significant influence. People who
>happened to be at a party and threw out an idea that was picked
>up by a gung-ho con runner and made actual.
That's not a SMOF, Martin, that's a Happy Deadwood! ;>
-susan
--
Susan B. Levy Haskell ||| sb...@msi.umn.edu
Technical Support ||| voice: (612) 624-8862
Minnesota Supercomputer Institute ||| fax: (612) 624-8861
University of Minnesota ||| <insert usual disclaimers here>
U19...@uicvm.uic.edu
>They then asked me if I'd heard of some east coast media/creation con. I
>said I hadn't. They then said, "Well YOU don't COUNT, then."
Uck. If not knowing about the above Cursed Event is grounds for calling you
a "mundane", no wonder fandom is in such shoddy shape.
>On the other hand, the men in the wedding party, all fannish friends of my
>brother's, all overheard this and INSTANTLY respected me. They EVEN asked
>me if I wanted to go to the bachelor's party with them! :-)
Well, you didn't know about a Creation/media con that the in-crowders knew
about, so it's obvious that you had taste. BTW, care to go out on a date? >:)
** Chris Krolczyk, Agnostic-at-Large **
** Email: u19...@uicvm.uic.edu / U19...@UICVM.BITNET **
** The above expressed opinions and views are solely my **
** responsibility...so go sue some other college, dope. **
U19...@uicvm.uic.edu
Rittenhouse) says:
>
>D. 'Krikket' Krick (kri...@meltdown.chi.il.us) wrote:
>
>: I've heard a rumor that the Jap Anime people are considering quitting
>CapriCon.
>: Note that this is just a rumor, but I've heard it from a couple independant
>: sources -- Both of which are tied into the anime crowd...
>I heard the same rumor, and classified it as 'unsubstantiated rumor.' When
>I hear this from, say, Matt Zell or Doug Killings, then I'll listen.
Word of Explanation Dep't: D'Andre Williams-the former prez of the Greater
Chicago Megazone-is running the anime room this year, and as far as I know,
he has no intentions of quitting.
The confusion may spring from this: The Megazone, as a _club_, is not running
the Anime room at Cap, although some members may be acting as D'Andre's
henchmen/-persons. D'Andre's running the room as an _individual_ due to some
wheeling and dealing he and the 'Zone probably did between each other as to
who would get the room after D. quit the presidency. Far as I know, there's
no animosity involved, and this arrangement may just be a one-year thing.
BTW, JIm, wouldn't it be a bit difficult for you to get Megazone info from
Doug? Matt isn't in the club anymore, granted, but at least he's still living
in the same state as the rest of us... >:)
Seth Breidbart
David Kassover <kass...@quantum.crd.ge.com> wrote:
>A SMOF is someone who knows what lesnerize is.
Anybody who reads enough knows what lesnerize means, and why not to :-)
Seth
Jim Rittenhouse
: The confusion may spring from this: The Megazone, as a _club_, is not running
: the Anime room at Cap, although some members may be acting as D'Andre's
: henchmen/-persons. D'Andre's running the room as an _individual_ due to some
: wheeling and dealing he and the 'Zone probably did between each other as to
: who would get the room after D. quit the presidency. Far as I know, there's
: no animosity involved, and this arrangement may just be a one-year thing.
: BTW, JIm, wouldn't it be a bit difficult for you to get Megazone info from
: Doug? Matt isn't in the club anymore, granted, but at least he's still living
: in the same state as the rest of us... >:)
Doug Killings is an old friend and is my - I dunno, what d'you call your
ex-wife's sister's husband? ex-brother in law? I keep in touch. He's reachable via sio...@well.sf.ca.us.
And he usually has the straight unmuggled dope on anime politics. Or a number
of other things.
elun...@mac.cc.macalstr.edu
The usage I've heard recently is smoffing, as referring to the people who
actually run the con-- talking about how they'd run each others departments,
while not in each others presence. <grin> For instance, Programming and
Logistics and Volunteering would all get together and smof about how they'd*
run Treasury or Parties or Hotel or what they'd* do if they* were concom chair.
<grin>
Department names changed to protect the guilty. Don't believe everything you
read, folks... ;)
>
> Martin
>
betsy.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
elun...@macalstr.edu betsy lundsten
normal is merely a setting on a washing machine
don't thwap the dragon!
Bernie Peek
Mi...@moose.demon.co.uk "Mike Scott" writes:
-> In article <22NOV199...@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu>
-> lm...@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu "Laurie Mann" writes:
->
-> >I thought "SMOF" came out of convention fandom of the '60s...
-> >can anyone remember when the ancronym came into being?
-> >(extra credit if you know who coined it).
->
-> On this side of the Atlantic, the term was (AFAIK) unknown until Steve
-> Jackson Games brought out an Illuminati expansion set which featured
-> the SMOFs as one of the secret societies.
[]
-> --
-> Mike Scott || Confabulation is the 1995 UK national SF convention
-> Mi...@moose.demon.co.uk || Mail Con...@moose.demon.co.uk for more details
->
SMOF definitely dates back at least to the early 70s over here. At
that time there was no conrunning fandom as such.
--
Bernie Peek
(Ex-)Programme Coordinator
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Intersection: The 1995 World SF Convention. Glasgow. Scotland.
Paul W. Cashman
>In article <2cvdrf$1...@crl.crl.com>, van...@crl.com (Paul W. Cashman)
>wrote:
>> pmo...@microwave.msfc.nasa.gov (G. Patrick Molloy) writes:
>>
>>
>> >Ah, but do you realize that the current Boston in '98 bid is NOT being run
>> >by MCFI, the group that ran the previous Noreascons, (and is currently
>> >running the Boston in 2001 bid)? I believe that is what led Covert to
>> >say that the SMOFs don't support it.
>>
>> True; in fact, judging from the latest issue of SFC (the con bid
>> listings), San Antonio in '97 and Baltimore in '98 are the designated
>> uncontestable shoo-ins.
>I wouldn't be too sure about '98. I think all bets are off now
>that Atlanta has entered the race. They may get a lot of "sympathy"
>votes because they lost the '95 race (plus all those Atlanta voters
>are now members of the Glasgow Worldcon). Then again, if the Atlanta
>NASFiC is a disaster.... (I know, I know, different committees and all
>that, but many of the voters may not realize that).
Very true. Of course, if the NASFiC is a debacle I'll be annoyed; I'm
on the concomm. :)
>> (I think for '98, I'll be voting for the bid that isn't using a
>> convention center. :))
>>
>I guess that would be Atlanta...
Yes, as of this past weekend and some quick back-court action.:) My
understanding is that the Marriott 10th floor may again be useable in
its Ghod-ordained role as consuite/lounge......I sure hope so.
D. 'Krikket' Krick
>D. 'Krikket' Krick (kri...@meltdown.chi.il.us) wrote:
>: >jrit...@genesis.MCS.COM (Jim Rittenhouse) writes:
>I will dutifully say that I have only heard fourteenth-hand about the people
>who have had problems in re smoking at CAPRICON, and I spoke to the chair of
>the con at WINDYCON, and she noted that the whole bloomin' hotel is a big
>atrium. No smoking problems there.
This is good news. I was one of those people who were harassed at the last
CapriCon for smoking in the smoking sections... (The person claimed to be
ConCom, but in all fairness, I don't have hard proof of that. Probably
wouldn't be able to pick said person out if I saw her again.)
>And I plead ignorance on the hucksters.
>I haven't run a huckster's room since 1982 (MARCON), and I'm out of the loop
>on such things, by and large. Don't know who said what to who. And you
>already have seen my problems on how they (the con-com) have hadled room
>parties in the past, and I think I've beaten that horse to death.
You and me both...
>My attitude on the con is that I am very, very ambivalent on coming back. I
>think highly of the chair, but the instutitional history is terrible. I will
>have nothing to do with a boycott.
And that is your choice. In all fairness, I don't know how much of a "boycott"
this is. Methinks it was just a group of fen (and a couple huxters) who
decided to never go back, and then they decided to call it a "Boycott". So far
I've seen absolutely no orginization on this one.
>I heard the same rumor, and classified it as 'unsubstantiated rumor.' When
>I hear this from, say, Matt Zell or Doug Killings, then I'll listen.
Agreed. That's why I clearly labled it as rumor. They are fun to hear and
(probably) laugh at, as well as to consider the "what if it were true..."
angle.
>: >>As to Duckcon and Gavin's new con - I dunno. There's a lot of media
>: >>people involved with those, and no trufans that I know of.
>:There are a lot of media people involved in Duckon and Consanguinuity?
>:(Forgive me if I mispelled that one, I don't have my dictionary handy.)
>:Odd, I don't remember any media people at any Duckon related event, or
>:hear about any of 'em regarding Consanguinuity....
>For some people, media = kiss of death. Not me. I don't have the smae }i
>same connextions. The people who are involved in Consangunity and Duckon
>are good people, and hard working people. I thought Duckcon has tried really
>hard to do a good job. (The consuite last year was surprisingly good!) But
>the old fanzine fans and such have found it to be too heavy on things like
>Klingon Love Poetry, and too light on serious SF discussion. *shrug* Can't
>please everyone.
Agreed. At Duckon 1, I heard a lot of people talk about how the old fen and
the new fen were both present, but not intermixing... Methinks this is just
something that you deal with... As you pointed out, can't please everyone...
>Some of the same people say CONGENIAL is not a real
>relaxacon because it has programming of any kind - like the Silly Bathing
>Suit Contest.
For obvious reasons you know more about Congenial than I do! I'm just a peon
who's been in attendance for 2 of 'em. Hardly a source of vast knowledge in
this case... 8^)
>: Karl definately got this one right...
>
>That wasn't Karl, that was Chris Croughton, and 'anime' was typoed. Don
>t get the idea that I personally don't care for people who dig media stuff.
>Au contraire. I was answering Leah's original question.
Oooops. Please forgive my errant quoting! Correction noted and logged.
>: From what I understand, it's a feature of Chicagoland Fandom. This is why
>: Congenial is in Madison, WI rather than Chicago. It's one of the reasons
>: Duckon was formed. To get away from the politics and just have FUN!
>
>CONGENIAL was originally supposed to be the 3rd Chicago con, but the rates
>for hotels (and space availability) stunk. We went to Wisconsin because its'
>cheap, and the way to get away from all politics is to hide your head in the
>ground. The idea is to reduce politics to an absolute minimum. Tricky
>stuff.
Once again, you obviously know more about Congenial than I. And as such, I
stand corrected, and apologize to the masses for any misinformation I conveyed.
<><><><><><>
Krikket - kri...@meltdown.chi.il.us -Pager# 708/324-6928
(Prefered Anon Address) - an...@anon.penet.fi -Chicagoland beeps
(Also a good Anon Address) - aps-...@kijol.yggdrasil.com-returned ASAP.
(I avoid whenever possible)- anon...@twwells.com -(708&312 area codes)
"Marvellous! You're going to kill me.
What a finely tuned response to the situation!"
U19...@uicvm.uic.edu
Rittenhouse) says:
>Doug Killings is an old friend and is my - I dunno, what d'you call your
>ex-wife's sister's husband? ex-brother in law?
_Whoops_. My apologies. I thought you were still married to Siobhan's sister...
I recall running into you at GenCon in Milwaukee, back in '88 (?) or so...
If I recall correctly, we ended up sitting at the same table(s) at a
restaurant called Jolly Vnuk's-you might recall that (A) the food seemingly
took hours to arrive and (B) one of my fellow cohorts in the C/FO-Chicago
said something really insulting about your ex-wife, not realizing that she
was sitting right at the table (never mind _him_...he's generally considered
a hosebag by just about everybody).
> I keep in touch. He's
>reachable via sio...@well.sf.ca.us.
I now feel the dread need to drop him a line....
>And he usually has the straight unmuggled dope on anime politics. Or a number
>of other things.
Uh, yes. Unless your definition of "other things" is more inclusive than mine
is.... >:)
U19...@uicvm.uic.edu
>I get that not-a-trufan-you're-not-worth-talking-to attitude a lot,
>too, since I have, err, value-added hair (okay, it's long) and prefer
>to wear comfortable clothes, jeans and t-shirts (sometimes
>music-related) to cons.
Weird. I'm fairly normal-looking, myself (read: a lot like you, albeit with
shorter hair), and I've never encountered much of a problem as far as this
b.s. is concerned. There isn't some sort of a SMOF dress code where you are,
is there? If so, I'm underwhelmed.
> Then I betray my secret, by mentioning, say,
>Larry Niven or Robert L. Forward or James P. Hogan (three of my
>hard-SF faves) and watch the disbelieving stares erupt.
If you're receiving disbelieving stares for being dressed normally, something's
amiss. _Really_ amiss.
> Ahh, revenge
>is a dish best served.....scattered, smothered and covered. :)
"Revenge is a dish best served....but since we don't have it, wouldja like
some fricaseed Trekkie instead?" >:)
Jim Rittenhouse
: In article <2d1fnc$c...@genesis.Mcs.Com>, jrit...@genesis.Mcs.Com (Jim
: Rittenhouse) says:
: >Doug Killings is an old friend and is my - I dunno, what d'you call your
: >ex-wife's sister's husband? ex-brother in law?
: _Whoops_. My apologies. I thought you were still married to Siobhan's sister...
<grimace> No, I assure you, I am not. We broke up three years ago.
: I recall running into you at GenCon in Milwaukee, back in '88 (?) or so...
: If I recall correctly, we ended up sitting at the same table(s) at a
: restaurant called Jolly Vnuk's-you might recall that (A) the food seemingly
: took hours to arrive and (B) one of my fellow cohorts in the C/FO-Chicago
: said something really insulting about your ex-wife, not realizing that she
: was sitting right at the table (never mind _him_...he's generally considered
: a hosebag by just about everybody).
No, you're confused. What it was was that the guy at the table was making
comments about Doug and his girlfriend (neither of who was present, and apparently nobody there had met her) and were speculating how good she must be in bed
(and in bed-related specialties) to get ol' Doug nailed. I said (as I sat
next to my then-wife, Doug's girlfriend's sister) that I knew that that was
impossible - that she wasn't that good in bed. The guy looked at me, and
asked - well, how do _you_ know? I said - because she's my sister-in-law,
this woman's sister, and she's never had a boyfriend before, so she _can't_
be all that good in bed, __can__ she?
He turned purple, and thought I (or my then-wife) was going to hit him. We weremostly amused.
Lee Dwayne Sudduth
>In article <2csepl$i...@crl.crl.com>, van...@crl.com (Paul W. Cashman) says:
>
>> Ahh, revenge
>>is a dish best served.....scattered, smothered and covered. :)
>
>"Revenge is a dish best served....but since we don't have it, wouldja like
>some fricaseed Trekkie instead?" >:)
Beware. I read Niven(Love Ringworld!), Poul, Pournelle, Gibson, Asimov,
Heinlein (particular favorite), Ellison, Haldeman, Drake, Butler, and just
about any I can get my hand on, or have time to read.
I am also a dedicated Star Trek/ Deep Space Nine fan, and I play Star Fleet
Battle with frequency.
My point is, many SF fen are also Trekkers as well. shock of Shocks, they
might even read (Horrors!) Fantasy, like Eddings, or Tolkien, or Donaldson,
or...I think you get the point.
Also, since I ike Vampire Literature as well, sign me...
Strahd von Zaroich
PS. I also play Ad&D....
Bruce Pelz
dl...@sc.hp.com (Danny Low) writes:
>Patrick Nielsen-Hayden (p...@panix.com) wrote:
>: The above may well be true, but in nineteen years of reading old fanzines
>: and talking to old-time fans I've never heard this version of the genesis of
>: SMOF. I could be wrong, but it does sound a bit like a back-formation.
>
>Funny. I got this story from old time fans. OTOH it is oral history. :-)
***********************
OK: The SMOF Term first showed up at Discon (I), 1963. Their PROCEEDINGS
have the scene wherein Hal Clement, before beginning his panel on the
last day of the convention, presents to Theodore Sturgeon (via 4SJ and
"on behalf of the Organization known as SMOF") the "First SMOF Award,
in consideration." Actual individual inventing term not cited. As I
think the REAL first use of the term was in the skit done the previous
day, I can make some educated guesses as to the perpetrator, but...
Bruce
U19...@uicvm.uic.edu
says:
>My point is, many SF fen are also Trekkers as well. shock of Shocks, they
>might even read (Horrors!) Fantasy, like Eddings, or Tolkien, or Donaldson,
>or...I think you get the point.
Well, shucks, Lee....I make one eensy-teensy joke about Trekkies (who, I
will admit, deserve to be classified as fans...I'm just not that much of
a ST zombie) and all of a sudden, I am _besieged_ with reasons as to why
you're a (gack) "trufan", though I really hate the term myself. I'm not
going to debate whether or not Trekkies belong at cons (they do, but once
again, I'm not a Trekkie), but I'd like to know why you're so damn defensive
about a little crack I made. Sheeesh.