Ed Kline's Letter

676 views
Skip to first unread message

Steve Gattuso

unread,
Feb 8, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/8/97
to
EDKLINE.TXT

Urthwyse

unread,
Feb 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/9/97
to

Obviously none of this was quoted for brevity (and I'd spend more
time snipping it out than responding). Thanks for posting this letter.
There's been a lot of rants about the lack of first-person accounts.
Well, here's one, it appears. Quite interesting.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adventure.. excitement.. a Jedi craves not these things.
Although, we do occasionally enjoy a tall, frosty glass of Yoo-Hoo.

cmelv...@aol.com

unread,
Feb 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/9/97
to

Wow. Doesn't -that- say everything? And a first-hand account as
well.

Electro

unread,
Feb 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/9/97
to

cmelv...@aol.com wrote:

> Wow. Doesn't -that- say everything? And a first-hand account as
>well.


Better, a firsthand account from someone with no obvious axe to
grind.


ele...@minn.net
*********************************************************
Midnight at the huge hotel,my head is filled with fur....
"Nate Bucklin"


cmelv...@aol.com

unread,
Feb 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/9/97
to

In article <32FCD6...@primenet.com>, Steve wrote:

>It is well known that you have been on the Internet conversing
>with members of alternative lifestyles and encouraging their =
>
>involvement with the convention. I have absolutely NO problem =
>
>with them or their involvement. I DO however question any one =
>
>or group that you willingly invite to participate in the =
>
>convention that have absolutely no interest or appreciation of =
>
>the premise of the convention, i.e. the love of anthropo-
>morphics of all sorts which was to be, I believe, the original =
>
>idea for the con, unless I am mistaken. It also piss us =
>
>off that you invite this opening on the 'net and yet make no =
>
>mention of this "change" in _InFurNation_. =

This is all news to me, but it certainly sheds a new light on
things... and explains a good deal as well. This was being touted as an
open convention on the alternative lifestyle newsgroups? Was it then also
being announced on any of the SF, fantasy, or Comic newsgroups? If it had
been, it would have at least kept more of a balance, and at least have had
been a fairer invitation. But an open invite to just one segment really
stacks the cards very heavily towards one interest.
And was it even -explained- to these newsgroups just what Confurence
was, or what furrydom was all about!? What purpose does it serve to
dilute the convention with people who aren't even interested in finding
out what the fandom is about? I can understand inviting newcomers in to
participate, but one assumes there would be some latent interest to begin
with, and that they would be coming from more walks of life than just
alternate lifestyles. Is this a furry convention, then, or just an excuse
to have a gay party and humiliate the mundanes?

Suddenly, things begin to click together, and I think that maybe
-both- sides in the recent flames have been operating from incomplete
info; none of us had the complete picture of what was really occuring at
the convention, and that both sides have had valid reasons for their
observations and conclusions. This may have been the missing piece to the
puzzle. We're having an influx of -impostors- attending the con, with
little to no interest in furry at all beyond self-gratification, who will
most likely never indulge in another furry interest until next year's con.
It occurs to me, as an after-thought, that the attendence figures for
the convention can't be fully trusted. We may have had over 1200 members
this year... but how many of these were furry fans, and how many were
there only for the "sex and the parties"? What was the ratio? Three for
one? Five?
Wow. Given this info, maybe I -do- owe an apology for some of my
conclusions; the reason for furrydom's bad image may be coming from a
completely unexpected source! I certainly want to hear more about this,
first, though, and any facts that people can forward about all this.


David G. Bell

unread,
Feb 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/9/97
to

In article <5dle44$o...@bonkers.taronga.com>
pe...@taronga.com "Peter da Silva" writes:

> Sounds like the problem at Confurence isn't so much Furries as mundane gay
> guys being encouraged to crash the con.

And _who_ is alleged to be doing the encouraging.

--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..

cmelv...@aol.com

unread,
Feb 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/10/97
to

Dr. Cat

unread,
Feb 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/10/97
to

cmelv...@aol.com wrote:
: Suddenly, things begin to click together, and I think that maybe

: -both- sides in the recent flames have been operating from incomplete
: info; none of us had the complete picture of what was really occuring at
: the convention, and that both sides have had valid reasons for their
: observations and conclusions. This may have been the missing piece to the
: puzzle. We're having an influx of -impostors- attending the con, with
: little to no interest in furry at all beyond self-gratification, who will
: most likely never indulge in another furry interest until next year's con.

Well, I want to follow Kay Shapero's sage advice on this one and "do my
homework". There were a number of specific instances cited, and very
unfortunate ones, and I'm sad that they've driven some fine, talented
people away from the con. But the allegation that Mark Merlino has been
inviting alternative lifestyle groups en masse were one part that didn't
have specific incidents or evidence provided to support the claim. I'm
not saying that I think it's true or that I think it isn't true, I'm
saying I don't know, and I want to find out exactly what happened before
I decide how to react to it. I do think Gen Cook mentioned something
about seeing a post in some gay lifestyle newsgroup, but the newsgroup
name she mentioned wasn't a valid one so I couldn't track it down through
DejaNews to see what it actually said. Maybe she still remembers enough
about the post to enable someone to track it down, which would be
instructive.

: It occurs to me, as an after-thought, that the attendence figures for


: the convention can't be fully trusted. We may have had over 1200 members
: this year... but how many of these were furry fans, and how many were
: there only for the "sex and the parties"? What was the ratio? Three for
: one? Five?

That's another significant issue - even if a large group of non-furry
fans were invited, how many showed up? A few? A lot? What percentage
of the people at the con did they represent? So far we only have
anecdotal info that some were there - getting an idea of the ratios is a
much harder thing to do.

I can shed a little more light on the "only there for the sex and
parties" line, by the way. I mentioned that to my business partner, and
she says her friend Chris answered someone's question that way and it was
a JOKE. Unfortunate that it was taken the wrong way and upset some
artists, but he doesn't have the experience with the fandom to have known
that people are so sensitive about that issue and would take it like that.
While he's not from the fandom, he isn't from any alternative lifestyle
group and was not there for sex or for parties. He was there to visit my
partner, who has been a close friend of his on AmberMUSH for years, to go
to Disneyland and to check out the con. She did a gorgeous sketch of him
as a ferretmorph, and he's since created a character on her furry themed
MUSH. So I think those outsiders aren't ALL bad... And a casually
overheard line can have different things behind it than you might think,
which just underscores the value of Kay's advice to find out as many
facts as you can, and not to leap to conclusions about the details you
don't know yet.

Still, I must say with regard to the guys who were reported to be
deliberately trying to freak out the heterosexuals in the lobby on
thursday... I have to admit I'd rather think they were non-furry fans
doing that rather than furry fans. Clearly it could be either way from
what little I've heard, but if they were non-furries I'd feel my
world-view that most furries are reasonably polite were further supported
by what actually happens in the world.

I guess what I really want is to see Kishma Danielle come to cons that
I can see her at again. After admiring her stunning, gorgeous zebra
makeup that she dances in for years, this time I finally got a chance to
chat with her, and it would be a shame to never run into her again. For
whatever reasons that might happen. I think whatever rudeness and other
problems there are in the fandom, the artists and dealers tend to run up
against far more of it than the average attending fan does. Ii just hope
Kishma can show up at some of the less extreme cons or something.

*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*

(Disclaimer: You don't have to go to cons to be a furry fan. But if you
wanna, just be aware that some of them are better than others, and almost
all of them are better than the sound here. Don't make any blanket
judgements without trying for yourself.)

Chris Johnson

unread,
Feb 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/10/97
to

O_O

...glad I didn't go...

I probably could deal with people making advances on 'the cat in the
tight fursuit'. Always figured I could rebuff them gently, laugh at
extreme pushiness, and get a little secret ego-boost from being thought a
desirable feline.

Somehow it hadn't occurred to me that had I gone, wearing my skintight
feline fursuit (no frills, no big 'ol mask, just furry body), people _at_
_the_ _con_ would stare and mutter and think I was a weirdo.

To be blunt- getting 'Come up to my room, and is your fursuit, er,
_ven_tilated in nice places?' is what I'd have expected. I could rebuff
that and feel I was participating in something I understood, just not to
extremes.

'Come up to my room and take that foolish thing _off_' is not something
I'd understand, nor would it be why I came.

There are some photos floating around with my approval- photos of me in
tiger guise. I'm sorry to say that it looks unlikely that anybody will get
to see me that way in person. I may not be promiscuous but I _like_ my
body and think the fursuit complements it nicely. However, it'd already be
quite daring for me to attend a convention dressed that way- if I'm to be
treated like a weirdo on top of that by con attendees, forget it.

*hrumph* I guess I'll keep following the news- frankly, it would be
_fun_ to go to a convention wearing my lovingly tailored furbodysuit, and
it would be _fun_ to get attention and nicely turn down cheerful flirting,
as a cat-person. Hell, I've even been a gay cat in fursuit! A perverse but
quite satisfying pleasure, though I haven't made any effort to repeat it
(or to have het sex).

Going to a con to be a in-your-face human queer just isn't good enough.
Bi I may be, queer if you feel like using the term, but I'm not that sort
of queer and don't feel like being one.

Confurence? Not even if I was invited. Nor any con with this sort of rep.

Jinx_tigr
(aka Chris Johnson)

M Panthera

unread,
Feb 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/10/97
to

Well I actually showed up this year for one day (Sat.).

So I read EK's letter. I have to say that I agree with him. From what I
saw, and from what I read I will in all likelyhood not attend next year.
as it is I did not go to CF for several years, it was'nt so bad then or at
least the behavior of the members was'nt so blantent back then. But things
have sadly gone way down hill and are now scraping the bottom..

That's all I have to say on the matter...

M Panthera


WalksFar

unread,
Feb 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/10/97
to


I see posts citing the content of Ed's letter, but I have not seen
the letter itself. Is there any place where I can view the letter?

If you say Dejanews, okay ... What is the heading and date? I would
need that to dig it out.

Thanks.

WalksFar ...


cmelv...@aol.com

unread,
Feb 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/10/97
to

In article <5dn8d8$a...@bonkers.taronga.com>, pe...@taronga.com wrote:

>That's a good question. Ed Kline seemed to be targeting Mark Merlino, but
I'd
>like to see if someone can dig up posted messages that would help nail
the
>responsible person rather than just pointing fingers.

That's a good point. -If- it were done, it might not have been Mark.
Ed seems pretty sure it was; has he said to anyone, publicly or
privately, if he'd actually read the post, or if he was going by
second-hand information?

Does anybody else remember seeing such a post?


cmelv...@aol.com

unread,
Feb 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/10/97
to

In article <5dn0hl$i...@news3.realtime.net>, c...@bga.com wrote:

>So I think those outsiders aren't ALL bad... And a casually
>overheard line can have different things behind it than you might think,
>which just underscores the value of Kay's advice to find out as many
>facts as you can, and not to leap to conclusions about the details you
>don't know yet.

And I agree with that. Ed's letter sort of throws the whole
situation into a flux, and it's very difficult to know what to think. If
the statements are true (and that is to say the reasons for the problems
and attitudes at Confurence), then it shifts the whole emphasis of from
where the difficulties arrive. And if they are -not-, then we're back
where we were before it was posted.
It's going to be difficult, if not outright impossible, to verify
each and every occurence, or to find out the actual stories behind them,
but it would help a great deal towards illuminating things if at least
some could be corroborated. And I'd like to know more about the posted
invitation: was it really made, and was it specifically only to one
special interest group instead of to all potentially interested groups?
Can anybody verify or produce a copy of the post?

Steve Gattuso

unread,
Feb 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/10/97
to

cmelv...@aol.com wrote:

> That's a good point. -If- it were done, it might not have been
> Mark.
> Ed seems pretty sure it was; has he said to anyone, publicly or
> privately, if he'd actually read the post, or if he was going by
> second-hand information?
>
> Does anybody else remember seeing such a post?

I think you're making an assumption. This is Usenet, which is only a
small part of the Internet. An action can be taken on the Web or on a
Muck and never be seen here. I believe _that_ is where you will have to
look for such proof.

By the by, I do not claim any veracity of said letter. I was merely
asked by Ed, who is a friend, to post it. Just in case some folks want
to shoot the messenger. =};-3

Jazmyn Concolor

unread,
Feb 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/11/97
to

In article <5dlgjh$d...@cobra.Minn.Net>, Electro <ele...@minn.net> wrote:
>cmelv...@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Wow. Doesn't -that- say everything? And a first-hand account as
>>well.
>
>
> Better, a firsthand account from someone with no obvious axe to
>grind.
>
>

Ed's axe to grind is for gays it seems. Just because the guys at the pet
auction sold for more then his mate, Kishna.. Sheesh..-I- could have told
him that guys would sell higher. The majority of the people with MONEY at
the con are from the Bay area. 'nuff said.

First people want us to ban PDA, then outright ban gays...What next?
Ban women? Ban costumes? Ban people with blue eyes? Get a grip people...
Noone wants to go to CensorCon...

(Saw only the letter that was personaly sent to Mark. Mark doesn't read A.F.F.
and I rarely do anymore since its not worth the effort. But I did get phone
calls about the posting of the letter...)


Richard Chandler

unread,
Feb 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/11/97
to

Not to remove any blame from Mark, since I can't really speak one way or
another, but I would also like to point to FurryMuck as another vector
steering not-really-furries toward attending CF.

Obligatory out of context overheard quote:
"This is just like FurryMuck in Real life..." (something about finding
someone to play with, but I don't quite recall the exact wording)

MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been touted as a Muck about
sex, even though we all know that more goes on there than that, I think we
all regularly run into newbies who have barely described themselves in
animal terms who are looking for an orgy. And people who if you look at
them, assume that you're sizing them up as a sexual partner.

They all get the idea that ConFurence is the place to go to meet one's
virtual lover in the flesh.

I just thought I'd point out that some unspecified portion of the blame
does not fall on the ConCom. I just have no data for what that portion
is.

--
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog... but they can tell right
off the bat if you're an idiot! -- Me
http://www.teleport.com/~mauser/ Gallery Web Page
"Yeah, I've got ADD, wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"

Arlon Osta

unread,
Feb 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/11/97
to

jinx...@sover.net.egg.sausage.and.spam (Chris Johnson) wrote:

CF8 is my 5th CF. And I do admit, that over the years, CF has kinda
gone downhill a little bit with the behavior of the attendees. But,
with any large con, there's always going to be undesireable behavior.
I don't necessairly turn my head when these activities go on. Hell,
i've been known to cuddle in the lobby myself, but that's where i
usually draw the line. I find some forms of PDA, tactless. But where
does one draw the line? Personally, I find that anything beyond
cuddling to be distasteful. Let alone, sucking face or groping one
another in the lobby. Remember that the media usually focuses on the
bad parts of society to make a more interesting story. Confurence has
gotten some bad media in the past. And has at times been touted as sex
convention, and generally a convention of wierdos. Again, mass media
has done it's job wonderfully.

Now, to continue... As I said, this is my 5th Confurence, and the
first that i actually met and spoke, however briefly, with Ed, when a
good friend of mine introduced me to him. Ed was a very nice
gentleman. Or at least in person, It seems, When all is said and done,
i get the impression that Ed is nothing more than a close minded
prude. The behavior that i saw at the con was no worse than I've seen
at any other con. The difference is that, now, we're no longer a small
con, but have progressed into a medium sized con. And as a result,
we've become more visible to all communities. As for this alleged
invite on the alternate liffestyle groups. Until i see irrefutable
proof, i tend to disbelieve the accusation. I've known Mark Merlino
for a few years now. And when I first started delurking to defend the
art auction against Terry Whittier, i spoke about this to Mark. He
told me that he doesn't even read AFF. Let alone, other newsgroups. I
have no reason to doubt his word on this.

As for the pet auction. Jazmyn said it well when she pointed out that
most of the bidders with the money were people from the bay area. Let
me elaborate by pointing out that most of the furs who come from the
bay area are fairly well to do gay males who work in the computer
industry. Myself included. Ed's denial of bitter grapes, makes his
claim all the more invalid. It does indeed sound like bitter grapes.

Ed's tart remarks about Silfur were very uncalled for. Silfur did
nothing wrong, he presented himself just like any other pet, but made
his presentation better. He genuinely entertained the bidders with his
dancing. And as such, commanded the highest bid. I didn't see anyone
else out there dancing. So what if Silfur was scantily clad during
most of the con. If I had a body like his, i'd be showing it off as
well.

As for Ed's comment on the crossdresser.... So what!!! There was much
worse at the con to pick apart than a security guard who was wearing
women's clothing and makeup. At least (s)he wasn't dressed in gaudy
drag queen clothing with a week old beard and a bad dye job. At least
it was tasteful. On a side note, drag aside, (s)he did a very good job
with hir security duties. That should be what's important.

>
> To be blunt- getting 'Come up to my room, and is your fursuit, er,
>_ven_tilated in nice places?' is what I'd have expected. I could rebuff
>that and feel I was participating in something I understood, just not to
>extremes.

You would probably have gotten both responses... Fursuites would make
for interesting sex, but just not practical... Making out with a
fursuit... Now that might be very nice. But for obvious reasons, like
dry cleaning, sooner or later, the suit's gonna have to come off.


>
> Confurence? Not even if I was invited. Nor any con with this sort of rep.
>
> Jinx_tigr
> (aka Chris Johnson)

My friend, don't judge CF on one man's opinion. Or several for that
matter. Go to con, have a good time, and make your own judgements on
whether you'll return. CF is what you make of it. If you're focused
simply on looking for the bad in the con, you'll find plenty of it.
But, if you're focused on having a good time, seeing old friend,
making new friends, and putting a face to the people you've spoken to
on the muck or elseware on the internet. You'll have a wonderful time,
and will most likely return the next year, and the next, and the next.

It's the wise (wo)man that makes their own decisions, rather than
allow others to cloud their judgement.

So sez the buck
Arlon

Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/11/97
to

mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) wrote:

>MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been touted as a Muck about
>sex, even though we all know that more goes on there than that, I think we
>all regularly run into newbies who have barely described themselves in
>animal terms who are looking for an orgy. And people who if you look at
>them, assume that you're sizing them up as a sexual partner.

Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on
FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.

-Brian

Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/11/97
to

ar...@netcom.com (Arlon Osta) wrote:

<snippage>


>The behavior that i saw at the con was no worse than I've seen
>at any other con.

Um... how many other cons have you been to? :) I've been on the
concom, staff and have volunteered at a *LOT* of conventions ranging
from Loscon to San Diego Comicon to Westercon, all the way through RPG
cons, etc. and none of them that I can think of would tolerate half
the nonsense that goes on at ConFurence. Those two idiots engaged in
the BSDM show in the lobby would have quickly found their badges
pulled at any of the above cons.

>The difference is that, now, we're no longer a small
>con, but have progressed into a medium sized con. And as a result,
>we've become more visible to all communities.

You're absolutely right, and with the increased visibility, our
responsibility to behave in a positive manner increases. You admit
yourself that CF is going downhill (and I've been here since the silly
thing started and you wouldn't recognize the con now from the
standpoint of CF0 and CF1).

Now you bring up another wonderful point Arlon. We're no longer a
small con and we're certainly not the big furry room party that CF0
was envisioned to be. My question is... why are we still being
TREATED like a small con by the con directors? And yes, this is a
totally separate tangent, please disregard for everyone who is just
looking for comments about Ed Kline's letter. :)

Does it seem to anyone else that ConFurence is just being run like a
giant furry party? We really haven't seen any major changes in the
command structure (at least as far as the number of directors) of the
con since... what? CF3? How many times over have we grown since
then? How impossible is it to find someone with any decision-making
ability at the con?

Don't get me wrong, I don't want CF to be a trade show like San Diego
Comicon or *gasp* a Creation con, but sheesh guys, like it or not,
ConFurence is a business, isn't it about time we pretended to run it
like one?

-Brian

Conrad Wong

unread,
Feb 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/11/97
to

In article <33023a40....@10.0.2.3X119>, Arlon Osta <ar...@netcom.com> wrote:
>CF8 is my 5th CF. And I do admit, that over the years, CF has kinda
>gone downhill a little bit with the behavior of the attendees. ...

People doing disgusting stuff in the elevators? That's something that's
never been mentioned at a prior con. Downhill, yes... Sort of like a
roller coaster. };)

>As for the pet auction. Jazmyn said it well when she pointed out that
>most of the bidders with the money were people from the bay area. Let
>me elaborate by pointing out that most of the furs who come from the
>bay area are fairly well to do gay males who work in the computer

>industry. Myself included. ...

BZZT!

I'm a Bay Area fur, I'm in the computer industry, but I'm not gay.
Moreover, I know a fair number of Bay Area furs who aren't. Am I saying
that most Bay Area furs are *not* gay? No. I don't know 100% of the Bay
Area furs. But, I suggest, you don't either.

*Labelling Bay Area furs as gay is like labelling furry fandom as gay*

Let me suggest another possibility. The Pet Auction has attracted a
largely gay clientele due to the experiences of past auctions and
ConFurences. This clientele includes a number of furries with money
from the Bay Area. That says nothing about whether the Bay Area is largely
gay or not. It does say something about the current state of the Pet
Auction and the inertia of 'popular expectations' that anyone attempting to
create their own Pet Auction faces.

I make no statement as to whether a Pet Auction that appeals more to
a gay audience is a good or bad thing. I don't go to the things. I will
note however that I would not like my own ConFurence experience marred by
having the con shut down because the con organizers are being charged with
pandering.

-- Lynx (the ky00t one)
--
| __|\ | Conrad "Lynx" Wong | Upstart feline miscreant |
| ._| _ : | 101 First Street, suite 554 | LY Go B Y++ L++ C++++ T++ A-- |
| ( ' | Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 | H+ S++ V+ F- Q+ PP+ B PA+ PL+++ |
| -' ;". |----------------------------------------------------------------|
| ; "' ; | PawPrints: http://www.best.com/~lynx/pawprints.html |
| , |Anything not nailed down is a cat toy, anything the cat can pry |
| *purrrrrr* |up with a crow bar is not nailed down, anything that IS nailed |
| |down is a scratching post. And anything edible is food -- Revar|

Mer'rark

unread,
Feb 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/11/97
to

Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
: mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) wrote:

Personally, it passed the line of good taste for me when someone
decided to create a virtual porn theater, and adjoining sex rooms,
showing themselves on the WhereAre like so many bad sores as 'T-port to
SEX'. I really wish those would be gotten rid of. They certainly are
not doing us one bit of good.

: -Brian

--
-- Mer'rark Walk like a dog, talk like a man.
Walk like a dog, like anybody can.

David G. Bell

unread,
Feb 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/11/97
to

In article <3300b7df...@news.linkline.com>
BHend...@linkline.com "Brian Henderson" writes:

> mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) wrote:
>
> >MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been touted as a Muck about
> >sex, even though we all know that more goes on there than that, I think we
> >all regularly run into newbies who have barely described themselves in
> >animal terms who are looking for an orgy. And people who if you look at
> >them, assume that you're sizing them up as a sexual partner.
>
> Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on
> FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
> often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
> West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.

I know just what you mean, and while places such as the Purple Nurple
aren't exactly family fun places, they are a hell of a lot more discreet
than the many audience participation live sex shows.

And I'm not claiming to be a saint, but I hope that my character
descriptions are a bit more subtle than some.

Jazmyn Concolor

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

In article <3300b886...@news.linkline.com>,

Brian Henderson <BHend...@linkline.com> wrote:
>ar...@netcom.com (Arlon Osta) wrote:
>
><snippage>
>>The behavior that i saw at the con was no worse than I've seen
>>at any other con.
>
>Um... how many other cons have you been to? :) I've been on the
>concom, staff and have volunteered at a *LOT* of conventions ranging
>from Loscon to San Diego Comicon to Westercon, all the way through RPG
>cons, etc. and none of them that I can think of would tolerate half
>the nonsense that goes on at ConFurence. Those two idiots engaged in
>the BSDM show in the lobby would have quickly found their badges
>pulled at any of the above cons.

Have you seen WonderCon's Caberet? Its a LOT wilder then CF's. How
about the Cherry Poptart 'official' party at San Diego Comicon? I can also
show you a piece of art from the San Diego Comicon art show with a male
satyr with a FULL ERECTION! San Diego Comicon is well known as the most
prudish of all cons at this time, yet I bid on the piece and won it while
it hung in full public view. I also have a piece I bought at LosCon of
a merman and a human screwing in the sand and a demon with an erection.
I bought these pieces mostly out of amusment at collecting art that got past
the art show censors, more then the content of the pieces..Though they are
rather well rendered and by popular artists. Perhaps the cons were afraid
of confronting these artists? Hmmmmmm...Hard to say..or perhaps they didn't
care or never noticed.

>
>>The difference is that, now, we're no longer a small
>>con, but have progressed into a medium sized con. And as a result,
>>we've become more visible to all communities.
>
>You're absolutely right, and with the increased visibility, our
>responsibility to behave in a positive manner increases. You admit
>yourself that CF is going downhill (and I've been here since the silly
>thing started and you wouldn't recognize the con now from the
>standpoint of CF0 and CF1).
>
>Now you bring up another wonderful point Arlon. We're no longer a
>small con and we're certainly not the big furry room party that CF0
>was envisioned to be. My question is... why are we still being
>TREATED like a small con by the con directors? And yes, this is a
>totally separate tangent, please disregard for everyone who is just
>looking for comments about Ed Kline's letter. :)

Every year Brian goes after us. Sooo....here we go again. Okay, Brian..
Just who is 'we'? You personally? For every complaint we had this year
about the con, there have been 4-5 'Great Jobs! Good Con! I'm Coming Back
Next Year!'...Those people don't count in your 'we', since they don't agree
with you. Out of the 1066 people at the con, how many are part of your 'we'?
May I remind you that while you were on staff, you only came to maybe 2
meetings and never brought up your gripes at the meeting to Rodney or
anyone else who could take them into account. Instead you chose to make your
vague attack here? To what end? Over half the directors and staff avoid
AFF as a 'vaste wasteland' or simply don't have time for it..

>
>Does it seem to anyone else that ConFurence is just being run like a
>giant furry party? We really haven't seen any major changes in the
>command structure (at least as far as the number of directors) of the
>con since... what? CF3? How many times over have we grown since
>then? How impossible is it to find someone with any decision-making
>ability at the con?
>
>Don't get me wrong, I don't want CF to be a trade show like San Diego
>Comicon or *gasp* a Creation con, but sheesh guys, like it or not,
>ConFurence is a business, isn't it about time we pretended to run it
>like one?

You missed some of the things we have been doing..Such as upgrading the
database software (to something that is more configurable and flexible),
security having more reliable radios and being quicker to respond to the
slightest hint of a problem (often beating hotel security there), registration
having its own staff and a PC with the Database onsite to doublecheck any
conflicts from pre-reg (though post reg proved imposible to update at the con
due to lack of staff and the ammount of data..Took me two weeks to sort it out
after the con....Even with PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY on each form, people still
had handwriting that looked like alien script..Must be hard to write with paws)
There are a few other things, but the spliting sinus headache I've had for
a week now prevents me from thinking straight (or bi or gay even), thus perhaps
you should ask Rodney what you missed at those staff meetings?


>
>-Brian

Urthwyse

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

On Tue, 11 Feb 1997, Jason J. Jensen wrote:
> post). If you and the rest of the CF clique refuse to address these
^^^^^^^^^

From what I've seen here, this is a very good term. Good choice
of wording.

Jazmyn Concolor

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

In article <lynxE5G...@netcom.com>, Conrad Wong <ly...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <33023a40....@10.0.2.3X119>, Arlon Osta <ar...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>CF8 is my 5th CF. And I do admit, that over the years, CF has kinda
>>gone downhill a little bit with the behavior of the attendees. ...
>
>People doing disgusting stuff in the elevators? That's something that's
>never been mentioned at a prior con. Downhill, yes... Sort of like a
>roller coaster. };)
>
>>As for the pet auction. Jazmyn said it well when she pointed out that
>>most of the bidders with the money were people from the bay area. Let
>>me elaborate by pointing out that most of the furs who come from the
>>bay area are fairly well to do gay males who work in the computer
>>industry. Myself included. ...
>
>BZZT!
>
>I'm a Bay Area fur, I'm in the computer industry, but I'm not gay.
>Moreover, I know a fair number of Bay Area furs who aren't. Am I saying
>that most Bay Area furs are *not* gay? No. I don't know 100% of the Bay
>Area furs. But, I suggest, you don't either.
>
>*Labelling Bay Area furs as gay is like labelling furry fandom as gay*

Okay..So after peering at the database, I'd say %80 are either gay or
bi...The rest are unknown... But I'm only going on the fact that I know
quite a few of them and they would even admit to it. The rest I know of
only because I hear far more about what goes on in fandom then I want to..
You don't EVEN want to get me started on San Diego Fans. :)

>
>Let me suggest another possibility. The Pet Auction has attracted a
>largely gay clientele due to the experiences of past auctions and
>ConFurences. This clientele includes a number of furries with money
>from the Bay Area. That says nothing about whether the Bay Area is largely
>gay or not. It does say something about the current state of the Pet
>Auction and the inertia of 'popular expectations' that anyone attempting to
>create their own Pet Auction faces.
>
>I make no statement as to whether a Pet Auction that appeals more to
>a gay audience is a good or bad thing. I don't go to the things. I will

I think the idea of buying people as 'pets', even if its just in fun
tends to appeal to gays and bi's more then hetrosexuals. I, as a hetrosexual,
don't realy have much interest in it, but that likely cause I don't have the
money and would feel rather embarrassed with a 'human' pet, just in fun or
otherwise. Buying a guy would tend to embarrass me since I'm already rather
attached to my mate (thus not wishing to hurt his feelings), would not know
what to do with the 'pet' (Except perhaps have them work for the art show
for an hour perhaps) and would not like to be the focus of public attention
as the 'bidder' for a 'pet'.
Most bi's and gays I know tend to be less easy to embarrass, thus perhaps
they ARE more attracted to 'pet auctions' and the like. Many hets I know
would simply be to embarrassed or afraid to bid. This is an observation,
not a slam against or praise of any particular lifestyle(s).

>note however that I would not like my own ConFurence experience marred by
>having the con shut down because the con organizers are being charged with
>pandering.
>

Since the 'con organizers' have not even been contacted by any
'athorities', I don't think there is much of a problem myself. Most of the
time we were far too busy to notice any of the things people said happened..
And if it was such a problem, why didn't anyone complain to con security
about it? They might have reacted if they thought there was a problem?

Or is it that there was no real problems, but the rumor mill on usenet
after the con? People just needing something to complain about?


Jazmyn Concolor

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

In article <5drejr$3...@bonkers.taronga.com>,

Peter da Silva <pe...@taronga.com> wrote:
>In article <lynxE5G...@netcom.com>, Conrad Wong <ly...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>People doing disgusting stuff in the elevators? That's something that's
>>never been mentioned at a prior con.
>
>They pretty much destroyed an elevator at one con I went to. And that
>wasn't even a furry con.
>
>The worst I heard of was a bunch of beauticians or something deciding to have
>a beach party in the hotel's hot tub... complete with sand. Scratch one tub.
>--

A bunch of punks busted up some furniture at BayCon once and were not
even con-goers.

You don't EVEN want to know what goes on at huge business conventions
such as CES or others... Makes some stories by a certain Rolling Stones
writer (can't remember the guys name for some reason) look tame.

Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:

>>Now you bring up another wonderful point Arlon. We're no longer a
>>small con and we're certainly not the big furry room party that CF0
>>was envisioned to be. My question is... why are we still being
>>TREATED like a small con by the con directors? And yes, this is a
>>totally separate tangent, please disregard for everyone who is just
>>looking for comments about Ed Kline's letter. :)

> Every year Brian goes after us. Sooo....here we go again. Okay, Brian..
>Just who is 'we'? You personally?

We. ConFurence. The convention. It should have been obvious from
the context where I said, and I quote: why are we still being TREATED


like a small con by the con directors?

> May I remind you that while you were on staff, you only came to maybe 2


>meetings and never brought up your gripes at the meeting to Rodney or
>anyone else who could take them into account.

Um, quite incorrect. I came to the post-con meeting for CF7 with a
*LARGE* list of suggestions, etc. as Rodney had requested. He took
them but has never acknowledged them. I basically decided that it
wasn't worth the effort and hence, so long as every aspect of the
convention is going to be micro-managed to death without any regard
for the opinions of the staff (and this is an annual complaint from a
*LOT* of staffers, I had better things to do with my time.

>You missed some of the things we have been doing..Such as upgrading the
>database software (to something that is more configurable and flexible),
>security having more reliable radios and being quicker to respond to the
>slightest hint of a problem (often beating hotel security there), registration
>having its own staff and a PC with the Database onsite to doublecheck any
>conflicts from pre-reg (though post reg proved imposible to update at the con
>due to lack of staff and the ammount of data..Took me two weeks to sort it out
>after the con....Even with PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY on each form, people still
>had handwriting that looked like alien script..Must be hard to write with paws)

Wonderful start. We should have had these things years ago. The only
reason we have registration working as well as it is is because
DeWayne did it on his own, with his own equipment and very much of his
own accord, mostly because he got sick of waiting and waiting and
waiting for the oft promised but never appearing John Stanley version
of the database. Security? Radios? Where? Zee complained a lot
that there weren't nearly enough radios this year and Rodney was
running around with *NO BATTERIES IN HIS RADIO*! Registration was run
off of DeWayne's cell phone, forwarded from his hotel phone! And the
complaint I heard most often from him was that he had too much money
but he couldn't get ahold of Dean to come do a pickup. Radios?
Where?

-Brian

Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk ("David G. Bell") wrote:

>I know just what you mean, and while places such as the Purple Nurple
>aren't exactly family fun places, they are a hell of a lot more discreet
>than the many audience participation live sex shows.

>And I'm not claiming to be a saint, but I hope that my character
>descriptions are a bit more subtle than some.

Oh, I wasn't listing the PN as an example of a live sex show or
something out and out obscene, just as one that oftimes has many more
people than any other place on FM. There are many worse places than
PN and they are lovingly described in their whereare descriptions.

-Brian

Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

mer...@netcom.com (Mer'rark) wrote:

> Personally, it passed the line of good taste for me when someone
>decided to create a virtual porn theater, and adjoining sex rooms,
>showing themselves on the WhereAre like so many bad sores as 'T-port to
>SEX'. I really wish those would be gotten rid of. They certainly are

>not doing us one bit of good.

Um... Mer... you're a wizard... :)

Actually, the existence of such doesn't bother me at all. Free will
and all. However, the fact that they draw more people than the
non-sexual places seems to say something about the MUCK community in
general, and that something isn't very nice.

-Brian

Jazmyn Concolor

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

In article <3300AB...@post.drexel.edu>,
Jason J. Jensen <st94...@post.drexel.edu> wrote:

>Jazmyn Concolor wrote:
>
>> Ed's axe to grind is for gays it seems. Just because the guys at the pet
>> auction sold for more then his mate, Kishna.. Sheesh..-I- could have told
>> him that guys would sell higher. The majority of the people with MONEY at
>> the con are from the Bay area. 'nuff said.
>
>Hardly 'nuff said, Jazmyn. Ed specifically said that he had no axe to
>grind with gays, bi's, or hetero's. His main gripe was with the
>absolute lack of regard some of these "sexually expressive" individuals
>had for others at the hotel, and the implied purpose of the Pet Auction,
>which seems to have little to do with its intended purpose.

From what I know of Ed its a case of Pot + Kettle = Black

>
>What you have just expressed, Jazmyn, is a knee-jerk reaction that,
>quite frankly, everyone would expect from you. This has nothing to do
>with repression and sensorship; at least not to the point where everyone
>should be allowed to do anything they want regardless of public reaction
>or consequence.

Was anyone hurt by this (other then bruised egos)? It has a lot
to do with Censorship when a few people are DEMANDING the con ban this group
or that group or limit their activities beyound what any local laws would.
There is NO law in Buena Park against PDA between couples of any gender,
plus no laws against wearing 'sexy' clothing. (There were hookers down on
Beach Blvd who the police barely give a second glance, so why should they
be bothered by the dress or expressiveness of individuals at what ammounts
to a big private party at a hotel? (Yes, anyone can buy a membership, but
only if they A) Know about the con. or B) Are accualy interested in a 'furry'
con.) Noone was accualy in the nude in a public place (except maybe the
Caberet which follows the laws of NOT serving alcohol and doesn't allow
minors, even though the nude beachs in CA do not prohibit minors..go fig..)
No accual sex was going on in any public place or CF Security would have
asked them to clear out. The elevator at the Buena Park Hotel was kinda funky
before the con, so its hard to tell if anyone realy did anything there..
All in all, noone was hurt, including any kids (there were only a very
few, who either didn't care or were not up late enough to see anything). Our
biggest problems were the overuse of silly string around furry costumes and
some annoying mundane selling beer to minors (must have been mundane minors,
since there were only a handful of minors at the con and I don't think they
would be interested in the stuff)...Oh yeah...and someones car getting
broken into, which could happen at ANY con..Mark got his van broken into at
BayCon once and I ended up with damage to my vehicle at a gaming con a long
time ago (OrcCon)...This is just something outside the ability of the con
directors to control.
As far as that goes, the con directors should not have to tell GROWN
PEOPLE how to behave in public. If people had gone to the Con Security,
I'm sure they might have at least talked to the people who were offending
others...Even the security who happened to be in drag, which I for one cannot
see this being a problem at a SF/Fantasy Con or Furry Con where PEOPLE ARE
WALKING AROUND IN COSTUME ALL THE TIME...Who cares if the costume was a dress??
Sheesh!..People gonna start complaining about people dressed as animals next?
What about the guys dressed as FEMALE animals? We have had THOSE for years.
Noone complained about them? Except maybe one guy who got embarrassed after
hitting on one of these for a date. :)


>
>What this has to do with is the direction of the convention and the
>growing concern of lax security (the latter concern which has marked you
>as a major problem, and which you conveniently didn't mention in this

Me? Personaly? I just keep the art show from collapsing under its own weight
and keep the database updated (even if people who sell memberships sometimes
fail to remember I have to get the info to)
Any lax security problems should be directed to the Security director of the
con, since Mark or Rodney had their hands full and didn't personaly handle
security for obvious reasons. They were JUST TOO BUSY trying to keep the con
going...Other directors were just as busy in their own areas. I ended up stuck
in the art show again due to understaffing, when I was supposed to be helping
take some presure off of Mark..Ohhh..well..Such are the plans of mice and men,
I guess...

>post). If you and the rest of the CF clique refuse to address these

>matters and simply choose to gloss them over with the tired "This is
>more repression" excuse, then perhaps CF *has* passed its time as *the*
>furry con to go to.

Clique? Just because we all live in the same state or what? We already
found that when the directors and staff leads are spread all over the
country and can't make it to the monthly planning meetings, things just DON'T
get done. Here I thought we were being more efficiant? I can address the
'matters' but I can do little about them...Its not something -I- can do
anything about, cept perhaps -=ask=- that people tone it down.. Mark asked
that after last year and it only seems to make some people act up more,
just because they were asked not to do something. Human nature perhaps..
Problem is, though YOU might not view us doing anything as Censorship, there
are others who would. You obviously don't know furry fen...
Banning certain groups or dress or harmless public displays would make CF
a target for abuse by those people who don't feel they are doing anything
wrong....and where does it end? Banning people from wearing skimpy or
sexy clothing? Then banning cross-dressing (which would have to include males
dressed as female animal characters)? Then banning all forms of PDA? Then
banning adictive card games in the gaming room?
As long as people are not breaking the law, then what IS the problem? If they
are breaking the law, then they will get NO HELP from the CF staff or Directors
if they are arrested and CF cannot be held accountable for the actions of
ADULTS attending the con, since CF is not responsible for the actions of its
members...

>
>Let's get a grip and address the problem, eh?

First prove there is realy a problem..Other then a few prudes who can't
cope with a few members of the con who are 'different'..

We received NO complaints from hotel staff or mundane visitors who happened
to be staying at the hotel. No complaints were forwarded to us by the hotel
about the actions of ANY of our members. The hotel is VERY happy with us and
wants us back next year. The Atrium had a number of complaints about the
horseplay in the lobby and broken furnishings..I know the people who did it
and they were not running around in skimpy clothing, wearing leashes and collars
or doing any PDA sorts of things...They were however DESTROYING PRIVATE
PROPERTY...

So which would you rather have..a little harmless PDA or people destroying
the lobby with 'macho' behavior, which noone seemed to be bothered by, except
the hotel and us (since we were presented with the bills)...

If PDA was the only problem this year (if you can call it a problem), then
I think we were doing quite well...At least we didn't get any bills for hotel
dammages this time...

So whats the problem anyway?
>
>--Jay

Dr. Cat

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

Steve Gattuso (Pdoo...@primenet.com) wrote:

: cmelv...@aol.com wrote:
: > That's a good point. -If- it were done, it might not have been
: > Mark.
: > Ed seems pretty sure it was; has he said to anyone, publicly or
: > privately, if he'd actually read the post, or if he was going by
: > second-hand information?
: >
: > Does anybody else remember seeing such a post?

: I think you're making an assumption. This is Usenet, which is only a
: small part of the Internet. An action can be taken on the Web or on a
: Muck and never be seen here. I believe _that_ is where you will have to
: look for such proof.

I dug around with Dejanews and found the one earlier mention of someone
saying they knew of such a post. I said earlier I thought it was Gen Cook
that had posted it, I was remembering wrong. My apologies for that.
The post was by Monika Livingstone, so maybe somebody that knows her
could ask if she remembers more details that could be used to track this
down. Here's an excerpt:

>Subject: Re: Confurence 8 observations
>From: sibe...@cruzio.com (Monika Livingstone)
>Date: 1997/02/03
>Message-Id: <siberkat-030...@trip20.cruzio.com>
>
> When Confurence is promoted on the alt.lifestyles.gay newsgroup at a
>gay/bi conference then it does make it difficult for the others attending
>that are not gay to explain themselves. I am not saying I hate gay's or
>think they should dissappear, but I would like to feel like it's ok to be
>a straight female there.There are some women there,now, that are straight
>but I have found many to be bi.

If she didn't actually see the post in question, but heard about it from
someone else, maybe she could tell some would-be investigator who it was
so that they could be asked where they saw it. It would be nice to track
this down and find out exactly what was posted and where.

*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*

(Disclaimer: Sherlock Holmes was not known to be a furry fan. However
there was a cool anime series done portraying him as a furry. Wasn't it
directed by Miyazaki?)

Dr. Cat

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
: My question is... why are we still being TREATED like a small con by
: the con directors?
[snip]
: Does it seem to anyone else that ConFurence is just being run like a

: giant furry party? We really haven't seen any major changes in the
: command structure (at least as far as the number of directors) of the
: con since... what? CF3? How many times over have we grown since
: then? How impossible is it to find someone with any decision-making
: ability at the con?

Well, I think "run like a giant furry party" may be a pretty accurate
characterization. And it's certainly not a style of management that
suits itself to a con with over a thousand attendees the way it might
have worked for the early Confurences. (I wasn't at the early ones.)

Still, even if there's an approach that's clearly better, like bringing
in more directors or something... I haveta say if the people running it are
determined to stick with their old approach no matter how many problems
it causes, there's probably not anything that anyone can do about it.
They do seem to have shown over the years that they're pretty determined
to keep running the con the way they want to run it, no matter what other
people might have to say about that.

Just like any other skill in life, running a medium sized (or larger) con
is something that only a few people know how to do really well. If
there's some people out there doing one that aren't as good at running
cons, I think it makes more sense to look for new cons if what you want
out of the fandom is a really first rate, professionally run con. Don't
expect a leopard to change its spots, or turn into an ostrich.

*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*

(Disclaimer: You probably shouldn't expect an ostrich to change into a
leopard, either. Even if it has bananas in its ears.)

Jazmyn Concolor

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

In article <33016ffd...@news.linkline.com>,

Brian Henderson <BHend...@linkline.com> wrote:
>jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:
>
>>>Now you bring up another wonderful point Arlon. We're no longer a
>>>small con and we're certainly not the big furry room party that CF0
>>>was envisioned to be. My question is... why are we still being
>>>TREATED like a small con by the con directors? And yes, this is a
>>>totally separate tangent, please disregard for everyone who is just
>>>looking for comments about Ed Kline's letter. :)
>
>> Every year Brian goes after us. Sooo....here we go again. Okay, Brian..
>>Just who is 'we'? You personally?
>
>We. ConFurence. The convention. It should have been obvious from
>the context where I said, and I quote: why are we still being TREATED

>like a small con by the con directors?

The con is not being treated as a small con..Small cons don't have near
this much programing or require a hotel this big. Oft the problems lay in the
lack of staff..And RELIABLE staff, having half a brain and a clue or staff
who has the time to dedicate is even harder to find. The smart people who
we would like to see helping out are smart enough to avoid volunteering.
But this is par for the course with most SF cons. You end up with either people
who burned out on con activities and would rather be on staff, newbies who have
no idea what they are getting into and a few people determined to help make
the convention better or at least keep it from getting worse..and a few people
who feel obligated to help keep things going smoothly....Overall, there are
rarely enough people to cover every area at every time they are needed. Some
of us worked the WHOLE con with little or no breaks to make up for the lack.
The directors are certainly aware of the size of the con, but without
enough staff, it tends to look like its run like a small con. Whats needed
are dedicated staff who not only know what they are doing, but have the ability
to train new people DURING the con, since many volunteers cannot make the
meetings due to being from too far away. I have suggested a Staff Mailing List,
but not everyone is on the net either.. Makes things a bit tough.

>
>> May I remind you that while you were on staff, you only came to maybe 2
>>meetings and never brought up your gripes at the meeting to Rodney or
>>anyone else who could take them into account.
>
>Um, quite incorrect. I came to the post-con meeting for CF7 with a
>*LARGE* list of suggestions, etc. as Rodney had requested. He took
>them but has never acknowledged them. I basically decided that it
>wasn't worth the effort and hence, so long as every aspect of the
>convention is going to be micro-managed to death without any regard
>for the opinions of the staff (and this is an annual complaint from a
>*LOT* of staffers, I had better things to do with my time.

So you didn't get your way and gave up? What good are staff who give
up and 'have better things to do'? CF needs DEDICATED STAFF who are willing
to come to at least most of the meetings or be updated on what happened at them,
rather then someone who comes to ONE post con meeting with a gripe list and
is never heard from again.
Maybe if you stuck around and showed some comitment to the con, people
might have started listening to you more..The people who were getting the
most attention were those who WORKED for it and not those who showed up once
to complain and were never seen again.

>
>>You missed some of the things we have been doing..Such as upgrading the
>>database software (to something that is more configurable and flexible),
>>security having more reliable radios and being quicker to respond to the
>>slightest hint of a problem (often beating hotel security there), registration
>>having its own staff and a PC with the Database onsite to doublecheck any
>>conflicts from pre-reg (though post reg proved imposible to update at the con
>>due to lack of staff and the ammount of data..Took me two weeks to sort it out
>>after the con....Even with PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY on each form, people still
>>had handwriting that looked like alien script..Must be hard to write with paws)
>
>Wonderful start. We should have had these things years ago. The only
>reason we have registration working as well as it is is because
>DeWayne did it on his own, with his own equipment and very much of his

Not all his equipment...Dean's PC, my copy of the Database updated
up to Thursday and handed over to Dean. Several calls on the radio or
gopher carried to me about questions on members and a couple notes sent
back down to reg on a couple people who were not in the database due to
their applications being too vague to enter and people not noticing the
postit note I left in the pre reg lists I printed out the night before.
DeWayne did have his cell phone, but the updated reg info came from Dean
and I...and a cool little program called 'My Mail Manager' which is a mailing
list program I'd recommend to anyone who has to keep track of more then 1000
people...over 1900 in our case, including everyone back to CF0

>own accord, mostly because he got sick of waiting and waiting and
>waiting for the oft promised but never appearing John Stanley version

We were promised a database from no less then 4 people...I got fed up
and bought the one we have now from Staples..It turned out to work so
well, the lack of the other promised DBs no longer mattered. MMM is
user configurable and so simple a chimp could use it.

>of the database. Security? Radios? Where? Zee complained a lot
>that there weren't nearly enough radios this year and Rodney was
>running around with *NO BATTERIES IN HIS RADIO*! Registration was run

Last year my radio didn't work due to the person who was in charge of
charging radios forgetting to charge non-security radios. Most of the time
though I had no trouble getting ahold of people on the radio this year. I
would have rather had my cell phone at times, but Mark was using it because
his wasn't programed yet due to having no time to get it done. My pager
didn't work either because my pager company went bankrupt and vanished.
People were using alternatives to the radios where they could. But the
radios were working a lot better this year then last year..And its a lot
better then the time when we didn't have radios at all. Its a good thing
we have people who donate the use of these radios during the con as they are
horribly expensive and prone to being dammaged. Some SF cons our size are
struggling along with radio shack walkie talkies or worse..

>off of DeWayne's cell phone, forwarded from his hotel phone! And the
>complaint I heard most often from him was that he had too much money
>but he couldn't get ahold of Dean to come do a pickup. Radios?

Gophers are supposed to make up for the shortages by running messages.
Someone could have been sent to find Dean or someone who could reach Dean.
Dean also had a cell phone and DeWayne could have called him. Concidering
I was stuck in the art show, someone could have came up and took my place
for a bit while I did a pickup, since I am authorized to do them if noone
else can be reached (since I knew where the money went and had the keys to
put it there). My radio worked however for most of the con (except a period
where the charger got misplaced) and I was never hard to find (being chained
to the art show most of the time and never far away for long).. Mark was
hard to find since he was off-site driving equipment back and forth, getting
supplies, etc., but was reachable via pager and cell phone. Rodney was on the
radio a lot from what I could hear, which perhaps is why his batteries ran
down so fast...Perhaps next year staff people can be handed a list of
alternatives to the radio, such as places where certain people might most likely
be found, cell phone numbers, pager numbers, room numbers, etc. and not always
be dependant only on the radios..As for getting more radios, they are on loan,
except for two of them which are Mark's (for work, not CF, but used at CF
anyways) and are expensive and not given out to just anyone on staff. Only
certain staff people and directors get them due to not wanting to hand them
out to people we don't know. CF would have to pay for dammage or loss of
any of them, so we have to be careful.

>Where?

Where? In the hands of directors, security leads and one for the art show,
which was used by whomever was working the art show at any given time, being
mostly passed between Vicky, Sherri and me. It oft became the one place people
KNEW they could find someone with a radio to call the others who were more
mobile then us. I tended to take it with me a couple times, but mostly because
I was using it to track down someone else and people in the art show were told
where I was going before I left in case I was needed. I make an effort to be
'findable'..Mostly when I know other directors may not be findable. I can not
be real sure of just where each radio and its caretaker was at any time though,
since that wasn't my dept. I think Dean and Zee handled most of it.

>
>-Brian

guitar

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) writes:

I would just like to state, I have attended the CES more than once.
What people are complaining about at ConFurence would be considered part
of a display at a CES. Naked porn stars, naked models, people doing their
best to be enticing and erotic no matter who or what was passing by. And
this is something that is considered normal. The shows get very favorable
write-ups in such places as The Wall Street Journal, Time, Newsweek. What
goes on off-scene at a CES would squick many people on FurryMUCK. Been
there, done that. :)

guitar

David G. Bell

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

In article <5drejr$3...@bonkers.taronga.com>

pe...@taronga.com "Peter da Silva" writes:

> In article <lynxE5G...@netcom.com>, Conrad Wong <ly...@netcom.com> wrote:
> >People doing disgusting stuff in the elevators? That's something that's
> >never been mentioned at a prior con.
>
> They pretty much destroyed an elevator at one con I went to. And that
> wasn't even a furry con.
>
> The worst I heard of was a bunch of beauticians or something deciding to have
> a beach party in the hotel's hot tub... complete with sand. Scratch one tub.

The worst I ever heard of were accountants.

The Colliery Overmen, Deputies, and Shot Firers may have _looked_ a
rough bunch when they arrived, but if they were irresponsible types they
wouldn't have got the jobs they had.

qu...@wcinet.net

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to qu...@wcinet.net

In article <jazmynE5...@netcom.com>,

jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:
>
> In article <lynxE5G...@netcom.com>, Conrad Wong <ly...@netcom.com> wrote:
> >In article <33023a40....@10.0.2.3X119>, Arlon Osta <ar...@netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> >>As for the pet auction. Jazmyn said it well when she pointed out that
> >>most of the bidders with the money were people from the bay area. Let
> >>me elaborate by pointing out that most of the furs who come from the
> >>bay area are fairly well to do gay males who work in the computer
> >>industry. Myself included. ...
> >
> >BZZT!
> >
> >I'm a Bay Area fur, I'm in the computer industry, but I'm not gay.
> >Moreover, I know a fair number of Bay Area furs who aren't. Am I saying
> >that most Bay Area furs are *not* gay? No. I don't know 100% of the Bay
> >Area furs. But, I suggest, you don't either.
> >
> >*Labelling Bay Area furs as gay is like labelling furry fandom as gay*
>
> Okay..So after peering at the database, I'd say %80 are either gay or
> bi...The rest are unknown... But I'm only going on the fact that I know
> quite a few of them and they would even admit to it. The rest I know of
> only because I hear far more about what goes on in fandom then I want to..
> You don't EVEN want to get me started on San Diego Fans. :)
>

Most S.F. Bay Area furry fans, like most S.F. Bay Area residents,
_aren't_ gay, bi, or of any other alternative lifestyle. I don't know
where the hell you got an "80%" figure for percentage of SFBA furs being
gay, since I think it's probably reverse that (20% being GBL/alt.) or
less, just more _noticable_ (like a sore thumb)... I get sick and tired
of Northern Californians, _especially_ those in the Bay Area, of being
automaticly being considered gay/bi/whatever _just_because_ they happen
to be from the San Francisco Bay Area, surrounding areas, or points
further north. A resounding majority _aren't_. Being someone who _does_
live an alternate lifestyle, I'm an exception, not the rule, even here in
the upper half of the State of California. (And please, don't even
consider me as part of the Bay Atrea contigent-- Eureka, where I'm from,
is some 300 miles north of San Francisco, where we up here usually refer
to the SFBA as being in "Central" California...)

>
....Quozl!

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

Fhaolan

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

BHend...@linkline.com (Brian Henderson) wrote:

>mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) wrote:

>>MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been touted as a Muck about
>>sex, even though we all know that more goes on there than that, I think we
>>all regularly run into newbies who have barely described themselves in
>>animal terms who are looking for an orgy. And people who if you look at
>>them, assume that you're sizing them up as a sexual partner.

>Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on
>FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
>often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
>West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.

Just for a moment, Fhaolan jumps in, "Aye, tha's true. Bu' for tha'
last few months tha most popular place on FurryMuck has been
'HoneyBadger's Burrow.' Consistantly beatin' WCoP every nigh'. The
Burrow is jus' the livin' room o' one o' tha' nicest furs in
existance, HoneyBadger. Many o' tha people who hang out there, are
there tae *escape* from all tha' sex-sites on tha' Muck. The Burrow is
pretty much a G tae PG area. It's gettin' *so* popular, tha'
HoneyBadger has added a guest room just for disconnected furs tae
sleep in, in order tae reduce the spam from tha room contents list
when walkin' intae tha' Burrow. As it is gettin' more an' more popular
all tha' time, I think this migh' be a good sign tha' furs who
*aren't* interested in R tae XXX are still attracted tae FurryMuck."

The wolf grins, "Now, I'm nae arguin' with anyfur. FurryMuck does have
an' inordinant number o' XXX places, I'm jus' sayin' tha' nae
*everyfur* who is on tha' Muck is interested in them."

-
Fhaolan the Celtic Wolfie
ark...@istar.ca
http://rat.org/pub/furry/kempal/index.htm

"An nae! I dinn'a have tae eat Dr. Ballards tae have a nice shiny coat!" - Fhaolan

FurryCode: FCW3admrswA++CD+H++M+PR+T+++W-ZSm+ RLCTacw++d+e++f+h*i+psm-


Elisabeth B. Shaw

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

>>The worst I heard of was a bunch of beauticians or something deciding to have
>>a beach party in the hotel's hot tub... complete with sand. Scratch one tub.
>>--
>
> A bunch of punks busted up some furniture at BayCon once and were not
>even con-goers.
>
> You don't EVEN want to know what goes on at huge business conventions
>such as CES or others... Makes some stories by a certain Rolling Stones
>writer (can't remember the guys name for some reason) look tame.
>
>
I remember one year when it was "Coastcon vs. the Frats". There was a
fraternity convention going on at the same time and hotel as Coastcon, and
there was some major damage going on. The frat blamed it on Coastcon, until
I'd heard from my sister's then father-in-law, who was chief of security for
the hotel, that we were actually a well-behaved crowd. (his words.)

I know a little about what goes on at major business conventions. Try
organising a riverboat cruise for 5000 people.

Aki. :3
(who did exactly that for the 1988 Worldcon.)

Message has been deleted

Gary Burke

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

In article <3300b7df...@news.linkline.com>, Brian Henderson
<BHend...@linkline.com> wrote: >mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard

Chandler) wrote: > >>MurryFuck, er, FurryMuck has already widely been
touted as a Muck about >>sex, even though we all know that more goes on
there than that, I think we >>all regularly run into newbies who have
barely described themselves in >>animal terms who are looking for an orgy.
And people who if you look at >>them, assume that you're sizing them up as
a sexual partner. > >Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the
whereare listings on >FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are
directly sex-related and >often, places like the Purple Nurple have more
people in them than the >West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.

Sorry about this, for some reason my linefeeds got screwed up. Anyways, I
could be totally wrong here. I'm not sure what char. you play on
furrymuck or whether you have been to the PN very much, but this is the
second time you have slagged my club. Rigel and I put a lot of work into
making the PN one of the most popular sites on furrymuck, and it is NOT
and was never intended to be directly sex-related. YES, there are TS
rooms in the basement (@agelocked). But the main room has a definite
policy regarding sexual activity that is by and large respected.. if its
NOT respected, Rigel or I are usually on hand to quiet things down. The
PN was built by Slinky back in 1994 as a gay/lebian/bi/straight gathering
spot and support centre, where people could go and be themselves without
politics and worrying about whether they were saying the right thing or
not. The T/D pools were too spammy and organized around playing T/D
(only logical). We just wanted someplace to TALK and make friends. And by
and large that worked. It's now a popular spot for LOTS of furries, many
of whom NEVER ts, but just like the atmosphere. Lots of snuggling, little
to zero actual snogging.

I'm seeing a definite trend here towards scapegoating gays for all the
evils of the fandom. It's always preceded with "I don't care if someone is
gay BUT...." It happens in RL and it happens here and it happens at cons
and it happens on furrymuck. Frankly if 'mainstream' gays found out about
Confurence and decided to attend for 'the parties and sex' they would stay
about 5 minutes before running out the door, not because we are freaks,
but because we are BORING!! Go to a circuit party in new york or west
hollywood or south beach miami.. or a bondage club in the Castro, or a
warehouse afterhours party in Toronto. You will see stuff there that will
curl your hair. Not just naked male dancers, but plenty of alcohol, heavy
drug use and practically-open sex. If you folks think Confurence is some
kind of Sodom and Gomorrah, man, you ain't seen NOTHING. Furries on the
whole don't drink, don't do drugs, barely even smoke, don't get in
fistfights and trash hotel rooms, and tend not to have vicious screaming
catfights in the parking lot at 4am. Am I saying we should DO these
things? Of course not. It's why I'm in furry fandom instead of going to
circuit parties once a month. But let's just have a little PERSPECTIVE.
When I run stuff like the Purple Nurple online and at CF, it is not to
provide a place for people to cruise for sex. Of course that happens.
People would cruise for sex in CHURCH if there was no other option. What
I am TRYING to do is provide a little fun. A little bit of the COOL parts
of the 'gay' community to people who might not get to experience it too
often but would like to. And keeping out the crappy parts that aren't much
fun. Everyone is welcome at the PN, except homophobes. People clumsily
cruising for sex are often ridiculed (usually in such a way that they
can't tell) and people who do meet each other and form happy relationships
as a result, are the reason I do this in the first place.



>
>-Brian

Lynn Davis

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

:>Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on

:>FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
:>often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
:>West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.

: Sorry about this, for some reason my linefeeds got screwed up.

I fixed them up a bit when I snipped.

: Anyways, I


: could be totally wrong here. I'm not sure what char. you play on
: furrymuck or whether you have been to the PN very much, but this is the
: second time you have slagged my club. Rigel and I put a lot of work into
: making the PN one of the most popular sites on furrymuck, and it is NOT
: and was never intended to be directly sex-related.

I've seen far far more sex-related activity in the West Corner of the
Park then in the Purple Nurple. Granted, I've only been on FM for about
a week or so, but even when PN looks busy on a whereare it's pretty
quiet in there. Maybe it's the time's I'm there, but I'd think evenings
would be when business picked up.

: YES, there are TS


: rooms in the basement (@agelocked). But the main room has a definite
: policy regarding sexual activity that is by and large respected.. if its
: NOT respected, Rigel or I are usually on hand to quiet things down. The
: PN was built by Slinky back in 1994 as a gay/lebian/bi/straight gathering
: spot and support centre, where people could go and be themselves without
: politics and worrying about whether they were saying the right thing or
: not. The T/D pools were too spammy and organized around playing T/D
: (only logical). We just wanted someplace to TALK and make friends. And by
: and large that worked. It's now a popular spot for LOTS of furries, many
: of whom NEVER ts, but just like the atmosphere. Lots of snuggling, little
: to zero actual snogging.

That's why I stop by. It's a friendly place. One of the places where
furs actually say 'hi' to the fur that just came in.
--
Tephra
Daughter of Teras
Owner/Proprietor of The Alternative Dragon
DC.D(?) f+ s+ h-- Cw(?) a $ d+++ WL++* Fr(^) l(Bax) Bmag

Stormwind

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

guitar <fu...@iglou.com> wrote:

>jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) writes:
>> You don't EVEN want to know what goes on at huge business conventions
>>such as CES or others... Makes some stories by a certain Rolling Stones
>>writer (can't remember the guys name for some reason) look tame.
>
> I would just like to state, I have attended the CES more than once.
>What people are complaining about at ConFurence would be considered part
>of a display at a CES. Naked porn stars, naked models, people doing their
>best to be enticing and erotic no matter who or what was passing by.

it should at this point be noted that
CES had distinctly seperate areas that
were held in *different buildings*.
one building housed the gamer oriented
booths; yes, there were a few 'booth babes',
but nothing that was extreme. mostly
miniskirts. then there was the consumer
electronics building, which housed everything
from pagers to home sound systems. and
*then* there was the adult market, which
had a whole hotel just for itself.

at NO POINT did any of the porn stars
or naked models wander into any other
area of CES other than their own hotel.
keep in mind i've worked several CES
shows by now, and while i've heard about
the adult section, i've *never* seen
anyone from that area present unclothed
in any other area of the show.

after hours i'm really not so sure about.
when you're working the booth you're
generally too exhausted after the shows
to do much besides get something to eat
and then collapse, preferably outside
where you can try to recover from the
nasty allergic reaction to the hotel's
cleaning solutions that all of us working
the booth developed.

--
stormwind

hell's amazon
lord of the frozen realm

Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

c...@bga.com (Dr. Cat) wrote:

>Well, I think "run like a giant furry party" may be a pretty accurate
>characterization. And it's certainly not a style of management that
>suits itself to a con with over a thousand attendees the way it might
>have worked for the early Confurences. (I wasn't at the early ones.)

Running it like a furry party, especially with only a few attendees,
results in a wonderfully friendly convention. I still think CF0 was
one of the most intimate, friendly gatherings of any kind I have ever
been to. This approach works when you only have 100 people to worry
about, it fails miserably when you're talking about 1200 people or
more.

>Still, even if there's an approach that's clearly better, like bringing
>in more directors or something... I haveta say if the people running it are
>determined to stick with their old approach no matter how many problems
>it causes, there's probably not anything that anyone can do about it.
>They do seem to have shown over the years that they're pretty determined
>to keep running the con the way they want to run it, no matter what other
>people might have to say about that.

Then perhaps ConFurence's time is past. I honestly think that one of
the reasons that ConFurence has started to fall apart is because
everyone knows that only Mark and Rodney can make any decisions and
half the time, neither of them can be found. Therefore, why not run
wild? No one can do anything to you.

If you want my opinion, it isn't more DIRECTORS who need to be added,
but the directors need to pick out a few people who have proven
abilities, hopefully in RL applications (ie. people who manage people
and businesses in RL), give them a position and LEAVE THEM ALONE!
Ideally, the directors shouldn't have any direct responsibilities at
the con, they are there to keep the cohesive whole running. Right
now, Mark and Rodney have so many things to do that they cannot
conceivably do them all and it results in very little actually getting
done.

I don't think anyone is suggesting throwing Mark and Rodney out of
their jobs, just having other people come in, take over some of their
responsibilities and maybe, just maybe, give them a chance to enjoy
the convention as well. I really think that if there were more people
with real responsibility over the convention, the bad behavior issue
would pretty much clear itself up.

-Brian

Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:

> The con is not being treated as a small con..Small cons don't have near
>this much programing or require a hotel this big.

You're right, a small con doesn't require these things, because
ConFurence isn't a small con. But that doesn't mean that ConFurence
is being run like a mid-sized convention either. It's basically being
run by 2-3 people with a lot of helpers.

>Oft the problems lay in the
>lack of staff..And RELIABLE staff, having half a brain and a clue or staff
>who has the time to dedicate is even harder to find. The smart people who
>we would like to see helping out are smart enough to avoid volunteering.

Ah, but now we're talking bodies, not staffers. In all of the
conventions that I have worked, helped organize, volunteered at, etc.
there have never been enough volunteers, that's just a fact of life.
But these are people who would normally be stuck in the video room to
watch it or who would be assigned to unload boxes or something like
that. These people have no responsibilities. I'm talking about
people who are responsible for a particular section of the convention.
Where is the individual responsible for the art show? Where is the
individual responsible for the dealer's room? Where is the individual
responsible for planning and maintaining the lounges? Where is the
guest liason? I'm sure there are people who would be willing to take
these positions and run them well if they wouldn't be micro-managed to
death.

> The directors are certainly aware of the size of the con, but without
>enough staff, it tends to look like its run like a small con. Whats needed
>are dedicated staff who not only know what they are doing, but have the ability
>to train new people DURING the con, since many volunteers cannot make the
>meetings due to being from too far away. I have suggested a Staff Mailing List,
>but not everyone is on the net either.. Makes things a bit tough.

Yes, it does. It also doesn't help that there isn't a specific list
of responsibilities for volunteers in particular areas. I know this
was suggested a number of years ago, but has anyone considered writing
up one-sheet lists of responsibilities for each of the positions? The
strongest point of having one person responsible for each area is that
it makes training someone on the spot pretty simple.

> So you didn't get your way and gave up? What good are staff who give
>up and 'have better things to do'? CF needs DEDICATED STAFF who are willing
>to come to at least most of the meetings or be updated on what happened at them,
>rather then someone who comes to ONE post con meeting with a gripe list and
>is never heard from again.

My way? No, I really don't care about that. Rodney asked that
everyone bring lists of complaints, suggestions, etc. We did. Then
he didn't want to hear any of it. Hate to say it, but everyone in the
world isn't free on Saturday nights. I told Rodney that early on.

> Gophers are supposed to make up for the shortages by running messages.
>Someone could have been sent to find Dean or someone who could reach Dean.
>Dean also had a cell phone and DeWayne could have called him.

Oh, DeWayne *DID* call Dean. I heard DeWayne complaining to Rodney
about how long it was taking Dean to appear with the money envelopes.
Now granted, Dean had a lot to do, but really... where was the radio
base station for registration? If anyone in the con should have one,
shouldn't it be the one with all the money?

>Concidering
>I was stuck in the art show, someone could have came up and took my place
>for a bit while I did a pickup, since I am authorized to do them if noone
>else can be reached (since I knew where the money went and had the keys to
>put it there). My radio worked however for most of the con (except a period
>where the charger got misplaced) and I was never hard to find (being chained
>to the art show most of the time and never far away for long)..

Hey Jazmyn, I'm not blaming you. You were stuck in the art show all
weekend and didn't get to see a lot of what was going on downstairs.

>.As for getting more radios, they are on loan,
>except for two of them which are Mark's (for work, not CF, but used at CF
>anyways) and are expensive and not given out to just anyone on staff.

Considering the hotel space this year was free, I think we can afford
to spring for a few radios, or better yet, purchase our own. It
certainly doesn't cost $12,000 for radios, which is the figure Mark
gave for the hotel cost for CF7, money we didn't have to put out this
year at all.

-Brian

Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

gbu...@interlog.com (Gary Burke) wrote:

>Sorry about this, for some reason my linefeeds got screwed up. Anyways, I


>could be totally wrong here. I'm not sure what char. you play on
>furrymuck or whether you have been to the PN very much, but this is the
>second time you have slagged my club.

I went back in a second message and corrected myself, noting that PN
was only a place that routinely got more characters in a whereare
listing than WCOP. It isn't an expressly sex-related site (although,
as you note, there are TS rooms available). It is, however, an
alternate lifestyle area.

-Brian

Steve Gattuso

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

Brian Henderson wrote:

> If you want my opinion, it isn't more DIRECTORS who need to be added,
> but the directors need to pick out a few people who have proven
> abilities, hopefully in RL applications (ie. people who manage people
> and businesses in RL), give them a position and LEAVE THEM ALONE!
> Ideally, the directors shouldn't have any direct responsibilities at
> the con, they are there to keep the cohesive whole running. Right
> now, Mark and Rodney have so many things to do that they cannot
> conceivably do them all and it results in very little actually getting
> done.

The events of the past two years have finally sunk in to them the need
for deliniating the responsibilities of the con to other persons. Jobs
ranging from control of sections of the con to things as simple as
somebody else learning from Mark how to set up that damned pole have
started to be set out. For example: Kurt Miller is in charge of Gaming
at the con. Anyone have any complaints other than the room should have
been bigger? Not that I've heard. Dewayne Stuart and Karl Maurer have
done a splendid job running registration. [_You_ try doing 1000+
memberships in one night and see if you don't crack up.] That is what
we had last time.

> I don't think anyone is suggesting throwing Mark and Rodney out of
> their jobs, just having other people come in, take over some of their
> responsibilities and maybe, just maybe, give them a chance to enjoy
> the convention as well. I really think that if there were more people
> with real responsibility over the convention, the bad behavior issue
> would pretty much clear itself up.

More is being done. Next year, the control of the Dealer's Den,
Publisher's Row and Artist's Alley are being transferred to another
person, which will lessen Rod's load. Namely, me. And I've already
decided to make a few changes, such as enforcing a brown-wrapper rule in
the Artist's Alley. In addition, registration for dealers will take
place in the most logical spot, the Den itself. Other changes will be
made as needed.

P.S.: The microphone [also known to those in the Den as 'The experiment
in terror'] will not be connected. You may cheer. =};-3

Jason J. Jensen

unread,
Feb 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/12/97
to

Jazmyn Concolor wrote:

> From what I know of Ed its a case of Pot + Kettle = Black

It doesn't make his point any less valid, Jazmyn.


> Was anyone hurt by this (other then bruised egos)? It has a lot
> to do with Censorship when a few people are DEMANDING the con ban this group
> or that group or limit their activities beyound what any local laws would.

Nobody was demanding that anyone ban any group, Jazmyn. A problem was
identified with certain people who have no regard for others who think
differently, and another problem was identified with the convention
becoming something which it was not originally intended to be. There
was nobody physically hurt, no. However, the reputation of furry
fandom, the convention, and everyone involved with the convention was
indeed hurt. I would imagine that the hookers on Beach Blvd. you
mentioned weren't all that interested in attending CF.


> As far as that goes, the con directors should not have to tell GROWN
> PEOPLE how to behave in public.

I would have to disagree there. On the contrary, many people who are
grown need frequent reminders on just how their actions are percieved by
the rest of society. Your security is supposed to be proactive enough
that it can handle such things without con members having to go
searching for them. And perhaps you find it easy, but I particularly
find it hard to take any member of security seriously if he's dressed in
drag.


> Me? Personaly? I just keep the art show from collapsing under its own weight
> and keep the database updated (even if people who sell memberships sometimes
> fail to remember I have to get the info to)

Yes, we all know you're entirely too overworked to the point where you
cannot claim responsibility for anything that goes wrong with the
artshow. Ever since I started going to CF, I believe I've heard you use
this excuse when anyone brought up problems with the artshow. One would
think by now that you'd bring in enough help that you could alleviate
that problem.

I should mention here that I used the term "clique" because there seem
to be a select few who maintain positions of influence despite their
actual qualifications, and seem to hold onto those positions with
jealous abandon despite the fact that delegation would smooth operations
and make their lives easier. The fact that holding on to that authority
makes them overworked enough to deny responsibility for that which
they've neglected seems to outweigh the benefits of delegating
authority.


> First prove there is realy a problem..Other then a few prudes who can't
> cope with a few members of the con who are 'different'..

If that were the problem, I think Ed would've never attended past the
first CF.

No, the problem, Jazmyn, as stated before and many times since, is; (1)
The assertion that upper management of CF is actively recruiting
alternate lifestylists who have no interest in furry fandom, and are
simply coming for a weekend of sexual deviance, (2) The convention is
doing very little to keep displays that mainstream society would
consider lewd from public view within its area of responsibility, and
(3) Security itself is becoming lax.

The only answers to these problems which you've offered is that you are
all too overworked to deal with it, and no mundane ever brought it to
your attention (which doesn't mean that people were disturbed by the
actions -- just that they never brought it to your attention). Other
than that, you've tried to redefine the problem to that of people
wanting to ban other groups, which has nothing to do with anything here.

I would also note that I've been an active supporter of CF since #3.
I've been a dealer, a super sponsor, and have contributed to the art
shows. I believe that gives me some qualification as knowing furry fen,
and I'd hope those qualifications would have you take my arguments in a
more serious light.

Thus far, you've given me no reason to return for CF9.

--Jay

Mer'rark

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
: mer...@netcom.com (Mer'rark) wrote:

: > Personally, it passed the line of good taste for me when someone
: >decided to create a virtual porn theater, and adjoining sex rooms,
: >showing themselves on the WhereAre like so many bad sores as 'T-port to
: >SEX'. I really wish those would be gotten rid of. They certainly are
: >not doing us one bit of good.

: Um... Mer... you're a wizard... :)

Er, not on FurryMUCK I'm not. Perhaps that's a good thing, too.
Since I might be too tempted to recycle the place out of hand. =)

: Actually, the existence of such doesn't bother me at all. Free will


: and all. However, the fact that they draw more people than the
: non-sexual places seems to say something about the MUCK community in
: general, and that something isn't very nice.

: -Brian

It's too bad, too. I keep saying we need more substance and less sex,
and no that doesn't mean more violence. It means more character
development, and interaction.

Character... hmm, how where have I heard that word used before?


--
-- Mer'rark Walk like a dog, talk like a man.
Walk like a dog, like anybody can.

Captain Packrat

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

"David G. Bell" <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<855700...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk>...
> In article <3300b7df...@news.linkline.com>

> BHend...@linkline.com "Brian Henderson" writes:
>
> > Yeah, I'll give you that one. If you look at the whereare listings on
> > FM, 40%+ of the most popular sites online are directly sex-related and
> > often, places like the Purple Nurple have more people in them than the
> > West Corner of the Park. That's pretty sad.

At the moment (2-12, 8:07 p.m. FurryTime), the WA list reads:

WhereAre: Scanning 307. Minimum to display: 2. Command:
Room Name ## Comments
Palace of Dragons T/D pool #1 - Sta 4 Truth or Dare Pool! (taxi,PoD,Pool)
Food Chain Lobby 3 *Voraephile/Macro/micro Club
Otterpaws 2 Otterpaws...not just for otters :)
Giants' Club 9 What it says! (t lc, n)
HoneyBadger's burrow 13 Friends, old and new, always welcome
Gold Table of Power <Articer's Pala 2 M:TG beta playing table <taxi, ap,
gold>
The Young and the Restless 3 *Little ones need fun too...
The Leash and Collar: Main Lounge 4 *Adult/Conversation/BDSM (t tlc)
Twilight Alehouse 2 A gargoyle's tavern (tport twa)
Coyote's Den 3 A country tavern
Underground Nexus 5 Almost the Center of the Furryverse.
North Corner of The Park 2 FTP Board
West Corner of The Park 10 Center of the Furryverse
The Purple Nurple 9 A gay/lesbian/bi/etc. hangout.
(t tpn)
Green Table of Life <Artificer's Pa 3 M:TG playing table <taxi, ap, green>
-- End WhereAre list --

The most popular place on FM every evening is HoneyBadger's Burrow.
Nothing sexual goes on there, it's just a place for friends to gather
and talk. And plenty of hugs. :) HB's Burrow regularly beats out
not only the Park, but almost all the adult areas as well!

--
Captain Packrat (Captain on FurryMUCK)
Fur Central ---> http://www.sandiego.sisna.com/captpakrat/

Furry Code 1.2 (available from the above site)
FRM4 A++>+++ C>+ D++ H+++ M+++ P++++ R+ T++++ W Z+>+++
Sm+ RLTI a cn++ d- e+ f++++ h+ iwf+++ sm#

If you're furry and you know it, Hug the Mouse!

O. .O
==V==


Dr. Cat

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
: Then perhaps ConFurence's time is past. I honestly think that one of

: the reasons that ConFurence has started to fall apart is because
: everyone knows that only Mark and Rodney can make any decisions and
: half the time, neither of them can be found.

: If you want my opinion, it isn't more DIRECTORS who need to be added,


: but the directors need to pick out a few people who have proven
: abilities, hopefully in RL applications (ie. people who manage people
: and businesses in RL), give them a position and LEAVE THEM ALONE!

: I don't think anyone is suggesting throwing Mark and Rodney out of


: their jobs, just having other people come in, take over some of their
: responsibilities and maybe, just maybe, give them a chance to enjoy
: the convention as well.

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that only Mark and
Rodney are in a position to make those changes, yes? And if that's
what's needed, either Mark and Rodney will decide to do those things, or
they won't decide to do those things, and no amount of discussing or
suggesting or arguing or analyzing the issues to death on alt.fan.furry
is going to change what happens. Purrhaps talking to Mark or Rodney is
the only thing anyone could do that might really have an effect, and
maybe not even that if they don't want to listen or aren't willing to
change their minds. In which case about the only thing that's left to
do is decide whether to keep going or pass it up.

Still, I have this theory that long public debates about how to change
Confurence are engaged in largely for catharsis and/or recreational
value. In which case the discussion is likely to continue on and on. :X)

*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*

(Disclaimer: I am going to go put bananas in my ears now, so if you want
anything, yell real loud so I can hear you! (Or if Pee Wee says the
secret word.))

Brad Austin

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

Dr. Cat wrote:

> Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
> : If you want my opinion, it isn't more DIRECTORS who need to be added,
> : but the directors need to pick out a few people who have proven
> : abilities, hopefully in RL applications (ie. people who manage people
> : and businesses in RL), give them a position and LEAVE THEM ALONE!
>
> : I don't think anyone is suggesting throwing Mark and Rodney out of
> : their jobs, just having other people come in, take over some of their
> : responsibilities and maybe, just maybe, give them a chance to enjoy
> : the convention as well.
>
> Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that only Mark and
> Rodney are in a position to make those changes, yes? And if that's
> what's needed, either Mark and Rodney will decide to do those things, or
> they won't decide to do those things, and no amount of discussing or
> suggesting or arguing or analyzing the issues to death on alt.fan.furry
> is going to change what happens. Purrhaps talking to Mark or Rodney is
> the only thing anyone could do that might really have an effect, and
> maybe not even that if they don't want to listen or aren't willing to
> change their minds. In which case about the only thing that's left to
> do is decide whether to keep going or pass it up.
>
> Still, I have this theory that long public debates about how to change
> Confurence are engaged in largely for catharsis and/or recreational
> value. In which case the discussion is likely to continue on and on. :X)

In this particular case, it's just a transparent attempt by
B.H. to posture himself into a position of authority at CF.


Brad Austin
Phoenix, AZ USA
<ar...@dancris.com>
Plushophilia home page: http://www.dancris.com/~artax


D. A. Graf

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

Peter da Silva <pe...@taronga.com> wrote:
: In article <jazmynE5...@netcom.com>,
: Jazmyn Concolor <jaz...@netcom.com> wrote:
: > Have you seen WonderCon's Caberet? Its a LOT wilder then CF's. How
: >about the Cherry Poptart 'official' party at San Diego Comicon? I can also
: >show you a piece of art from the San Diego Comicon art show with a male
: >satyr with a FULL ERECTION!

: Yep. The last con I went to was in Dallas, and the art show was chockablock
: full of centaurs fucking. No, it wasn't a furry con. Regular "straight" SF.

: SF is an alternate lifestyle, didn't you know that?

: FIAWOL.

To shed a bit more light on the illo Jazmyn talked about in capital
letters, it was a satyr, yes...HOWEVER, the reason the erection slipped by
the artshow director that year was simple: at first glance, even at
looking at it for a little, the pernicious penis is hidden among the
foliage. You see the satyr standing in leaves and branches, similar in
colour to the foliage, and unless you looked REEEEAL close, as Jazmyn
obviously did, you'd miss it.

It wasn't as blatant as she made it out to be. I remember her showing it
off proudly, pointing out the erection gleefully, and laughing over how it
slipped by the director.

Make of it what you will.


--Tygger


--
******************************************************************************
gr...@primenet.com

www.av.qnet.com/~canuss/tygger www.av.qnet.com/~canuss/tygger/gk.htm
******************************************************************************
"Hey, I'm just an ex-Guard with a bad attitude...."

Random quote from Saraenae Kohiino, Guardian Knights

Urthwyse

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Jason J. Jensen wrote:
> Jazmyn Concolor wrote:
> > As far as that goes, the con directors should not have to tell GROWN
> > PEOPLE how to behave in public.
>
> I would have to disagree there. On the contrary, many people who are
> grown need frequent reminders on just how their actions are percieved by
> the rest of society. Your security is supposed to be proactive enough

Though this is a little to the side, try teaching a college course
to see how you really do have to keep grown people in line. I'm a TA and
teach a lab course. I've also taught my subject to 4th graders as
volunteer service. I have a harder time getting the college students to
behave than the 4th graders. (The 4th graders usually score higher on the
same tests too- go figure.)
You wouldn't think you'd have to really work to remind adults to
behave, but you really do. With children, you at least have an authority
factor to help quell their behavior. Adults are generally just as bad a
children with the added attitude of "I don't have to listen to you or
anyone."


Richard Chandler

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

In article <5dso06$c...@gold.interlog.com>,
Gary Burke <gbu...@interlog.com> wrote:
<snip>

>curl your hair. Not just naked male dancers, but plenty of alcohol, heavy
>drug use and practically-open sex. If you folks think Confurence is some
>kind of Sodom and Gomorrah, man, you ain't seen NOTHING. Furries on the
>whole don't drink, don't do drugs, barely even smoke, don't get in
>fistfights and trash hotel rooms, and tend not to have vicious screaming
>catfights in the parking lot at 4am.

I dunno about drugs, but there was a lot more drinking at CF8 than I've
ever noticed before (As Elf observed as well, although his own performance
was fairly memorable). CF6 I broke up a fistfight on the balcony that
probably would have resulted in Metalhead either going through a window or
over the edge. And lord knows there's enough psychodrama over FurryMuck
relationships (although the worst example I can think of was a certain
young woman).

The hotel rooms at the Buena Park came pre-trashed.

--
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog... but they can tell right
off the bat if you're an idiot! -- Me
http://www.teleport.com/~mauser/ Gallery Web Page
"Yeah, I've got ADD, wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"

Sean Malloy

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn Concolor) wrote:
> A bunch of punks busted up some furniture at BayCon once and were not
>even con-goers.
>
> You don't EVEN want to know what goes on at huge business conventions
>such as CES or others... Makes some stories by a certain Rolling Stones
>writer (can't remember the guys name for some reason) look tame.

I remember a WesterCon in Phoenix years ago where the JayCees had had
their convention the previous weekend -- but couldn't resolve a vote
for some top office and held vote after vote without result, except
that they were still there when the WesterCon started. Sometime
Saturday the hotel management told the concom that if they knew of
WesterCon attendees who needed rooms, they'd be _happy_ to throw out
some of the JayCees to make room for them. I remember the damn duck
calls up and down the halls at two in the morning when they finally
managed to come up with a winner (the 42nd vote, which amused the
Hitchhiker's Guide fans enormously). The parties the JayCees were
running were causing no _end_ of complaints. Jazmyn is right. Fans are
downright sedate compared to businessmen.

--
Sean R. Malloy | American Non Sequitur
Naval Medical Center | Society
San Diego, CA 92134-5000 |
mal...@cris.com | "We may not make sense,
srma...@snd10.med.navy.mil | but we do like pizza"
*NOTE* Remove the '_' in my email address for replies;
it is there to stop automatic remailers

Richard Chandler

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

In article <jazmynE5...@netcom.com>,
Jazmyn Concolor <jaz...@netcom.com> wrote:
> Okay..So after peering at the database, I'd say %80 are either gay or
>bi...The rest are unknown...

Is THAT kind of information in the CF database? Sheesh! And people were
getting on Trish Ny's case for trying to score the status of every
player's @age status on FurryMuck!

Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97
to

mer...@netcom.com (Mer'rark) wrote:

>Brian Henderson (BHend...@linkline.com) wrote:
>: Um... Mer... you're a wizard... :)

> Er, not on FurryMUCK I'm not. Perhaps that's a good thing, too.
>Since I might be too tempted to recycle the place out of hand. =)

Yeah. Dunno why I was thinking you were, musta had SPR confused with
FM for a split second. no offense. Especially after all the fun we
had together on SPR the other night. :)

> It's too bad, too. I keep saying we need more substance and less sex,
>and no that doesn't mean more violence. It means more character
>development, and interaction.

I've been saying the same. Too bad far too many people use the MU*s
to act out their baser instincts. I would have thought, or at least
hoped, that some people were more mature than that.

Guess not.

> Character... hmm, how where have I heard that word used before?

It's that thing that most people don't have nearly enough of? :)

-Brian


Brian Henderson

unread,
Feb 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM2/13/97