A "Clean" Convention
Steve Carter
adult material allowed. Between the snitting and political & social
arguments, I see a few logistical problems that folks aren't addressing.
For one, who would come to support such a con? Patronage would be no
problem if it were a small convention like Mephit, but in terms of dealers
most of the biggest names (Mailbox Books, Radio Comix, Terrie Smith &
Michelle Light) would have to leave about half their inventory at home.
Second, hosting a major event with any staying power requires that it be
*for* A, not just *against* B. There must be something to draw the guests
in, rather than just to keep unwanteds out. It would target an audience
which actively desires clean material, and most of those are parents.
Parents, however, already have enough bills to pay in the very fact of
having smalls in their lives in the first place.
Even singles, active solicitors of clean material, such as (I will not say
SugarDaddy!) Michael Russell can't support an entire convention.
Third, if you're going to ban erotica, you should also ban excessive
violence. This is the ugly stepchild of furrdom that gets overshadowed by
all the throbbing organs and flowing juices. As far as I'm concerned
violence is more reprehensible than sexuality because I've MUCH firsthand
experience with both.
Still, a G-rated convention is a good goal, but would require a larger
paradigm shift than I think most furrii are capable of right now.
Dragon Magic
> adult material allowed. Between the snitting and political & social
> arguments, I see a few logistical problems that folks aren't addressing.
I thought I had addressed the business side well. Though, it could still
work as a gathering, maybe with just artists setting up in a room for
doing work and selling prints, etc., but dealers would almost all have
to be turned down, it seems. Not all, but you'd be lucky to have a
dealer say, "It's a long drive, and we'd have to leave a lot home, but
maybe we can turn a profit at a new, small show..."
> For one, who would come to support such a con? Patronage would be no
> problem if it were a small convention like Mephit, but in terms of dealers
> most of the biggest names (Mailbox Books, Radio Comix, Terrie Smith &
> Michelle Light) would have to leave about half their inventory at home.
Not only this, but as far as I recall, those entities are all US Americans,
and would require a visit through customs to make it to this show. That
would entail some duties for their merchandise, plus the necessity to have
converted money beforehand. There's just a lot of thought that would
need to be put into this. But it could still work if it were made smaller
to begin with.
> Second, hosting a major event with any staying power requires that it be
> *for* A, not just *against* B. There must be something to draw the guests
> in, rather than just to keep unwanteds out. It would target an audience
> which actively desires clean material, and most of those are parents.
> Parents, however, already have enough bills to pay in the very fact of
> having smalls in their lives in the first place.
And there are also the severely religious, not just the gentle religious
types.
I'm talking about the people who would probably not be in furry if it
weren't
for their inner animal, pretty much.
I doubt people just go to a show ONLY for smut, but sometimes they
only shop for smut. And if the con is about a month apart from another
major convention, where they could get smut, they may just skip this
show to go to that show, seeing that it may be a better show off the
bat. Who knows? I don't think such a show has attempted to surface
so far, so it's hard to tell how it would work out in the market today.
> Even singles, active solicitors of clean material, such as (I will not say
> SugarDaddy!) Michael Russell can't support an entire convention.
Well, if the show is a shoestring budget show, and badges cost maybe
$10 for the weekend, with just workshops and an artists' alley, and
the staff is volunteer only, I can see that it can be supported by one
big spender, maybe with sponsorship patronage or something? One
$500 badge for that one person, and maybe 100 more at $10, then
you could have it recoop.
> Third, if you're going to ban erotica, you should also ban excessive
> violence. This is the ugly stepchild of furrdom that gets overshadowed by
> all the throbbing organs and flowing juices. As far as I'm concerned
> violence is more reprehensible than sexuality because I've MUCH firsthand
> experience with both.
This was a major argument I had at GenCon just last week. We were
told that adult materials should be covered up when in general viewing
areas that maybe kids could see. We should clearly mark their locations
or holders, so that people would know that they were going to be looking
at adult materials, and we could stop kids from looking at them when no
parent is around.
What got me is that the convention was going around asking artists and
dealers to tape over nipples and other female and male genitalia, but
tape sellers were showcasing HK Cinema action films uncensored without
complaint, people were selling artwork that was fairly violent, even one
seller had tee shirts out, one of which showed a dragon with a knight
firmly clenched in his claw, his other claw flicking the head off the
knight,
flying across the width of the tee shirt with a blood trail from the body
to the head. And yet, not one con staff member asked for this tee shirt
to be put back or out of public view.
It is a weird standard here, violence is widely accepted, but nudity is
considered intolerable. Sex shouldn't be considered as awful as, say,
Reservoir Dogs. But sex-movies get NC-17 ratings, and Reservoir
Dogs gets an R rating. Go figure.
Sorry to get off in a tangent, just agreeing with Steve here.
> Still, a G-rated convention is a good goal, but would require a larger
> paradigm shift than I think most furrii are capable of right now.
Maybe it should be considered a fantasy and furry convention? If you
can draw a larger audience who may accept a furry theme as well,
you can draw a wider array of people in. Who knows? But it
definitely needs more thought than what I see so far. But the con people
are making notes for a business plan, which is good. Very good.
TygerMoon Foxx
for is "tasteful". I have seen some beautifully rendered erotic pieces
which only classify as adult because the subject matter depicted is
naked and anatomically correct. To me there is literally a world of
difference between these types of displays and the spooge and
scourge-o-matic artwork with its overexaggereated excretions and gory
weals. Some of my favorite classic artwork from which I take
inspiration (Reuben, Michaelangelo's "David", Venus di Milo, countless
others) are considered acceptable by the public at large.
If a "clean" convention is to be started, I would surmise that it would
have to begin from scratch rather than trying to impose radically
different guidelines on an existing convention. To do so would probably
kill that convention's attendance. When people attend a convention,
they get used to a certain atmosphere and come to expect certain things
from it. Anthrocon doesn't do too badly as a "clean" con with the adult
material clearly marked and access to that material tightly monitored
and with definite hours for adult content posted. No matter what you
do, you are still going to get a few people pushing the envelope as far
as they can but this year I saw less of them than in any previous year
I've attended. For the first time in three years of con attendance, not
once was I as a female furry inundated with males who don't seem to
understand the meaning of the word "no". I was out fairly late both
Friday and Saturday and was not subjected to the overly enthusiastic
chained couples doing whatever they felt they wanted to do because it
was "adult hours".
I guess what I'm saying is, I see no need for a "clean" convention when
the careful guidelines put in place already provide that most of the
time. The only purpose a "clean" convention would serve would be as a
form of censorship and a means by which the organizer could impose his
or her values on the congoers. Not much fun, if you ask me. As long as
the adult area stays adult and the yiffers keep their moneymakers out of
my face and personal space, I'm happy.
--
In Light and Shadow,
TygerMoon Foxx
----------------------------------------------------------------
I am darkness and light, the shadow hunter and king of the sun.
My claws hold the earth, my tongue tastes the sky.
I am steadfast and strong, compassionate and caring.
I am tiger, and my words are pure.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"Welcome to the 21st century. Dang, everybody's still stupid."
-----Simtra Kyphrion Firefox
"Ah...springtime and the assholes are in full bloom..." ----- Bo
Atara
<9kovkm$r4f$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>:
>...been watching with some interest the threads about a convention with
>no adult material allowed. Between the snitting and political & social
>arguments, I see a few logistical problems that folks aren't
>addressing.
I think one of the biggest misconceptions already going about the convention is
that it's going to be "Yerf" clean. The stated rating for the con will be R,
which includes most zines and prints that I've seen at cons - adult art show
notwithstanding.
You used to example of Mailbox Books, so I will too. =) (Not picking on you,
Sean!) To get a general idea of what's being planned, the "banned" items would
be items marked in red from mailbox books: items containing graphic sex and
violence. In the comics section, I counted 88 titles that fall under the R or
less rating, and only 12 that fall under NC-17. The list of names offering
prints under the G-rating alone is more than 10 times longer than the list of
names offering NC-17 prints.
Again, nothing as to content or rules regarding what's allowed has been
decided; I'm just going off what was stated in the original proposal. I've
simply found it interesting that people assume "no porn" means "no nudes."
There's a big difference between the two. (For me, anyway.)
And if the con doesn't succeed because of its art policies, then it will be a)
no sweat off anyones' backs but those running and organizing the con, and b)
proof that furry really DOES mean sex. ;)
--
Atara
"Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus."
http://www.FurNation.com/Atara/
***What doesn't fit in my email addy? NADA.***
Atara
mouseboy...@mindspring.com (Steve Carter) wrote in
<9kovkm$r4f$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>:
>Second, hosting a major event with any staying power requires that it
>be *for* A, not just *against* B. There must be something to draw the
>guests in, rather than just to keep unwanteds out.
The draw will be the workshops and panels. Not all conventions are centered
around the dealer's room. Business conventions in which people learn how to be
better pencil-pushers and the like are more content-oriented. I've never gone
to a professional convention and thought, "Oh boy, I'm going buy some really
nice stationary." I go to learn something.
The how-tos are going to be much more important at this con than the how-muchs.
Dragon Magic
> decided; I'm just going off what was stated in the original proposal. I've
> simply found it interesting that people assume "no porn" means "no nudes."
> There's a big difference between the two. (For me, anyway.)
First off, from what I understand now, the reason for this direction is not
so much a direct taste, but local decency laws, if I'm not mistaken? It
would
depend on those laws, then, as well. Maybe the laws state that nudity=porn?
And then, who decides when it goes to porn and is no longer tasteful nudity?
Just showing nipples and breasts? Vaginas and penises? Just don't show
spooge or intercourse? Implied spooge or intercourse only? You get the
drift.
We haven't fully heard what the con's full definition is yet, because I
think
they're still discussing that.
> And if the con doesn't succeed because of its art policies, then it will
be a)
> no sweat off anyones' backs but those running and organizing the con, and
b)
> proof that furry really DOES mean sex. ;)
No, it doesn't mean that furry really does mean sex. It means that it's
unlikely
people will gather from all across this continent to a convention, spending
money
and using up vacation or personal time, just to go to a clean show. Believe
me,
if furry does mean sex, there would be no Yerf. And Yerf still gets uploads.
Dragon Magic
centered
> around the dealer's room. Business conventions in which people learn how
to be
> better pencil-pushers and the like are more content-oriented. I've never
gone
> to a professional convention and thought, "Oh boy, I'm going buy some
really
> nice stationary." I go to learn something.
Have you ever run a convention? There's more to it than just saying, "We'll
be
at this hotel/convention hall."
All furry cons require money, period. Why? Because no one's holding the
convention at their own hotel/home/apartment/etc. Not only do you usually
have to provide payment for the rental of the space up front, but also
hotels
generally require a downpayment to secure blocking of rooms, in case you
cancel or otherwise don't get the crowd you expected, they don't lose out
on the rooms you blocked. Then there's the advertising. Can't really tell
people you have a show without at least getting the word out. Guests?
Gotta pay the ways there for the big guests to get them there, and then
you have to get their hotels paid for, etc.
Ah, don't forget getting badges made up, other items as well. Don't want
just anyone getting into the con when you've spent all that money trying to
get it setup. Volunteers help out at the con to maintain order, but if
you're
all volunteer, you may run into problems, so make it worth your while to
have head-guys who are there to help out definitely. Gotta get their rooms
and possibly food, etc.
So when you just have workshops and artists' galleries, well, there's not
much money coming back in. You'll have to hope that the sales of the
badges will recoop your losses. But you can't charge them the same price
as a con where people know they'll get a full dealer's room, art gallery,
workshops, fun events, big guests, etc. Why? Because they would just
go to that con instead of yours, if they had money to go to only one.
All in all, you have to view all conventions as a business venture. Even
if you don't intend to make money or are in it for the money, you can't
just expect to shell out hundreds, if not thousands, every year to keep
the con going when people will continue to want it to grow. Any show
that's pretty stagnate will lose its interest with people easily, even if it
has such a moral proposal for its guests.
So no, a dealer's room is essential to ensure that you can get money back
into the show. When people come to buy, more people come to sell, and
more money is paid for the show itself. Why? Because it's economical to
pay the $200 a table if you're going to get 10,000 people into the show,
who are going to want to perhaps buy what you're selling. When you are
asked to pay $200 a table for a show that may get 500 people just there
for maybe the workshops, and you have to leave about half your stock
at home, why would you bother?
> The how-tos are going to be much more important at this con than the
how-muchs.
Again, you can easily have workshops AND a dealer's hall and not
compromise the show's integrity. The fact is, though, it will continue
to cost money to keep holding workshops with no way to rebuild
capital for another show. Simply selling badges will maybe cover
the costs of the hotel, insurance, etc., but may not get you the money
for guests, advertising, etc.
It's something that needs to be thought about hard. Is it going to be
profitable, or at least break even? If not, who will cover the extra costs?
Atara
<DYTb7.90581$dd1.11...@typhoon.neo.rr.com>:
>No, it doesn't mean that furry really does mean sex. It means that it's
>unlikely people will gather from all across this continent to a
>convention, spending money and using up vacation or personal time,
>just to go to a clean show. Believe me, if furry does mean sex, there
>would be no Yerf. And Yerf still gets uploads.
Yes, Yerf gets uploads. But what you're saying is that the only way to get
furry fans to cough up money is to have smut. If there's no smut, they won't
attend. Therefore, smut is what makes conventions run. Yes?
I don't have anything against smut; I have a fair collection of it. I do think
this will be an interesting experiment, however.
AJL
> Well, if the show is a shoestring budget show, and badges cost maybe
> $10 for the weekend, with just workshops and an artists' alley, and
> the staff is volunteer only, I can see that it can be supported by one
> big spender, maybe with sponsorship patronage or something? One
> $500 badge for that one person, and maybe 100 more at $10, then
> you could have it recoop.
Ok, time for your reality check:
CritterConDiego cost well over $2300 to plan, setup and run, including
room rental, insurance, food, and badge materials (about 25 cents per
Badge-A-Minit button)
Sales of memberships and dealer tables, profits from T-Shirt sales, plus
the $100 or so donated to the kitty brought in less than $1850.
(Yes, that means I spent nearly $500 of my own money for this)
All this was accomplished with an ESTABLISHED presense of over 200
furries who would be in the area for Comic-Con anyways. We had 250 or
more people show up at the event (officially 240 membeships, but we
weren't enforcing memberships very closely).
Expecting a turnout of more than 50-75 furries at a first-time event is
more realistic... unless there is already a larger established presence
in the area.
If you think that $1500 ($500 plus 100x$10) is enough for a
shoestring-budget convention, you are sadly underestimating the costs
involved. CritterConDiego is about as "shoestring" as conventions get,
and it cost more than that *without* programming panels or a dance. Add
either one of those, and the expenses start to go up exponentially.
Anyways, this was not a flame or a rant... just a wake-up call.
--Darrel.
AJL
> The draw will be the workshops and panels. Not all conventions are centered
> around the dealer's room. Business conventions in which people learn how to be
> better pencil-pushers and the like are more content-oriented. I've never gone
> to a professional convention and thought, "Oh boy, I'm going buy some really
> nice stationary." I go to learn something.
You've also probably had your boss, or a vendor pay the admission fee
for you, too. Have you looked at how much "seminar" shows cost for the
attendees?
Getting in for less than $200 per person, per day, would be a *cheap*
show.
Dragon Magic
> >unlikely people will gather from all across this continent to a
> >convention, spending money and using up vacation or personal time,
> >just to go to a clean show. Believe me, if furry does mean sex, there
> >would be no Yerf. And Yerf still gets uploads.
>
> Yes, Yerf gets uploads. But what you're saying is that the only way to get
> furry fans to cough up money is to have smut. If there's no smut, they
won't
> attend. Therefore, smut is what makes conventions run. Yes?
>
> I don't have anything against smut; I have a fair collection of it. I do
think
> this will be an interesting experiment, however.
No, what I'm saying is, and what Steve has pointed out, you will lose out on
dealers, artists and attendees when you say, "No this", when this has been
in
the dealer, artists or attendee's convention agenda in some major form. Why
go to Clean Con 2002 in July in Montreal, a 1500 mile drive, when, say,
Further Confusion 2002 in May in San Diego, a 1500 mile drive, has
everything Clean Con has, plus the smut?
Now if FC said, "Nothing but smut", yeah, you'd lose attendees them, too,
because people would not want to attend something that was only smut, just
as people would not want to attend something that had no smut at all. You
lose attendence the more roadblocks you setup.
But the major point is, SEX SELLS. Period. Dealers, artists, etc., all find
that anything that's been considered smut here, will bring in the dollars,
will
make their trip to the con more profitable, and will weigh more in what they
attend. If a dealer or artist can only attend one show a year, and there are
twelve cons which allow smut this year, and one clean show, which do you
think a dealer or artist who also has smut will do? Think he or she will
just
abandon that part of their sales force just to attend a novel idea? Hardly.
Furry fans cough up money for smut and non-smut. If non-smut never sold,
no one would bother doing the prints, after all. So you've misinterpreted my
statement. But anyone who limits a major portion of sales at any con will
see a loss of income from that show, period. Just simple economics.
Dragon Magic
> shoestring-budget convention, you are sadly underestimating the costs
> involved. CritterConDiego is about as "shoestring" as conventions get,
> and it cost more than that *without* programming panels or a dance. Add
> either one of those, and the expenses start to go up exponentially.
[snip]
Actually, the $500 is based on an actual event. In 1997, my friend
wanted to run his own con, but only for friends. He rented out two
rooms at a hotel down in Dayton, Ohio, about four hours from his
home, and blocked up some rooms for the people to have there.
He didn't get insurance, of course, since it was for friends, and didn't
need the badges. He just asked everyone attending to help defer
the costs by paying a fair share of the costs, and pay for their own
rooms. They could share as they needed, he didn't care.
Cost about $450 to run for two days. Had about 20 people attend.
Wasn't that bad, actually. So yes, if you do want a shoestring budget
show for under $1500 today, you can do it. It just won't be too much
of a public event, really. (:
For a small, first year show, though, expect easily at least $3000
to get the right promotion and hotel space, and escalate that as
you figure in more guests, rooms, events, days, etc. I'd love to
hear from the big guys exactly how much it cost to run Anthrocon
or Further Confusion, etc. Just to compare it to the figures that
I've estimated for cons. I expect it's well into the tens of thousands
by now.
> Anyways, this was not a flame or a rant... just a wake-up call.
Well, yours is based on your actual experience in California. I'm
not sure how the costs displace throughout the country for hotels
and taxes and insurance. But hey, the fact is still, conventions cost
money, and unless you have a good plan to get the convention to
pay for itself, it's going to cost you a lot of money. Period.
Glen Wooten
> ...been watching with some interest the threads about a convention with
> no adult material allowed. Between the snitting and political & social
> arguments, I see a few logistical problems that folks aren't addressing.
>
> For one, who would come to support such a con? Patronage would be no
> problem if it were a small convention like Mephit, but in terms of
> dealers most of the biggest names (Mailbox Books, Radio Comix, Terrie
> Smith & Michelle Light) would have to leave about half their inventory
> at home.
Well, speaking for Terrie, I have to say that "half" is somewhat of a high
figure. Yes, Terrie does some adult stuff - but it's not the majority -
although it may be what some people fixate on. In the case of the others,
"half" is WAY too high a figure.
But this does bring up a problem - Customs. I'm not sure how it would
work the other way, but Canadians wanting to sell in America have to jump
through all sorts of hoops to get things done - I can't see it being
simple the other way. It's also common that Canadian Customs inspectors
can be rather arbitrary in what they classify as "pornography", and
destroy (no, not turn back, destroy). How Customs would deal with things
needs to be VERY clearly established - and this isn't a dig at Canada,
it's a dig at Customs the world over. IF your agent didn't have enough
bran this morning, you could have a hard time with him.
When wandering across a border (ANY border) to do business, you have to be
concerned with Customs, currency exchange, and GST/PST/excise taxes - BOTH
ways.
--
Glen Wooten
_________________________________________________________
| primary: jag...@rexx.com | secondary: leo...@aol.com |
_________________________________________________________
| Terrie's web page: http://www.rexx.com/~jaguar |
_________________________________________________________
AJL
> Cost about $450 to run for two days. Had about 20 people attend.
> Wasn't that bad, actually. So yes, if you do want a shoestring budget
> show for under $1500 today, you can do it. It just won't be too much
> of a public event, really. (:
I thought we were talking about a 100 person convention... what you
described, with only 20 people, was just a small room party and it
*still* cost $450.
> I'd love to
> hear from the big guys exactly how much it cost to run Anthrocon
> or Further Confusion, etc. Just to compare it to the figures that
> I've estimated for cons. I expect it's well into the tens of thousands
> by now.
ConFurence is still one of the big guys... over 700 members each year in
2000 and 2001. I needed to have over $30,000 in advance funds this past
year to keep the hotel happy, but that was also to secure the next two
years (2002 and 2003) at the same hotel at a significantly reduced cost
than this year's event.
> Well, yours is based on your actual experience in California. I'm
> not sure how the costs displace throughout the country for hotels
> and taxes and insurance. But hey, the fact is still, conventions cost
> money, and unless you have a good plan to get the convention to
> pay for itself, it's going to cost you a lot of money. Period.
Unless you go to some mom-n-pop hotel with teenie meeting rooms, you are
going to have to deal with a standard corporate contract and Banquet
Event Orders to reserve the meeting space. Standard verbage in those
contracts is that you will hold your own insurance that will name the
hotel. Don't expect to get away without the insurance, as most hotels
will want to see the coverage binder before letting you set up.
The ConFurence Group had a $1 Million policy for CF12 and $50,000 for
CritterConDiego. the premiums for the two shows cost about $1000
total. I'm going to be buying a year-round small-business policy before
ConFurence 2002, which will save money in the long run.
--Darrel.
AJL
> Why
> go to Clean Con 2002 in July in Montreal, a 1500 mile drive, when, say,
> Further Confusion 2002 in May in San Diego, a 1500 mile drive, has
> everything Clean Con has, plus the smut?
Wow... you got a whole lot of mixed up stuff in that one little
paragraph...
The "Clean Con" (I believe) is being planned for August, not July.
Further Confusion is in January, and it is in Northern California (San
Mateo?) not San Diego.
ConFurence 2002 is April 26-28, in Burbank (Los Angeles area)
CritterConDiego is the one in San Diego, and that's in July.
...I just wanted to clear that up.
--Darrel.
AJL
> AJL <grap...@ajlvideo.com> wrote:
> : If you think that $1500 ($500 plus 100x$10) is enough for a
> : shoestring-budget convention, you are sadly underestimating the costs
> : involved. CritterConDiego is about as "shoestring" as conventions get,
> : and it cost more than that *without* programming panels or a dance. Add
> : either one of those, and the expenses start to go up exponentially.
> $1500 would be pretty light spending, especially for a startup con when
> there are lots of initial one time expenses. On the other hand, I'm not
> sure what Darrel is going on about as far as costs soaring with a dance or
> programming panels. The cost for that space, if you are willing to risk
> guaranteeing a certain number of room nights, ought to be nothing.
CritterConDiego exists in a strange scenario where room-blocks were not
easy to obtain, hence the meeting space is paid for directly. Comic-Con
takes up nearly 100% of all the rooms available that weekend, and we
rent the meeting space at a discount because it would otherwise be
vacant.
*If* I were able to get a room block (and I will be trying to get one
for next year's CCD) and *if* I am able to get enough people to rent the
rooms to pay for the space, then you are correct, the space is paid for.
However, the more space you ask the hotel for, the more rooms they are
going to require in the block to pay for it. And if you don't fill a
minimum percentage of your room block, you pay a penalty for their not
being able to rent the rooms to other guests. The risk, and therfore
the potential expense is significantly higher if you have more meeting
space.
> It can pay off big when they think 400 room nights might be walking
> over to the competion.
For a con to fill 400 room nights first time out would be a miracle,
unless there is already a large installed base of people coming into the
area for the same weekend. A "clean con" first time out can probably
expect 200 members or less, and maybe 80-100 room nights. If I was
running it, I wouldn't budget for more than 25 to 35 dealers tables,
either. If the first year goes well, then the following year can be
planned larger... but even at those small numbers, you're looking at a
significant expense.
--Darrel.
Dragon Magic
> paragraph...
Just sampling, nothing set in stone. (:
As an example only. I knew it was all off, but wanted to tell them
that there was more to think of than just what the con was.
Glen Wooten
> Dragon Magic <cb...@dragonmagic.net> wrote:
> : All furry cons require money, period. Why? Because no one's holding the
> : convention at their own hotel/home/apartment/etc. Not only do you usually
> : have to provide payment for the rental of the space up front, but also
> : hotels
> : generally require a downpayment to secure blocking of rooms, in case you
> : cancel or otherwise don't get the crowd you expected, they don't lose out
> : on the rooms you blocked.
>
> some more or less token security deposit, but the room block certainly
> isn't paid for in advance and if you block enough rooms, they usually give
> you function space for free. It's not a one sided deal.
The "standard" contract (which is always different) has an estimated cost
for the meeting space based on the number of room nights you are
projecting (with graduated penalties for not meeting the numbers), a
certain amount of catering (catering wants their cut as well - if you have
no catered events, expect a higher meeting space cost), and a security
deposit. The final bill is the most frightening one - since there will
always be little "extras" you weren't expecting.
> : Then there's the advertising. Can't really tell
> : people you have a show without at least getting the word out. Guests?
> : Gotta pay the ways there for the big guests to get them there, and then
> : you have to get their hotels paid for, etc.
>
> Guess what, a lot of hotels will give you a certain number of comped room
> nights for a given number of room nights rented in addition to function
> space.
Yes, but the ratio tends to be rather high. If you get one comped night
for 25 room nights, you're doing pretty good (and 25 is a VERY low
figure...)
Michael Russell
Steve Carter wrote:
Hi, I'm Mike, from Canmore ... *snicker*
> For one, who would come to support such a con?
I would love to see some actual marketing and demographics research
about those who attend furry cons. I know there are many reasons
why people attend. I attend to buy art, meet friends, perform in
the puppet shows if possible, and maybe vacation in the surrounding
area.
There was good attendance at the early Anthrocon conventions in
Albany, and these were fairly "clean" in comparison to all other
furry conventions.
Based upon the common complaint I hear from artists regarding
lack of money, especially understandable for the college students,
how many artists will attend if they are unsure about the money
they can earn from the event? Attending a convention can get
expensive, especially if travelling long distances.
> Second, hosting a major event with any staying power requires that it be
> *for* A, not just *against* B.
I will agree that a convention has a better chance of success
when it is for something and promotes a reason to attend. Meetings
that are designed to exclude as the motivation usually do not last
or have the enthusiastic support.
> Even singles, active solicitors of clean material, such as (I will not say
> SugarDaddy!) Michael Russell can't support an entire convention.
*smile*
Also, keep in mind, the buyers of clean material have higher
expectations regarding quality, subject, context, and so forth.
Patrons of clean material are more discriminating.
I think the goal of this proposed convention are praiseworthy.
I just wish it was in Calgary instead of Ottawa. *smile*
Also, it is expensive to get to Ottawa from Florida. Probably
explains why we see a lot of Canada license tags on cars ...
> Third, if you're going to ban erotica, you should also ban excessive
> violence.
Good point. This is why some films can get an "R" rating even
when there is nothing sexual in the film.
Having the convention in Canada does present an interesting problem.
I would figure it would be a good idea to research the Canadian
rating systems and use those as a reference. Something that might
be "PG" rated in the USA might get a "M" rating in Canada??
--
Cheers, Mike 'Flafox' Russell
Vicki Fox Productions (mrus...@ix.netcom.com, Vick...@hotmail.com)
The World of Vicki Fox ( http://www.VickiFox.com )
Ben_Raccoon
news:3B702E7D...@ajlvideo.com...
> Dragon Magic wrote:
> > Cost about $450 to run for two days. Had about 20 people attend.
> > Wasn't that bad, actually. So yes, if you do want a shoestring budget
> > show for under $1500 today, you can do it. It just won't be too much
> > of a public event, really. (:
>
> I thought we were talking about a 100 person convention... what you
> described, with only 20 people, was just a small room party and it
> *still* cost $450.
How much did last year's CritterCon cost? It seemed a lot closer to the
original room party idea, and was a little "cleaner" than the more recent
one.
--
www.furnation.com/ben_raccoon
Greylocks, aka Marc Lacourciere
con will help reduce them.
For example; no dance.
Why? Several reasons...
Not enough space, too costly, and the best reason of all: There are at
least 5 excellent ultramodern dance clubs within a few blocks of
walking. Who knows we may be able to get free entry to some of those
clubs?
Costs will be further reduced by avoiding as many administrative costs
as possible. We dont need to re-equip the entire security crew for
example. Communications are covered. Computers are not a major issue.
Artistic knowledge is excellent, and the staff has a clue.
We also dont expect to achieve a miracle. This will be a small con, a
first con, and an experiment all at once.
It runs on the willingness and dedication of a few who are willing to
try instead of just talking about it.
It has to deal with local and federal laws, so we have to be creative
about the constraints. How to do this? We'll do our best to offer
interesting alternatives. What? Just wait, we're working on it.
Greylocks, aka Marc Lacourciere
bad days, and they can be as extreme as the US customs are about
'un-allowed' things.
Seizures can and do happen.
When we Canadians travel to AC or other cons, we have to think about all
this. It goes both ways.
We are not establishing a No Porn rule just to get folks annoyed, but
for very practical reasons. 90% are legal, the rest is because we want
to try something new.
Remember, No Porn does not mean No Adult, ok?
Trust Jeff to keep you all informed when more details happen. This
convention only came to life last Saturday, let it grow a bit :)
Blue Streak
"Michael Russell" <mrus...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3B7046A9...@ix.netcom.com...
> Having the convention in Canada does present an interesting problem.
> I would figure it would be a good idea to research the Canadian
> rating systems and use those as a reference. Something that might
> be "PG" rated in the USA might get a "M" rating in Canada??
Absolutely not! In fact, there have been cases where the opposite is true.
Brief nudity and language is generally not as big a deal; for example when a
movie is broadcast on both a Canadian and a U.S. television network, the
U.S. version is always more censored. We have many of the same pornographic
magazines (like Penthouse) and comic books (like Bondage Fairies). In
Ontario, women are legally permitted to go topless in public (although none
do, it's still considered a social no-no). And in Quebec, touching is
permitted in strip clubs. Yes, the limits on what is legal is lower in
Canada, but until you reach that ceiling, Canada is actually more lenient
than most states in the U.S.!
ilr
Damnit Mouseboy, don't track that stuff in here.
This is AFF, you're supposed to get rid of Reality before you
come in. Go try again, there's a Reality-Scraper out on the porch.
;)
-Ilr
AJL
> How much did last year's CritterCon cost? It seemed a lot closer to the
> original room party idea, and was a little "cleaner" than the more recent
> one.
With roughly the same number of people (240 sold memberships), but with
only 10 dealer's tables, 2000's CritterConDiego cost just over $1,000
including food. It took in $3.04 less than it cost.
I had a better deal on the meeting space but because of the shape of the
room it couldn't fit as many tables as this year's con.
We were able to fit in a dance because the room we had was poolside, and
we were able to use the patio area adjacent to the pool without paying
for it.
--Darrel.
PeterCat
> For a small, first year show, though, expect easily at least $3000 to
> get the right promotion and hotel space, and escalate that as you
> figure in more guests, rooms, events, days, etc. I'd love to hear
> from the big guys exactly how much it cost to run Anthrocon or
> Further Confusion, etc. Just to compare it to the figures that I've
> estimated for cons. I expect it's well into the tens of thousands by
> now.
The reason many cons (not just furry, but SF/anime/comic/whatever)
charge about $40 for a membership is because that's the break-even point
these days. So to get a ballpark figure for the budget of a con (for
this year), multiply its (previous year's) attendance by $40.
Smaller/startup cons aren't exempt from the rule of thumb, but have to
take some wild guesses as to attendance (and thus, projected revenue).
The organizers of a new, small con should expect to have to raise about
$10,000-$15,000 amongst themselves (no-interest loans) to fund the first
year. The money received from memberships, etc. goes into the bank to
pay _next_ year's expenses, with a small portion paying off part of the
startup loans over a number of years. Otherwise you're going to go nuts
trying to manage cash flow, and running short of cash because there
haven't been enough folks preregistering yet.
--
The Furry InfoPage! http://www.tigerden.com/infopage/furry/
pete...@Furry.fan.org (PeterCat) Rhal on FurryMUCK (come cuddle!)
--
"I can't believe what he's doing with those shiitake mushrooms!"
Watch "Iron Chef," Fridays and Saturdays at 10pm (ET) on Food Network!
AJL
> : convention at their own hotel/home/apartment/etc. Not only do you usually
> : have to provide payment for the rental of the space up front, but also
> : hotels
> : generally require a downpayment to secure blocking of rooms, in case you
> : cancel or otherwise don't get the crowd you expected, they don't lose out
> : on the rooms you blocked.
>
> some more or less token security deposit, but the room block certainly
> isn't paid for in advance and if you block enough rooms, they usually give
> you function space for free. It's not a one sided deal.
The hotel will look at the number of RESERVED rooms in your block
usually 30 days before the event, and ask for a deposit according to
those numbers and your contracted obligations.
This is why when people don't reserve their rooms early, it hurts the
convention so much. It also allows more room for the hotel to
mistakenly reserve people at different rates, or for them to release the
remaining unreserved rooms in your block so that late reservations need
to pay prevailing prices. This happens at almost every con I've been
to.
Lesson: Reserve your room as early as possible. It's not *just* to
ensure that there will be space, it *really* helps the con-com negotiate
final arrangements with the hotel.
> Guess what, a lot of hotels will give you a certain number of comped room
> nights for a given number of room nights rented in addition to function
> space.
There's usually a 50:1 ratio of paid rooms to comp'd rooms in most hotel
contracts. If you have 400 room nights used at the end of the con, then
the con gets a credit of 8 room nights deducted from the final bill.
This usually pays for 2 rooms for the entire weekend... not *much* of a
credit, but it does help a little.
Jeff Novotny
> This isn't my experience from working a number of cons. They usually want
> some more or less token security deposit, but the room block certainly
> isn't paid for in advance and if you block enough rooms, they usually give
> you function space for free. It's not a one sided deal.
Right. That's my experience too. Of course, you have to block an awful
lot of rooms to get everything for free. But working on a larger scale
will still earn sizable discounts.
They'd rather have us in their space than the Rogers and Smith wedding
reception because we will block a certain number of suites, will pay for
an executive suite or two, and will bring traffic into their hotel who
will eat at their restaurant, plug coins into their vending machine,
etc., and will be exposed to the hotel chain, hopefully in a positive
manner.
Best;
Jeff
ilr
> Also, it is expensive to get to Ottawa from Florida. Probably
> explains why we see a lot of Canada license tags on cars ...
>
California even. And since this Con's planned in the Summer, It'd
actually be feasible for me just to go straight North, all the way
out to Ottowa. What's that, 3 votes for Calgary now? ;)
Makes sense to me though, why bother hosting another con right
around the same time Anthrocon in about the same region as
Anthrocon? And Anthrocon's had a record for being cleaner
than most Cons. It's a little redundant y'know.
-Ilr
David Cooksey
annual summary reports. For a first time con, you can look at the budget we
had for 1998. This was the budget and actualk numbers for the first year of
FC and we did a LOT of begging and borrowing to keep the actual expenditures
down.
Compare that to the most recent budget and you can see how prices escalate
quickly as attendance grows.
http://www.anthroarts.org/about.html
David Cooksey
news:3B707EB7...@sympatico.ca...
> Right. That's my experience too. Of course, you have to block an awful
> lot of rooms to get everything for free. But working on a larger scale
> will still earn sizable discounts.
Yep, this year, if we fill our room block at FC (around 1200 room nights),
we'll get everything for free meeting room wise, but until now its usually
been around $15 grand for meeting room and catering on top of our room
block. And remember, at teast in recent years, you can expect one attendee
to generate one room night as a rule of thumb. We actually do slightly less
than that at FC but we have so many locals its tough to get them all to get
rooms at the hotel. We envy AC in that regard and try to schedule a lot of
late night entertainment accordingly to mediate the problem.
David Cooksey
Charles Melville
Dragon Magic wrote:
> > Again, nothing as to content or rules regarding what's allowed has been
> > decided; I'm just going off what was stated in the original proposal. I've
> > simply found it interesting that people assume "no porn" means "no nudes."
> > There's a big difference between the two. (For me, anyway.)
>
> First off, from what I understand now, the reason for this direction is not
> so much a direct taste, but local decency laws, if I'm not mistaken? It
> would
> depend on those laws, then, as well. Maybe the laws state that nudity=porn?
No, I was following the discussion on Yerf when it started, and basically
there were a number of people, artists included, who expressed desire and
interest for a convention that was porn-free. That was what got the ball
rolling before Jeff decided to make the jump, and the later announcement that
the con would be in Ottawa.
--
-Chuck Melville-
http://www.zipcon.net/~cpam/index.htm
Brian Y
bla bla bla
>The list can be found at coollist.com
>under "Calgaryfurries" .. to post, post to >calgary...@coollist.com
David Bliss
Worldcon in Winnipeg telling dealers to have a complete inventory ready to
hand over at customs and expect to pay ALL taxes on merchandise IN ADVANCE.
You are supposed to get any taxes paid on unsold merchandise back when you
leave but you'd better be able to prove they owe it. I'd like to hope this
was an exaggeration or that things have since changed (is NAFTA doing ANY
good?) but doubt it. I also recall a Westercon in Vancouver telling their
dealers the same thing.
"Glen Wooten" <jag...@rexx.com> wrote in message
news:9kpa5o$1q1p$1...@velox.critter.net...
Kay Shapero
TygerMoon Foxx <tyge...@paganportals.com> wrote in message
news:3B700712...@paganportals.com...
> I think when most people use the word "clean" what they're really asking
> for is "tasteful". I have seen some beautifully rendered erotic pieces
> which only classify as adult because the subject matter depicted is
> naked and anatomically correct.
And sometimes not even erotic. I bought a Dark Natasha print of a dancing
batmorph from the NC-17 section of last year's ConFurence, who must have
been in there because she wasn't wearing anything; the pose and expression
were not particularly sexual. (Mind you I'm still trying to figure out what
caused some of the other art to be in there; maybe I'm just too clean minded
or something.)
TygerMoon Foxx
> And sometimes not even erotic. I bought a Dark Natasha print of a dancing
> batmorph from the NC-17 section of last year's ConFurence, who must have
> been in there because she wasn't wearing anything; the pose and expression
> were not particularly sexual.
The guidelines are pretty much the same as for the movies ---if there's
full frontal nudity, you either stick a postie on it or you put it in
the adult section. Of the four pieces I had in the adult section this
year, only one of them obviously belonged there for the sexual content.
With two of them, they were there because the figures were nude and I
didn't choose to cover that part of the drawing; the third had an
implied sexual act in it and both critters were anatomically correct and
naked.
I have to admire the scrupulousness of Dark Natasha regarding her
artwork; I bought two pieces from the adult section this year (unusual
for me ---I don't usually view the adult section at all) and I had to
study them for a long time from an artist's viewpoint before I realized
why they were in there. The first ---a picture of a mare and a stallion
in harem garb---when closely examined shows the mare's breasts clearly
visible...and her sexual attributes, while skillfully blurred by the
harem pants, are still recognizable as such. The second ---a unicorn
being held by an antelope---is much the same. While it wasn't obvious,
the nipples and crotch were still recognizable as such.
--
In Light and Shadow,
TygerMoon Foxx
----------------------------------------------------------------
I am darkness and light, the shadow hunter and king of the sun.
My claws hold the earth, my tongue tastes the sky.
I am steadfast and strong, compassionate and caring.
I am tiger, and my words are pure.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"Welcome to the 21st century. Dang, everybody's still stupid."
-----Simtra Kyphrion Firefox
"Ah...springtime and the assholes are in full bloom..." ----- Bo
golder
>
> I think one of the biggest misconceptions already going about the
convention is
> that it's going to be "Yerf" clean. The stated rating for the con will be
R,
> which includes most zines and prints that I've seen at cons - adult art
show
> notwithstanding.
>
Okay, in as much as we have discused it since it looks like I will be
handling the Art Show, that a lot of choices are being made this first time
defaulting on the clean side, just be on the safe side for reasons to avoid
legal problems that might arrise.
Nipples are ok. Genitalia is not. I had argued for allowance of non sexual
"David-esque" (with post-it notes covering naughty bits to be extra safe)
being a gray area but I understand Jeff's reasons for saying no and will
stand by them.
Spooge is right out. Sex if implied is still a gray area. A couple holding
one another that shows no genitals and doesn't appear too overtly sexual
might be considered okay (cuddling in bed covered by sheets or such should
be fine), but I doubt it would be if their faces are caught in a Ron Jeremy
moment if you catch my drift. I'll have to get back to you on that.
Violence is a gray issue. Mature violence that may be depicted in Virtago
comics like Swamp Thing is the borderline while the Heavy Metal pulsating
guts, disembowments & gory violence won't be. Ditto with violence of a
suggestive abusive sexual nature ("Legend of the OverPeni"...er, "Fiend")
Basically, if it can be seen in "Sabrina Online" then you're safe.
---Style
Berios
Dragon Magic <cust...@dragonmagic.net> wrote:
>> Third, if you're going to ban erotica, you should also ban excessive
>> all the throbbing organs and flowing juices. As far as I'm concerned
>> violence is more reprehensible than sexuality because I've MUCH firsthand
>> experience with both.
>
>This was a major argument I had at GenCon just last week. We were
>told that adult materials should be covered up when in general viewing
>areas that maybe kids could see. We should clearly mark their locations
>or holders, so that people would know that they were going to be looking
>at adult materials, and we could stop kids from looking at them when no
>parent is around.
>
>What got me is that the convention was going around asking artists and
>dealers to tape over nipples and other female and male genitalia, but
>tape sellers were showcasing HK Cinema action films uncensored without
>complaint, people were selling artwork that was fairly violent, even one
>seller had tee shirts out, one of which showed a dragon with a knight
>firmly clenched in his claw, his other claw flicking the head off the knight,
>flying across the width of the tee shirt with a blood trail from the body
>to the head. And yet, not one con staff member asked for this tee shirt
>to be put back or out of public view.
>
>It is a weird standard here, violence is widely accepted, but nudity is
>considered intolerable. Sex shouldn't be considered as awful as, say,
>Reservoir Dogs. But sex-movies get NC-17 ratings, and Reservoir
>Dogs gets an R rating. Go figure.
The artist "Karno" from Iceland is one of the most explicitly into sex
and violence in furry art I can think of... his philosophy seems
to be that if we cant have one, we will automaticly have the other.
It seems to dovetail with a very strong type of American cynicism about
the subject.
I have heard that in some European countries their comics are
really not big on violence, and sex is generaly depicted in a positive
light ... it seems that in America we are so uptight about sex that
violence has become a substitute. Also, since the church has
associated sex with "evil", I guess we not only feel bad about sex
but many people's depictions of it get a bit on the outragious
side due to pent up supression. It's all a no-win situation, really.
Another artist who has drawn some pretty violent stuff is Roz Gibson...
I dunno if you could make a big difference between individual
acts of murder, and death that happends in military situations.
I guess it really depends. Her writing is good and characters
like Jack Salem are psychotic/sociopathic, so it makes sense
that he would be killing other characters, though for me sometimes
it's a bit much.
I've noticed a trend with some young furry artists who do furries of the
"goth" type to draw them with bloody weapons and stuff, who just
murdered someone... I guess they listen to Maralyn Manson a lot
and this is kinda cool to them. (I'm sure it would freak out
their parents... that's probably the point.)
I think what makes for a good comic is to realize that you need to
have good writing and staging, etc. first and foremost, and that
if sex or violence are the main point of your work, it comes off
as kind of campy. (Or just plain bad writing.)
For me personaly, most of the sexual art at Anthrocon didnt do much for me..
with the exception of Eric Schwartz!
Steve Carter
news:9kup0v$4...@tiger.tigerden.com...
> I have heard that in some European countries their comics are
> really not big on violence, and sex is generaly depicted in a positive
> light ...
Yes! Sex feels good and pain feels bad. This is simple; more people should
practice this. Look at the statistics for violent offenders: an
overwhelming majority are more inspired by violence than sex, even serial
rapists.
> I've noticed a trend with some young furry artists who do furries of the
> "goth" type to draw them with bloody weapons and stuff, who just
> murdered someone...
Frazetta has quite a history of doing excellent scenes of action and
violence without dipping into the mire of overemphasizing the gore. It's a
matter of how mature the person is artistically.
...Let me give you one source of my original comment on emphasizing violence
as well as sex.
In April of 1995, I was living in Oklahoma City. A friend and co-worker,
Cartney McRaven, was newly married and downtown in the Alfred P. Murrah
building taking care of some last paperwork when the bomb went off, killing
her and 167 others.
http://www.oklahoman.com/opub/bombing/bvic/
I was one of the hundreds of people who helped sift through the remains and
clean up after the massive devastation Timothy McVeigh caused in his
ideological temper tantrum-cum-act of cowardice. You can't imagine what a
sobering experience it is to be that close to such an event, and to have it
touch your life personally and PERMANENTLY.
That reaffirmed my dedication to life, love, happiness, and the protection &
salvation of the innocent.
Jace
<mouseboy...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> ...Let me give you one source of my original comment on emphasizing violence
> as well as sex.
>
> In April of 1995, I was living in Oklahoma City. A friend and co-worker,
> Cartney McRaven, was newly married and downtown in the Alfred P. Murrah
> building taking care of some last paperwork when the bomb went off, killing
> her and 167 others.
> http://www.oklahoman.com/opub/bombing/bvic/
>
> I was one of the hundreds of people who helped sift through the remains and
> clean up after the massive devastation Timothy McVeigh caused in his
> ideological temper tantrum-cum-act of cowardice. You can't imagine what a
> sobering experience it is to be that close to such an event, and to have it
> touch your life personally and PERMANENTLY.
>
> That reaffirmed my dedication to life, love, happiness, and the protection &
> salvation of the innocent.
*hushed* Damn that sucks... sorry to hear it, Steve.... but at least
you came away from it positively.
---
Jace
ja...@softhome.net
ICQ# 4654209
http://sydewinder.tripod.com/default.html
falcon.cc.ukans.edu/~qandrews
Freeform fantasy RP
RHayes Jr
even if it was known to spontaneously combust five minutes after purchase.
What's more, you'd blame the explosions and the clouds of flying severed
fingers on society's "sexual oppressiveness."
God above. What is wrong with you people? It sure as hell isn't the fact
that porn doesn't have a forum for itself... it's already at every
convention, available from every cable company, stacked in festering heaps
in every convenience store, spreading like hyperactive fungus across the
internet--- hell, it's damnear raining out of the sky in brown-paper-wrapped
bundles and concussing people in the street!
Yet in spite of being able to WALLOW in spooge 24-7, you react in shrieking
terror to the very notion of a single porn-free area upon the face of this
godforsaken planet and in this godforsaken fandom, as if you would shrivel
into dust the moment you walked through the door like Dracula at Tiki Tan.
Maybe THAT'S why you're so religiously devoted to the preconception that a
porn-free convention is an automatic failure-- you're a bunch of Spooge
Vampires who have to roll around naked on beds of back issues of Genus to
keep from bursting into flame in the light of day.
It sure the hell can't be anything like *facts* or *clinical observation*
that leads you to this 'TARD conclusion. Last time I checked, *damnear every
entertainment business on the planet* somehow gets by without automatically
providing one-handed fap-off material at the front door. Last I heard,
Disneyworld hadn't collapsed into financial ruin because Minnie refused to
shake her cha-chas at the incoming guests. Jim Henson did pretty good
considering he never was enlightened enough to shoot BLUE FILMS with Kermit
and Miss Piggy. And CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, but C.S. Lewis, Beatrix Potter,
Alan Dean Foster, Mercedes Lackey, Brian Jacques, Hugh Lofting, H. Beam
Piper--Don't recognize any of those names? TRY READING something!-- didn't
*starve* to death for lack of Spooge sales.
You know what? You may be right. It may very well be, thanks to a
coincidence of COSMIC proportions, that your microcephalic expectations for
this porn-free "Ottowa Con" are right on the money. It just might be that it
won't make a dime, and that it'll be a complete failure after the first
year.
But you know what? I DOUBT IT. You know why? 'Cause this Con has one thing
that none of the others has, and so long as the others are being run the way
they are, never will. A 110% DECENT REPUTATION. You won't have to fudge
details when you tell your parents about going, and if you do, they'll be
details that are your own fault. You won't have to worry about some flathead
leaving his "Humpy the bunny" portfolio lying out in the open and freaking
out the waitress you were hitting on. You wont have to put up with 20
different people sitting around trying to figure out how to hang a wang on a
hyena.
What's more, if they run this 'con right, you might actually get to wave
your portfolio under the nose of a few professionals-- as in people with JOB
OPENINGS-- without them asking you inconvenient questions about the
full-color portraits featuring a raccoon-and-dildo threesome hanging on the
opposite side of the curtain behind your table-- assuming they wouldn't have
taken one look in the adult section and run off screaming into the Canadian
night.
SO, by all MEANS, keep your porn-accessible conventions. You're apparently
so pathetically sexually desperate that you can't live without it without
EXPLODING. Meanwhile, the rest of us with lives *above* our waistlines will
be gathering togethor in Ottowa, rubbing elbows, having fun, trading art and
writing tips, maybe even hobnobbing with professionals, talking about
something OTHER than whether a bipedal horse's schlong should point up or
down, and generally *NOT CATERING TO YOU.*
--
RH Junior
Freelance Artist/Cartoonist
http://www.geocities.com/blue27a
http://nipandtuck.keenspace.com
http://UTLT.keenspace.com
Dragon Magic
"RHayes Jr" <blu...@ntelos.net> wrote in message
news:VDme7.53211$C7.17...@e3500-chi1.usenetserver.com...
> Oy. You wankfreaks would scream for the presence of porn in every
convention
> even if it was known to spontaneously combust five minutes after purchase.
> What's more, you'd blame the explosions and the clouds of flying severed
> fingers on society's "sexual oppressiveness."
Hmmm... Someone's blowing this way out of proportion.
First off, what has sexual imagery which is PUT ASIDE from general
view ever harmed a convention. Every genre of convention has adult
materials, Furry is no exception.
What the practicality is, most of any con is supported by money. Cons
are all business ventures unless someone just has a gathering in their
backyard. This is probably accepted by all reading this newsgroup as
fact.
Now, with this idea, anyone who puts forth a convention, should
understand that they will be spending money. And unless someone
has a lot of money to blow and doesn't care about making anything
back, they'll need to push the convention to earn some money back.
How does one do this? Sure, you can try to make the money off
the badges alone. But if you try to make your con last on badges
alone, you'll probably end up charging people $40+ the first year
for an unknown show with nothing for them to find at your show
they can't get at another show.
So you stack up a couple guests. Money involved. Pay their way there,
and if the hotel doesn't provide the rooms, more money. Okay, you
got guests. Nice. What about some presentations and workshops?
Probably going to need to print up some books to let people know
all about these guests and workshops, so they know what's going on.
You have all these extra expenses, how are you going to recuperate
them? There's a good chance that you'll make up some money, and
maybe some badge money as well, opening up an artist's alley, art
show and dealer's room.
Here's where we get into the problem. Especially in Canada. See,
most of the people who normally get tables and panels at art shows,
are from the States. So to get to a Canadian show, it's a bit more
trouble for them to bring goods, what with customs, travel expenses,
etc.
Okay, now that you've eliminated spooge and mature materials past
brief nudity, you're eliminating about half of the merchandise some
dealers sell, and some of the works other artists are already known
for. These artists may decide that the long trek isn't worth their
costs and artists may feel that it's not worth doing a gallery that
weekend of just some of their artwork to sell.
Why? Because there are many more cons in Canada and the US
where there are no limits on the adult stuff, at least, as long as it is
normally legal. Therefore, the con would lose a lot of its potential
income on just telling people, "No sex, no spooge, no harsh violence".
Who cares that you do not like it, or that the con is trying something
ethical here, it's a business venture, and they'll be wanting to make
back their money.
> God above. What is wrong with you people? It sure as hell isn't the fact
> that porn doesn't have a forum for itself... it's already at every
> convention, available from every cable company, stacked in festering heaps
> in every convenience store, spreading like hyperactive fungus across the
> internet--- hell, it's damnear raining out of the sky in
brown-paper-wrapped
> bundles and concussing people in the street!
Everyone with common sense knows:
Sex sells.
Violence brings in the crowds.
Convention = Business, things that bring more business in a controlled
environment = good.
There are many porn-free areas on this world. In fact, when people go to a
con,
they have a choice of not seeing porn. Why? Everything of a mature nature
like that,
is either in a clearly-marked bin or box, or behind a specific wall, or
otherwise out
of the usual path. That means, if you *DO* want to see it, then you have
that choice.
It's not forced upon you ever at these cons.
And we're not saying that a porn-free convention is an automatic failure,
but it
has a severe handicap. All first-time shows have a problem of the proper
advertising,
and that people have never experienced it, and that you have to get people
together
who will have to experience working together perhaps for the first time
doing a
convention. There's a lot of problems inherit with doing a first-year con
without
being associated with another.
Now, what's more, they're limiting income by turning away people who do earn
money on selling spooge and violence. Even though you or others do not like
that
these things exist, get with reality, sex and violence have been around
forever.
You have a choice at any con with sex and violence of *not* seeing it, so as
to
why this is a problem for you is beyond me, unless you feel that people's
tastes
should always adhere to yours.
I do doubt a clean con's first year without a lot of support and a lot of
money
thrown into it knowing it'll probably be lost will make it to a second or
third year.
They do have to heavily consider the loss of the income from dealers and
artists,
and see whether they can attract enough members to make it a worthwhile con.
And the argument that such authors made it without sex is irrelevant. Why?
Because
there's a place for general-audience works in the mainstream world. You
don't have
to plan a trip, buy a membership, get a hotel room and find entertainment at
many
different planned workshops and events in order to buy a Mercedes Lackey
book.
In fact, many people go to the cons to meet others from around the country,
and
to find and do stuff there they won't normally find in their area. You can't
go into
a B Dalton's and find the Doug Winger Collection, after all.
The facts have always followed that you need to turn your business toward
your
audience who will pay; free-riders aren't there to dictate your business. If
50% of
your projected audience have a choice between your clean show 800 miles
away,
or another con with little to no restrictions only 400 miles away, which do
you
think they will attend? Remember, you can go to a show which allows spooge
and
still not see spooge all weekend, so don't factor that people who don't like
to see
sex will automatically want to go to a clean con.
And referencing anyone who realizes this as a retard, is proof enough that
your
rant is similar to a burned fur's rant that openly depicted sex is
practically a crime
against what really is furry. Furry is a lot more than just clean art. It's
a fantasy
genre, and has more meaning that what you factor into it.
It is not the people who like to buy a few spooge pieces at a con and keep
them
for themselves who make us look bad, it's the raving lunatics such as
yourself
ranting on and pushing people's opinions to be toward your own tastes that
begins to perk the media's ears.
> You know what? You may be right. It may very well be, thanks to a
> coincidence of COSMIC proportions, that your microcephalic expectations
for
> this porn-free "Ottowa Con" are right on the money. It just might be that
it
> won't make a dime, and that it'll be a complete failure after the first
> year.
It may be. Who knows? If they got the right local support, they may get
enough
money to make a strive at a second year. But a convention should have people
convening to a point. If it's just a local con, who cares except locals,
right?
> But you know what? I DOUBT IT. You know why? 'Cause this Con has one thing
> that none of the others has, and so long as the others are being run the
way
> they are, never will. A 110% DECENT REPUTATION. You won't have to fudge
> details when you tell your parents about going, and if you do, they'll be
> details that are your own fault. You won't have to worry about some
flathead
> leaving his "Humpy the bunny" portfolio lying out in the open and freaking
> out the waitress you were hitting on. You wont have to put up with 20
> different people sitting around trying to figure out how to hang a wang on
a
> hyena.
So it sells no spooge, it's automatically more decent than the rest? Again,
back
into pushing your tastes onto everyone. All the con takes is some guy in a
fursuit
walking out to a local place, and when people ask why he's in a fursuit, he
explains that he's a furry, what they are, and all of the sudden people at
the
con are hounded by the local media of these freaks who enjoy wearing
fursuits just for fun, and find out more and more.
Think that con will still have a decent reputation? I mean, no spooge was
sold, so it's still a good place . . . except that people just hate the con
because
they're tired of the cameras or people walking around trying to snap
pictures
of anyone in anything controversial.
Don't think it won't happen. It's happened in the States often enough.
And I've seen many, many kids at spooge-selling cons. I've talked with
many of them, even some with parents. The parents know what's in the
marked binders and boxes at my booth, and they still shop there. They
don't turn away upon seeing it.
And if you think that spooge-free portfolios won't freak out a waitress,
imagine what a nicely modeled topless furry image she sees will do?
Some people are also turned off breasts, no matter what they're on.
This con proposes brief nudity, so this would be a scenario allowed.
Plus, just because it's clean in public, doesn't mean that artists can't
do sketchbooks after hours which aren't clean, and someone will
be looking at that at the restaurant without realizing someone behind
them can see over their shoulder.
You have the weirdest impressions of what a clean con really is, and
that it's always 100% safe. They're only trying to limit the sales of
materials
normally rated R or worse. They're not Bambicon here.
> What's more, if they run this 'con right, you might actually get to wave
> your portfolio under the nose of a few professionals-- as in people with
JOB
> OPENINGS-- without them asking you inconvenient questions about the
> full-color portraits featuring a raccoon-and-dildo threesome hanging on
the
> opposite side of the curtain behind your table-- assuming they wouldn't
have
> taken one look in the adult section and run off screaming into the
Canadian
> night.
There are professionals at other cons as well. Remember that Radio Comix,
Shanda Fantasy Arts and Frontier Productions are at other conventions.
If you want a serious job, you make a serious portfolio, not the kind you
sell, which outlines the extents of your talents. This shows how little you
truly know of the professional world. Hell, some jobs want to see how you
handle adult situations in your art as well. Not all, hell not even most,
but
enough that if you seriously wanted a job doing dicks and sex in art, you'd
need to put them in your portfolio.
And professional artists have seen nudity. Many who take college courses
are involved in life drawing, which has semesters where you draw, get this,
NAKED HUMANS. That's right, they want you to draw the naughty stuff
in college, and you get graded on it. Great, no?
This kind of stuff happens throughout the world. You can't kill it off
because
you don't like it, and you can't push it off to others that it's evil or
sick, because
in reality it's normal to have sex. What's the harm of showing images of it
to people who are of age and want to see it? I'd rather people saw sex, than
saw how to make a bomb. One's natural, the other's very destructive.
> SO, by all MEANS, keep your porn-accessible conventions. You're apparently
> so pathetically sexually desperate that you can't live without it without
> EXPLODING. Meanwhile, the rest of us with lives *above* our waistlines
will
> be gathering togethor in Ottowa, rubbing elbows, having fun, trading art
and
> writing tips, maybe even hobnobbing with professionals, talking about
> something OTHER than whether a bipedal horse's schlong should point up or
> down, and generally *NOT CATERING TO YOU.*
Allowing spooge does not meant that everyone will buy JUST spooge, or
buy any spooge at all. Get this, you can buy what you want, look at what you
want, if at all. You can show up and just hang out with friends all weekend,
and
never go to the artist's alley, art show or dealer's room. People do this
all the
time.
I know for a fact that many people who enjoy drawing spooge also draw a lot
of non-spooge, or are involved in normal matters. People can have fun
without
spooge. Just telling people "NO SPOOGE" kinda tells them, "Well, we're
limiting our market compared to everyone else, but if you still want to
come,
we'll try hard to make it a good con." That's all they can offer compared to
the
other cons, just a restriction, but otherwise the same as all other cons.
After all this, though, all I've gathered is that you are without the life
or without
fun, as you decide you have to tell everyone that they are perverted
jackasses
who make furry a horrible place and are only whining to get more porn, when
most people who have argued against closing it off aren't seriously into
spooge,
or even in it at all.
They just have a sense of reality and how business works. Perhaps you should
learn some of it as well, before you tell us all that we have ulterior
motives?
We've tried to help out the con with some suggestions. What have you done?
Doug Winger
<blu...@ntelos.net> wrote:
[Fair Ranting Snipped]
Just an observation, and not meant as a flamey sort of thing, but I've
noticed for someone that's stated numerous times that they personally don't
care too much for porn, you sure do go on about a lot.
> http://nipandtuck.keenspace.com
> http://UTLT.keenspace.com
By the by- just another of those marvelous, amusing coincidences that
sometimes catch my eye- you ever notice some of the other choice online comix
Keenspace offers to the public? Strange that you don't seem to mind their
company while peddling your wares there, what with that previous outburst.
Still, you're at least realistic about it, so you've got my respect in that
regard. A bit ranty, but what the hey? I indulge in that at times, myself. I
do wish you'd have addressed the points and concerns raised- which had little
to do with the absense of porn other than from an economic standpoint- rather
than going on with your usual "They're all out for P0RN!" diatribe.
As for the con, and since I'm already here- I don't see it being a bad thing
at all. It might even become a going concern, though I doubt very much that
it'll ever come anywhere close to matching the larger cons. Still, if there's
a large enough base of fans that actively don't like the more sexual material
available at the other conventions enough to want to "Get away from it all,"
it just might turn out to be a regular thing.
Personally, I don't see it becoming more than a Relax-A-Con sort of affair,
but that's more due to the number of the things already available and the
economy of travelling, as well as the crossing of borders.
Y'never know, though.
I do have to admit I don't particularly care for that pre-emptive banning
idea being tossed around. That's looking to shoot yourself in the foot so you
don't have to worry about that ingrown toenail during the marathon in my
opinion- something about innocent until proven guilty that I recall being
waved around- but I'm not on the Con-Com, and it's still in the airy idea
stage.
But, other than that, I say gofer it and wish 'em good luck with it.
- Doug
-"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. I should know;
I've seen the people at SciFi conventions." - Me
Hangdog
> "RHayes Jr" <blu...@ntelos.net> wrote in message
> news:VDme7.53211$C7.17...@e3500-chi1.usenetserver.com...
>
> > Oy. You wankfreaks would scream for the presence of porn in every
> convention
> > even if it was known to spontaneously combust five minutes after purchase.
> > What's more, you'd blame the explosions and the clouds of flying severed
> > fingers on society's "sexual oppressiveness."
>
> Hmmm... Someone's blowing this way out of proportion.
>
> First off, what has sexual imagery which is PUT ASIDE from general
> view ever harmed a convention. Every genre of convention has adult
> materials, Furry is no exception.<snip>
You're missing Ben's point here, or at least his only valid one--understandable,
as the man can't write concisely.
Yes, the furry pr0n is generally pretty well tucked away at every furry con.
But does it HAVE to be at EVERY furry con? Why can't a bunch of people get
together and pool their own money and say "Just at this con, in this ploace, on
these days--no pr0n, please?" A lot of folks on this forum act like that's some
kind of outrage or threat or offense. Why? Your right to view and read what
you like isn't threatened by others choosing not to view or read it. I mean, do
furry cons threaten C&W music because there's no western swing dancing at cons?
Come on.
So you take a different tack and say, "Oh, it'll never work." Well, maybe
not--but maybe it will. Ya never know 'til ya try, eh? And unlike many here, I
think this is worth trying.
YMMV, and undoubtedly does. That's life.
--Hangdog
Dragon Magic
> >
> > First off, what has sexual imagery which is PUT ASIDE from general
> > view ever harmed a convention. Every genre of convention has adult
> > materials, Furry is no exception.<snip>
>
> You're missing Ben's point here, or at least his only valid
one--understandable,
> as the man can't write concisely.
>
> Yes, the furry pr0n is generally pretty well tucked away at every furry
con.
> But does it HAVE to be at EVERY furry con? Why can't a bunch of people
get
> together and pool their own money and say "Just at this con, in this
ploace, on
> these days--no pr0n, please?" A lot of folks on this forum act like
that's some
> kind of outrage or threat or offense. Why? Your right to view and read
what
> you like isn't threatened by others choosing not to view or read it. I
mean, do
> furry cons threaten C&W music because there's no western swing dancing at
cons?
> Come on.
What's the problem with the pr0n? If you don't want to see it, no one forces
you
to see it. Period. So what if it's there?
What if suddenly people felt that there should be no vixens at a show?
They're
tired of the same crap over and over, fox this, vixen that, and decide, "No
more
at our show!"
Okay, not an effective comparison, but still, think about what people are
arguing . . . It's at every con.
Every stop to think . . . why? Because it's business, it helps keep the con
going.
And so far, the first person to take this as an offense in any form was the
previous poster, who flew off the handle calling anyone defending spooge
a pervert, without looking at our reasons. I've been arguing that it would
be a bad idea to tell people "No!" to something that obviously made extra
income for the show without much, if any, extra trouble brewing for it.
And try other cons sometime. I can go to any gaming con with a crowd of
over 1,000 people, and find someone somewhere selling some type of
mature product. And that has hardly any at all to begin with, since they're
games. Whether it be XXXenophile or a fantasy art book, whatever,
it'll be there somewhere.
Sci-fi? Comic? Any broad genre con will have problematic "mature" stuff,
as people seem to think it. But they have it because people will buy it.
They
can't find stuff like this around them, usually, and when they're at a three
day
show where they may not return for another year, you'd bet they're going to
get what they can of the weird and hard-to-get stuff, like spooge or
whatever,
and then get the general stuff like mainstream books, etc., near their home
when they return.
Simple rule of economics, the stuff that people want that weekend will sell.
> So you take a different tack and say, "Oh, it'll never work." Well, maybe
> not--but maybe it will. Ya never know 'til ya try, eh? And unlike many
here, I
> think this is worth trying.
Because we're applying realism here. Ask any group which has started a
first-year con, and see what troubles they had. Now add on that this is
well into Canada, where populations and travel is much more difficult
and expensive for a majority of the congoing crowd of North American
cons, plus customs. And now add on that they're telling people "NO" to
a part of the con that makes money at many other shows, closer to the
homes of people.
And you want us to take a blind faith jump that this should would work
out of the gate, or want us to give suggestions to rethink their strategy.
I believe that the people who are trying to give these suggestions with
their sound reasonings are helping the con more than the people who
are applauding them just for running a clean con.
Hangdog
> What's the problem with the pr0n? If you don't want to see it, no one forces
> you
> to see it. Period. So what if it's there?
What's the problem if it's not there for one con out of six or seven?
Seriously. Answer this. It's the crux of the issue.
Dragon Magic
I have. Read the two messages I've posted before.
Cons are business ventures. Saying "no porn" is cutting off a source
of income from an already-struggling idea. First year con a bit of
a distance from the US border where most of the congoers already
reside.
Bad for business to add another level of financial difficulty to the
con, hence why they should rethink their idea or perhaps try to
build up many other venues to be different than other cons.
Simply "no porn" is not different enough to draw the crowds.
ThPhilster
Actually there is one item that all of you have overlooked on the porn issue.
There are a lot of Euro comics that have that as an element...
yet are considered literature, not stroke material, even Jean Mobius (Heavy
Metal, Leutenant Blueberry, Marvel, and DC comics...) was guilty of this. Now
lets say there's some anthro story collection from europe that has a
pornographic scene(s) in it, yet it was distributed through a mainstream book
system (ala Barnes and Noble, Hastings, etc.). By the basic rules in place this
would be rated on the same level as a stroke portfolio cranked out at
Officemax's self serve copy center and not allowed to be sold at the show.
This isn't an attack on or defense of the con, but merely an irony engine to
be contemplated.
Monkeys, typewriters, Shakespeare.
yer pal,
Phil
Blah blah blah >buy my crap< blah blah blah
PeterCat
> Cons are business ventures. Saying "no porn" is cutting off a source
> of income from an already-struggling idea. First year con a bit of a
> distance from the US border where most of the congoers already
> reside.
I live in Syracuse NY, and Ottawa is actually closer to me than
Philadelphia is. Anyone coming from the USA will have the advantage of a
favorable currency exchange rate. (And avoiding porn also avoids
potential customs unpleasantness.) There are also a fair number of furry
fans and artists who live in Canada (my mailing list for Anthrocon has
25 Canadian artists).
> Bad for business to add another level of financial difficulty to the
> con, hence why they should rethink their idea or perhaps try to build
> up many other venues to be different than other cons.
On the contrary, a small, first-year con has the advantage of being
small, and can afford such an experiment. Let's suppose they have a
small dealers/artists alley-type area, 20 tables or so. That's small
enough to fill fairly easily with artists selling only general artwork.
Same for a small art show. Also, cons don't make an appreciable amount
of income on just the dealers room or art show -- these areas pretty
much break even on their own expenses, and may even appear to "lose"
money if one looks at the budget by areas. Memberships provide most of
the income.
> Simply "no porn" is not different enough to draw the crowds.
In some respects, a con isn't a business, nor a charity. It's a big
party... and the people running it are supposed to have fun, too.
Drawing big crowds may not be the point.
C-ACE has other attractions already announced: workshops, etc. Being
small, and in Ottawa, and in August are also advantages. In the fall I
attend a nice little con in Schenectady called Albacon -- attendance
about 300 people. It has a much more intimate atmosphere than bigger
cons, which is appealing. (They don't have porn, either -- well, except
for the midnight MiSTing of a bad skiffy adult video, which was
hilarious.) I would expect C-ACE to be similar.
Scott Kellogg
<just...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>In article <VDme7.53211$C7.17...@e3500-chi1.usenetserver.com>, "RHayes Jr"
><blu...@ntelos.net> wrote:
>> http://nipandtuck.keenspace.com
>> http://UTLT.keenspace.com
>
> By the by- just another of those marvelous, amusing coincidences that
>sometimes catch my eye- you ever notice some of the other choice online comix
>Keenspace offers to the public? Strange that you don't seem to mind their
>company while peddling your wares there, what with that previous outburst.
Doug, as of this moment, there are 1019 comic strips running on
Keenspace, and 2173 sites. I think it's a bit unrealistic to expect
those of us who use Keenspace to agree with everything that people put
up in their strips there?
Freedom of speech, you see. Please don't paint all of us with the
same brush.
Thanks,
Scott Kellogg
21st Century Fox
http://techfox.keenspace.com/
Cerulean
>you react in shrieking terror to the very notion of a single porn-free area
etc.
Funny, I haven't seen anyone actually opposing the existence of the
con. There's only one post in this thread I would characterize as a
shrieking reaction, and, well, y'all can figure it out for yourselves.
--
___vvz /( Cerulean = Kevin Pease http://cerulean.st/
<__,` Z / ( DC2.~D GmAL~W-R+++Ac~J+S+Fr++IH$M-V+++Cbl,spu
`~~~) )Z) ( FDDmp4adwsA+++$C+D+HM+P-RT+++WZSm#
/ (7 ( S>J37) - ,,'a)ew!J6 ay+ 77!> ue) 6u!y+oN,,
Doug Winger
skel...@austin.rr.com (Scott Kellogg) wrote:
[Some Snippery]
> Doug, as of this moment, there are 1019 comic strips running on
> Keenspace, and 2173 sites. I think it's a bit unrealistic to expect
> those of us who use Keenspace to agree with everything that people put
> up in their strips there?
>
I doubt that any single strip hosted there can be considered representative
of the place- nor any dozen strips, in fact. That was the point I was making,
and stretching it to cover the current territory.
It was mild humor, albeit with the slight seasoning of barbary (yes, that's
a pun). I was, rather indirectly, making the point that Learning To Live With
It doesn't mean having it in your face, and it can be avoided quite easily
most times, even if it's right next door- or seated at the table right next to
you at a convention- unless you go out of your way to not avoid it. It's when
It can't be avoided because it's being waved in your face is when you scream
about it, but do be sure it's not you performing any self-inflicted waving
before complaining. As to what It is... Well, It may be anything you don't
particularly care for.
Sorry if I seem to go mildly cryptic at times, but it makes sense if you can
follow the chain of logic. Consider it a puzzle to solve, and keep in mind
that unless I've clearly stated the intent, it ain't a flame nor even all that
much angry muttering.
- Doug
Doug Winger
[More snippery elsewhere this time]
> Freedom of speech, you see. Please don't paint all of us with the
> same brush.
Oh, and before I forget: you're preaching to the choir on that point. I'm not
the one with the paintbrush, I'm just one of the regular 'wankfreaks'
wandering about here, y'see.
- Doug
Dragon Magic
> Keenspace, and 2173 sites. I think it's a bit unrealistic to expect
> those of us who use Keenspace to agree with everything that people put
> up in their strips there?
Actually, you missed Doug's point.
The guy ranted that we're all wanting porn this, porn that, that
we can't exist without it, wouldn't it be nice if we just didn't
have it at a con, and the guy's comic is listed on a site where
you can find mature-related comics.
I think it's ironic; guy thinks porn = perverted, being on a host
known for hosting such comics. He doesn't seem to mind porn
when it helps pay for his free hosting, I see.
Dragon Magic
> > of income from an already-struggling idea. First year con a bit of a
> > distance from the US border where most of the congoers already
> > reside.
>
> I live in Syracuse NY, and Ottawa is actually closer to me than
> Philadelphia is. Anyone coming from the USA will have the advantage of a
> favorable currency exchange rate. (And avoiding porn also avoids
> potential customs unpleasantness.) There are also a fair number of furry
> fans and artists who live in Canada (my mailing list for Anthrocon has
> 25 Canadian artists).
Still, think about Anthrocon. There were plenty more than 25 artists there,
and if you stopped into the artist's alley there, every seat was filled
early
in the day.
And yes, Customs comes into play with more than just porn. If, say,
Mailbox Books wanted to go with two tables' of stuff, no porn, and
found that there would be maybe 300 visitors to the show, and customs
would charge them about $150 in duties for all their stuff, think they'll
still go chancing that they can make that up on such a small crowd?
I doubt it.
> > Bad for business to add another level of financial difficulty to the
> > con, hence why they should rethink their idea or perhaps try to build
> > up many other venues to be different than other cons.
>
> On the contrary, a small, first-year con has the advantage of being
> small, and can afford such an experiment. Let's suppose they have a
> small dealers/artists alley-type area, 20 tables or so. That's small
> enough to fill fairly easily with artists selling only general artwork.
> Same for a small art show. Also, cons don't make an appreciable amount
> of income on just the dealers room or art show -- these areas pretty
> much break even on their own expenses, and may even appear to "lose"
> money if one looks at the budget by areas. Memberships provide most of
> the income.
Actually, a first-year con has the biggest disadvantage. First off, they
have no repeat visitors or vendors. They don't have revenues from
the previous year. No revolving advertising yet. Everything they do
up front is out of the pocket to begin with.
And the smaller you are, the more costs you have per size. You
still need a room for the dealer's room and art show and artist's
alley. If you put them all in the same room, not much room for
them at all. Plus them rooms for the workshops and events. Gotta
get one large enough for big events like opening ceremonies to
introduce everyone.
And as far as memberships, you think you get memberships by
just saying, "Come, see us, we have workshops, and no porn"?
You gotta give people stuff. Guests, vendors, artists . . .
Vendors pay more per space than anything, and when people
find out they can buy stuff there they can't get near them, they
start getting more anxious to sign up. When you tell them that
their $40 badge will get them in to see 8 vendors, 12 artists
and a small art show, but there's no porn to worry about,
you'll be hopeful to get more than locals.
Just a reality that you have to accept.
> > Simply "no porn" is not different enough to draw the crowds.
>
> In some respects, a con isn't a business, nor a charity. It's a big
> party... and the people running it are supposed to have fun, too.
> Drawing big crowds may not be the point.
No, conventions are always a business venture, whether or not
you mean it to be, because there are other things involved, like
insurance, deposits, licenses, costs, bookkeeping, taxes . . .
If it were just a party, it would be in someone's house, small
gathering, and all fun. When you take it to a hotel, you start
seeing the headaches which cause people like Susan Packard
many "bad days" before and after a con, where she must rest
back up. It's draining and not very fun the days before and
days after, as well as the planning period for the next year.
The con itself may be, but it's still hard work.
> C-ACE has other attractions already announced: workshops, etc. Being
> small, and in Ottawa, and in August are also advantages. In the fall I
> attend a nice little con in Schenectady called Albacon -- attendance
> about 300 people. It has a much more intimate atmosphere than bigger
> cons, which is appealing. (They don't have porn, either -- well, except
> for the midnight MiSTing of a bad skiffy adult video, which was
> hilarious.) I would expect C-ACE to be similar.
If you expect to have about 300 people in attendance clear up there, then
it will remain a local con, which is fine, could work out that way. However,
the way they are marketing it here, has been more of "an alternate" to
the cons we have here, that it's a cleaner version, and asked for
any suggestions. We've given our sound suggestions on why this
would be a bad idea to market to a larger crowd than local.
Me, I really don't see them lasting long trying to push themselves as
a bigger con. They'll probably have to keep it small until they found
a new venue and could allow more of a general audience and easier
access for artists and vendors.
Farlo
>God above. What is wrong with you people?
Nothing, really. How are you? Or, is that a rhetorical question, since some
of your post was in ALL CAPS?
--
Farlo
Urban fey dragon
m>^_^<m
Keeper of *an* ALF FAQ
http://hall.j.m.home.att.net/alffaq/alffaq.html
Blackberry
>
>Oy. You wankfreaks would scream for the presence of porn in every convention
>even if it was known to spontaneously combust five minutes after purchase.
>What's more, you'd blame the explosions and the clouds of flying severed
>fingers on society's "sexual oppressiveness."
So, you're saying that your opinion is unbiased? =:)
>God above. What is wrong with you people? It sure as hell isn't the fact
>that porn doesn't have a forum for itself... it's already at every
>convention, available from every cable company, stacked in festering heaps
>in every convenience store, spreading like hyperactive fungus across the
>internet--- hell, it's damnear raining out of the sky in brown-paper-wrapped
>bundles and concussing people in the street!
>
>Yet in spite of being able to WALLOW in spooge 24-7, you react in shrieking
>terror to the very notion of a single porn-free area upon the face of this
>godforsaken planet and in this godforsaken fandom, as if you would shrivel
>into dust the moment you walked through the door like Dracula at Tiki Tan.
"Me people" did say, as I have always said, that I think it's great if people
want to start yet another convention as a place that burned furs and others can
go and feel safe from having to see anything they didn't want to see. However,
what I'd be against is it taking away from any existing convention. There are
already a *lot* of annual furry meetings around the USA -- I assume there'd be
more call for more regular get-togethers outside the USA. Do we need to have
another one?
I was just at Anthrocon 2001 a few weeks ago, and there was nothing sexual there
that was on public display -- you had to go looking, whether it was in the adult
art show or in artists' folios. There was less blatant display in the lobby and
forums than you'd see at a Star Trek con or a Shriners' meet.
I saw quite a few minors at AC01 and they didn't seem to run screaming, cupping
their eyes in terror or gouging them out in shame.
In short, anyone can go to Anthrocon and never see a single sexual picture or
sexual act. As far as they would be concerned, it would be perfectly "clean".
So what more do you need?
--------------------
"It's ludicrous to have these interlocking bodies and not interlock. Please
remove your clothing now." -- Anya, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"
Blackberry
>
>You're missing Ben's point here, or at least his only valid one--understandable,
>as the man can't write concisely.
>
>Yes, the furry pr0n is generally pretty well tucked away at every furry con.
>But does it HAVE to be at EVERY furry con? Why can't a bunch of people get
>together and pool their own money and say "Just at this con, in this ploace, on
I still think the problem will be one of logistics and definitions.
First, you have to draw a line somewhere. What is "porn"? Some people get
turned on by furs in full battlesuits; some couldn't get interested in a
luscious, nude, presented female fur if their life depended on it. Is a bikini
okay? What about tight shorts? What about slinky Danskins? What about a
formal tweed suit (some people find that sexy)?
Second, what if an artist does sell a piece of prurient artwork at this con,
gets caught in a "sting", and complains that they have the right to sell what
they want as long as it conforms to all local guidelines? The con can throw the
artist out and get a bad reputation among artists or it can allow it and toss
its entire reason for existence out the window.
Blackberry
>
>[...]
>C-ACE has other attractions already announced: workshops, etc. Being
>small, and in Ottawa, and in August are also advantages. In the fall I
>attend a nice little con in Schenectady called Albacon -- attendance
>about 300 people. It has a much more intimate atmosphere than bigger
>cons, which is appealing. (They don't have porn, either -- well, except
>for the midnight MiSTing of a bad skiffy adult video, which was
>hilarious.) I would expect C-ACE to be similar.
So, it's going to have an all-ages art show, workshops of various kinds, a
dealers' room I assume, most likely some party-type gatherings (such as a
dance)...
If you didn't walk behind the wall into the adult part of the art show and
didn't stop at a dealer's table and ask to see their adult art, this sounds
exactly like Anthrocon.
Dragon Magic
> dealers' room I assume, most likely some party-type gatherings (such as a
> dance)...
>
> If you didn't walk behind the wall into the adult part of the art show and
> didn't stop at a dealer's table and ask to see their adult art, this
sounds
> exactly like Anthrocon.
Only smaller, farther away from the center of the furry con goers, and
without the namesake of a con like Anthrocon.
Like many have pointed out, it'll be hard to make a general run to be
a contending convention. *shrugs* They need more or just resign to
being a local con.
Dragon Magic
or
> sexual act. As far as they would be concerned, it would be perfectly
"clean".
> So what more do you need?
I think what the original points were:
1) Porn's everywhere, we need more places where we can be safe from it.
2) Porn taints a con, so we need an untainted con.
3) Perverts are the only people to attend a con with spooge, so let's do
away
with the perverts.
I dunno, that's what I got from the original rant, whether or not that was
its
intention.
On the other hand,
1) Porn is everywhere, even in places where you're safe. I was at a con
one year where the walls were thin enough to hear through to the next
room. Heard the bed moving and two people, male and female, making
some very intimate noises.
OOPS. PORN. I guess?
2) Furry taints a con. Look at the bad publicity and how much furries
hide they really are furry because of the people who have painted us
in such a bad light. To defeat this taint, we need a non-furry con.
3) Anthrocon was so full of perverts, even the kids and the mothers
who were there because it was a con that their kids wanted to go to.
Maybe 10% at most of the people looked at the adult stuff at my
table alone. Most of those who did, did buy stuff in them, though,
because THAT WAS ONE OF THEIR REASONS FOR
ATTENDING (why doesn't newsgroup carry bold *grunt*).
Still, even those who bought the smut, didn't appear to be perverts,
and we're raving on and on about sex only. In fact, a few of them
I had good conversations about stuff even unrelated to porn and
furry.
RHayes Jr
> If you didn't walk behind the wall into the adult part of the art show and
> didn't stop at a dealer's table and ask to see their adult art, this
sounds
> exactly like Anthrocon.
I went to AC. It was a bit more pervasive than that. The adult materials
were at almost every table-- and the "post it note" rule was barely observed
in letter, much less in spirit. (Two gold stars and a smiley face sticker do
not a modest presentation make.) Many tables had 4 or 5 "adult" folios out--
and often carelessly left open on the table.
Noone short of a blind man could mistake what the situation was.... The
"adult" artists had peed all over their territory, and left the rest of us
having to hunt and pick and tiptoe around them.
Frankly, I do not want to attend a convention arranged like a flea-market
where the majority of dealers are selling the furry equivalent of back-issue
Playboy and Penthouse-- closed covers or not. I want to attend an *anthro*
convention-- not a "skunkF***ers" convention. I don't want to have to walk
through a dealer's room or an artists' alley and have to spend most of my
time staring at the ceiling while people around me riffle through reams of
porno or finish out an on-the-spot commission of someone's nude and
tumescent avatar getting gang-banged. I want to be able to walk through the
*entire* gallery and the *entire* convention, not have to spend most of my
time detouring around parts of it. I don't want to have to explain to my
minister/priest/rabbi/mother/coworkers/friends, "gee, it was a nice
convention-- and there weren't *nearly* as many perverts selling pictures of
werewolf cootchie as *last* year!" I want to be able to pick up rare, unique
and hard-to-find furry comics and magazines and browse *new* titles I've
never heard of, without wondering what I'm going to get a face full of when
I open the cover. I want to associate with artists and writers who are
loving devotees of their craft, not elbow-rub with a bunch of
pornographers-- people who don't have the talent or ethics to be true
artists, yet lack the courage and looks to be full-blown hookers.
I want to attend a convention without having to stomp my principles in the
mud, just so I can "get along."
And I wanna go someplace where people have something better to do with
furries than find new ways to draw them naked.
Blackberry
>
>> If you didn't walk behind the wall into the adult part of the art show and
>> didn't stop at a dealer's table and ask to see their adult art, this
>sounds
>> exactly like Anthrocon.
>
>I went to AC. It was a bit more pervasive than that. The adult materials
>were at almost every table-- and the "post it note" rule was barely observed
>in letter, much less in spirit. (Two gold stars and a smiley face sticker do
>not a modest presentation make.) Many tables had 4 or 5 "adult" folios out--
>and often carelessly left open on the table.
Well, I didn't see anything that wasn't covered as much as a typical picture
from Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Spectacular is, but I didn't stand at every
table and peruse every picture to find policy violations.
>Noone short of a blind man could mistake what the situation was.... The
>"adult" artists had peed all over their territory, and left the rest of us
>having to hunt and pick and tiptoe around them.
I saw plenty of non-adult art and artists there. Three of the most popular
tables -- Circles, Bill Holbrook, and Dan DeCarlo -- had no nude or erotic art
for sale or show at all. I know some of the other artists and dealers and I
watched all of them make sure the books were flipped shut etc. when the young
Tails boy and his family came through. So I didn't see any evidence of policy
violation, but if you have some, present it to the con staff.
>Frankly, I do not want to attend a convention arranged like a flea-market
>where the majority of dealers are selling the furry equivalent of back-issue
>Playboy and Penthouse-- closed covers or not. I want to attend an *anthro*
>convention-- not a "skunkF***ers" convention.
If you perceive it to be that way, then it will always be that way in your mind.
I really don't know what the "skunk***" term really means except that it's a
buzzword that burned furs like to use for people that they don't like. I deal
with enough people hating me for simply existing; if you want to hate me, at
least hate me for a reason, please.
>I don't want to have to walk
>through a dealer's room or an artists' alley and have to spend most of my
>time staring at the ceiling while people around me riffle through reams of
>porno or finish out an on-the-spot commission of someone's nude and
>tumescent avatar getting gang-banged.
I walked through the dealers' room several times myself... my eyesight is pretty
good, still measured better than 20/20, and I couldn't have made out what was in
a fully displayed picture just from walking by a table, and certainly when
people were there riffling through, I'd have to stand behind them and look over
their shoulder to see.
Was someone there with a gun to your back forcing you to peek over people's
shoulders? Let's be honest; it's not that you are afraid you'll look at the
art; it's that you want to prohibit it in the first place.
>I want to be able to walk through the
>*entire* gallery and the *entire* convention, not have to spend most of my
>time detouring around parts of it.
Uh, that section of the art gallery clearly said "Mature Art, adults only".
What did you expect to be in there, still lifes of pears and flowers?
>I don't want to have to explain to my
>minister/priest/rabbi/mother/coworkers/friends, "gee, it was a nice
>convention-- and there weren't *nearly* as many perverts selling pictures of
>werewolf cootchie as *last* year!"
Are they forcing you to say the last part? What's wrong with "Gee, it was a
nice convention"?
>I want to be able to pick up rare, unique
>and hard-to-find furry comics and magazines and browse *new* titles I've
>never heard of, without wondering what I'm going to get a face full of when
>I open the cover.
I think there's rather an easy solution to that -- don't open any comic that
says "Mature readers only" on the cover. If it's explicit smut and they don't
have a warning on the cover, they're in violation of the Comics Code, IIRC.
>I want to associate with artists and writers who are
>loving devotees of their craft,
I was very able to do that there. What prevented you?
>not elbow-rub with a bunch of pornographers-- people who don't have the
>talent or ethics to be true artists, yet lack the courage and looks to be
>full-blown hookers.
So, you want a convention where you can ban people you don't like. Go for it.
>I want to attend a convention without having to stomp my principles in the
>mud, just so I can "get along."
>And I wanna go someplace where people have something better to do with
>furries than find new ways to draw them naked.
I had a great time at Anthrocon and didn't once draw a naked furry or become
involved in the drawing of a naked furry. Prove that I did, or that I didn't
have fun, or that I'm not a person, and your point will be secure from this
challenge.
Jim Doolittle
<cust...@dragonmagic.net> wrote:
> Cons are business ventures. Saying "no porn" is cutting off a source
> of income from an already-struggling idea. First year con a bit of
> a distance from the US border where most of the congoers already
> reside.
Conventions make the vast majority of their money selling memberships
(badges). Dealer's tables and artshow sales are a small percentage of
this. As an example, the FurFest artshow last year grossed about $750
for the convention. Dealer's table sales (which is not my department, so
this could be off) probably brought in around $600. As a contrast,
membership sales were somewhere in the neighborhood of $15,000.
> Simply "no porn" is not different enough to draw the crowds.
Certainly not, which is why Jeff is also planning on having some real
good programming and workshop content at his convention. So it has
tighter content restrictions than most furry conventions. Big deal.
There are enough furry conventions now that the new, smaller conventions
can afford to try new ideas. There are always niches to be filled within
fandom. CACE looks like it can fill two, maybe three. The first Canadian
convention, a less-spoogy atmosphere, and a concentration on art
workshops.
I think this is a good thing.
-Jim
--
Jim Doolittle
http://www.flayrah.com
Unusually good information
Jim Doolittle
<cust...@dragonmagic.net> wrote:
> Like many have pointed out, it'll be hard to make a general run to be
> a contending convention. *shrugs* They need more or just resign to
> being a local con.
And what's wrong with that? Regional conventions are Good Things. You
don't have to have an attendance of 1000+ to have an enjoyable
convention. One of the more enjoyable conventions I've been to had an
attendance of less than 200.
Atara
543C7E.193...@news.speakeasy.net>:
>And what's wrong with that? Regional conventions are Good Things. You
>don't have to have an attendance of 1000+ to have an enjoyable
>convention. One of the more enjoyable conventions I've been to had an
>attendance of less than 200.
Also, the larger cons are (of course) busier. So you feel pressured to do
everything there is to do and see everything there is to see, and you spend all
your time rushing around rather than enjoying yourself. Or rather, some of us
do. =) Smaller cons give people a chance to relax.
--
Atara
"Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus."
http://www.FurNation.com/Atara/
***What doesn't fit in my email addy? NADA.***
PeterCat
> Still, think about Anthrocon. There were plenty more than 25 artists
> there, and if you stopped into the artist's alley there, every seat
> was filled early in the day.
That's like comparing apples and pineapples: superficial similarity in
language, substantial difference in size and flavor.
> And yes, Customs comes into play with more than just porn. If, say,
> Mailbox Books wanted to go with two tables' of stuff, no porn, and
> found that there would be maybe 300 visitors to the show, and customs
> would charge them about $150 in duties for all their stuff, think they'll
> still go chancing that they can make that up on such a small crowd?
> I doubt it.
Go back and read the messages announcing the con (search for Message-ID:
<3B6B59E7...@sympatico.ca>). They're planning on "an expanded
artist's alley with perhaps a few dealers mixed in," not a full-blown
dealers' room. I wouldn't expect Mailbox Books there, but an Ottawa-area
comics or book dealer might do well.
> And the smaller you are, the more costs you have per size. You
> still need a room for the dealer's room and art show and artist's
> alley. If you put them all in the same room, not much room for
> them at all. Plus them rooms for the workshops and events. Gotta
> get one large enough for big events like opening ceremonies to
> introduce everyone.
True, but a smaller con can take place in a smaller hotel, which tend to
be less expensive because of greater competition. When you get above
1000 people, the choice of adequate hotels dwindles drastically --
you're too big for most, not big enough for a convention center. The
hotel descibed in the con's announcements sounds just about right, and
the neighborhood is appealing. If the con chair thinks he can afford it,
I won't second-guess his judgment.
> And as far as memberships, you think you get memberships by
> just saying, "Come, see us, we have workshops, and no porn"?
> You gotta give people stuff. Guests, vendors, artists . . .
It's a con. A gathering place for people of like interests. A place to
meet people and talk and learn about stuff. Small cons are great, the
guests aren't as busy (or as harried) as they are at a bigger con so you
have more chance to chat. Based on the features already announced, a
number of people have said they're interested in attending. I probably
will too, if I can get the time off work.
> Vendors pay more per space than anything, and when people find out
> they can buy stuff there they can't get near them, they start getting
> more anxious to sign up. When you tell them that their $40 badge will
> get them in to see 8 vendors, 12 artists and a small art show, but
> there's no porn to worry about, you'll be hopeful to get more than
> locals.
I presume that's $40 Canadian, which would convert to about $30 US.
That's about right for a small con. Besides, I don't think they've
announced a membership rate yet.
There are plenty of small SF cons that do well without huge art shows,
dealers rooms or masquerades, and no adult art sections. C-ACE will also
be appealing to cartoon and comics fans, as well as writers and artists.
Not everyone goes to cons just to buy stuff.
> If it were just a party, it would be in someone's house, small
> gathering, and all fun. When you take it to a hotel, you start seeing
> the headaches which cause people like Susan Packard many "bad days"
> before and after a con, where she must rest back up. It's draining
> and not very fun the days before and days after, as well as the
> planning period for the next year. The con itself may be, but it's
> still hard work.
Err, perhaps I didn't introduce myself. Anthrocon Art Show Director,
former major creditor, badge #4. I know what goes into running a
convention. If you have "bad days" it generally means you're not suited
or prepared for the job of con-running (sh*t will happen, plan and
budget for it and cope), or you don't have adequate help.
> If you expect to have about 300 people in attendance clear up there,
> then it will remain a local con, which is fine, could work out that
> way. However, the way they are marketing it here, has been more of
> "an alternate" to the cons we have here, that it's a cleaner version,
> and asked for any suggestions. We've given our sound suggestions on
> why this would be a bad idea to market to a larger crowd than local.
Uh... that was only one (and the last) of three points of distinction,
the others being its location in Canada so it's easier for Canadians to
attend, and an emphasis on workshops and skills development, with the
possibility of professional instructors from the Ottawa School of Art. I
don't recall any indication from those associated with the con that they
expected a substantial number of attendees from farther than a
comfortable day's drive away.
> Me, I really don't see them lasting long trying to push themselves as
> a bigger con. They'll probably have to keep it small until they found
> a new venue and could allow more of a general audience and easier
> access for artists and vendors.
Where on earth did you get the impression C-ACE was pushing to be a
bigger con? The very first message posted here said they were planning
for 300-400 members. I think the higher range is a bit optimistic, but
hey, you never know.
Dragon Magic
Anthrocon. Whether that was the intention now, it wasn't when
it was first brought up. Those who keep arguing one way, and
then those who tell those arguing against those ideas that the
con is small, need to thoroughly read the threads.
Secondly, why on earth would the con, and others here saying
that "porn should be outlawed" pretty much, be trying to promote
itself as some major event, that the US audience should attend,
and finding out about customs, etc., if they just want to be a
small, local con?
Some people just argue to argue anymore, and they stretch out
arguments just to argue.
Read back through the threads before you start telling others
off.
Dragon Magic
> > of income from an already-struggling idea. First year con a bit of
> > a distance from the US border where most of the congoers already
> > reside.
>
> Conventions make the vast majority of their money selling memberships
> (badges). Dealer's tables and artshow sales are a small percentage of
> this. As an example, the FurFest artshow last year grossed about $750
> for the convention. Dealer's table sales (which is not my department, so
> this could be off) probably brought in around $600. As a contrast,
> membership sales were somewhere in the neighborhood of $15,000.
For example:
GenCon: About 300 vendors, where booths were *starting* at just
under $2,000 each, and went up for the more room you held. That's
about $600,000 at least in income.
And turnstile attendance, which means total "days" sold at the four
day con, about 70,000 total this year, with each day about $15.
That's $1,050,000.
Include now the event prices, art show, merchandising . . .
As you can see, just at the minimum, vendors are more than half
the income of the attendees; it's probably about level when you
actually factor in the exact amount of the booths.
Vendors play an extremely good role in paying for cons. They
expect to pay more for their badges and space than normal
attendees, and attendees expect to spend more money at
vendors than artists.
Just the simple economics of conventions.
> > Simply "no porn" is not different enough to draw the crowds.
>
> Certainly not, which is why Jeff is also planning on having some real
> good programming and workshop content at his convention. So it has
> tighter content restrictions than most furry conventions. Big deal.
> There are enough furry conventions now that the new, smaller conventions
> can afford to try new ideas. There are always niches to be filled within
> fandom. CACE looks like it can fill two, maybe three. The first Canadian
> convention, a less-spoogy atmosphere, and a concentration on art
> workshops.
No one's denying that they can't try. Just many of us who have done
conventions or helped with planning them are warning them of the
serious problems before they happen.
A "good idea" isn't exactly something that will turn around money
at a con. There needs to be serious consideration of what people
are telling them.
Most attendees are saying, it's not worth the long trip for such a
small con, up front, and limiting more artists and vendors, makes
it more of a turnoff.
If they stick with a local con status, then there's really no added
expenses that a major con would have, like massive advertising
or big guests. They could possibly make it at this size.
But as they first presented it, as Anthrocon in its first years, they
have a massive struggle to make it.
Jeff Novotny
> In some respects, a con isn't a business, nor a charity. It's a big
> party... and the people running it are supposed to have fun, too.
> Drawing big crowds may not be the point.
>
> C-ACE has other attractions already announced: workshops, etc. Being
> small, and in Ottawa, and in August are also advantages. In the fall I
> attend a nice little con in Schenectady called Albacon -- attendance
> about 300 people. It has a much more intimate atmosphere than bigger
> cons, which is appealing. (They don't have porn, either -- well, except
> for the midnight MiSTing of a bad skiffy adult video, which was
> hilarious.) I would expect C-ACE to be similar.
Thanks, PeterCat. This is pretty much our idea for the con: Go for a
targeted audience and avoid over-extending ourselves. The hotel is very
laid-back and it should be small enough to easily meet up with your
friends. :)
Best;
Jeff
Jeff Novotny
>
> First off, CACE originally came off as wanting to be another
> Anthrocon. Whether that was the intention now, it wasn't when
> it was first brought up. Those who keep arguing one way, and
> then those who tell those arguing against those ideas that the
> con is small, need to thoroughly read the threads.
No, no, no, no, no. CACE doesn't want to be another AnthroCon. There is
a good reason for that -- an Anthrocon already exists. We'd rather
become very good at doing our own thing rather than a poor imitation of
something else.
We're not trying to be a mega-convention. I don't know where anyone got
that idea. There are already some very popular conventions that do a lot
of stuff very well and cater to almost every conceivable type of fan.
This is a more specialized type of convention. It caters to a specific
audience -- one that is very art-oriented, and interested in learning.
And, yes, there are those who appreciate the fact that there is no adult
content. This may also some younger fans to attend for the first time,
or for other fans to bring their boyfriends or girlfriends, etc.
>
> Secondly, why on earth would the con, and others here saying
> that "porn should be outlawed" pretty much, be trying to promote
> itself as some major event, that the US audience should attend,
> and finding out about customs, etc., if they just want to be a
> small, local con?
It should be considered a regional convention, and, as we mentioned, a
specialized convention. A good example of another regional convention is
Conifur Northwest. They had a similar regional base and attracted 275
people in their first year. The MidWest Furfest falls into a not
dissimilar slot, although they are quickly getting more popular.
We expect that most of our attendees will be from one of two groups:
Canadian and NE United States fans looking for a nearby con (perhaps as
a second summer con after AC); and those who are especially interested
in our agenda or atmosphere. Some fans in the second group from as far
away as the West Coast have expressed interest already.
We're keeping the budget smaller by cutting back on some of the
non-essentials: no dance, having a smaller con book. If we are
successful as a smaller con, we'll get a bit bigger, and add more
features, but we don't intend to change our basic philosophy. If that
means that we'll have to settle to eventually stabilizing at lower
numbers like 500 or 600 in a few years, that's just fine by me.
As for customs and excise, we are looking into these issues. This is
somewhat complicated, so please give us some time. We are hoping this
won't be too difficult for individual artists.
I hope this clears a few of these issues up. Thanks.
Best;
Jeff Novotny, Chairman, Canadian Anthro & Cartooning Expo
Jeff Novotny
> And, yes, there are those who appreciate the fact that there is no adult
> content.
I should clarify again here, that the content limit for the convention
is similar to a soft "R" rating. When I said no adult content, I was
referring to the fact that there will be no pornography. These terms can
be a little ambiguous, and I don't want to confuse anyone.
Best;
Jeff
Dragon Magic
> > Anthrocon. Whether that was the intention now, it wasn't when
> > it was first brought up. Those who keep arguing one way, and
> > then those who tell those arguing against those ideas that the
> > con is small, need to thoroughly read the threads.
>
> No, no, no, no, no. CACE doesn't want to be another AnthroCon. There is
> a good reason for that -- an Anthrocon already exists. We'd rather
> become very good at doing our own thing rather than a poor imitation of
> something else.
Right. There are man cons already going, each one with its own unique
flavour.
What CACE seems to be saying, is that "we have no spooge" and
"we're more of a regional show, but we'll attract people from all over".
Those two ideas, though, seriously, need to be rethought, is all. Not
because I'm advocating spooge, but because, as others have pointed
out clearly, it'll probably be the death of the con up front in money.
People may go and enjoy it, but if you get less people returning
each year because they got bored, with less people going, then
what's the use?
> We're not trying to be a mega-convention. I don't know where anyone got
> that idea. There are already some very popular conventions that do a lot
> of stuff very well and cater to almost every conceivable type of fan.
I think it was the fact that you were saying you were going to be "a con
where people could go after AC". AC is a major con. People going
to AC who go to another con would probably make that con a "major"
con as well, in numbers.
I don't think one can really market a con saying it's aligned or somehow
attached in a schedule with Anthrocon without saying it's comparable
with it.
> This is a more specialized type of convention. It caters to a specific
> audience -- one that is very art-oriented, and interested in learning.
> And, yes, there are those who appreciate the fact that there is no adult
> content. This may also some younger fans to attend for the first time,
> or for other fans to bring their boyfriends or girlfriends, etc.
As far as I'm aware, most all cons cater to artists and orient toward
a strong art presence. I didn't get out to the workshops and events
at Anthrocon, but I remember at least hearing a lot of good about
a Quick Draw event in the main room.
As far as those who appreciate no spooge content, are you getting
*more* people with no spooge than you're losing saying, "spooge
will not be tolerated"?
Shutting a big door to open a little door lets in less air, after all.
And I saw plenty of young fans and families, and couples, at
Anthrocon, browsing around the artist's alley, the art show and
the dealer's room without covering their eyes or running in horror.
It was very well controlled.
The assumptions people are passing that "spooge at a con"
automatically make it all adult, or a perverted, unclean show, are
really blown out of proportion and unfounded.
Many shows are family-oriented and still allow for spooge. And
so far, I haven't really heard of a problem of any con in the past
few years.
> > Secondly, why on earth would the con, and others here saying
> > that "porn should be outlawed" pretty much, be trying to promote
> > itself as some major event, that the US audience should attend,
> > and finding out about customs, etc., if they just want to be a
> > small, local con?
>
> It should be considered a regional convention, and, as we mentioned, a
> specialized convention. A good example of another regional convention is
> Conifur Northwest. They had a similar regional base and attracted 275
> people in their first year. The MidWest Furfest falls into a not
> dissimilar slot, although they are quickly getting more popular.
> We expect that most of our attendees will be from one of two groups:
> Canadian and NE United States fans looking for a nearby con (perhaps as
> a second summer con after AC); and those who are especially interested
> in our agenda or atmosphere. Some fans in the second group from as far
> away as the West Coast have expressed interest already.
Conifur Northwest was also near a major area of furs. I believe there
are two major mailing lists for that region, and a major metropolis and
airport hub for the US there.
Yes, US cons get a preference, since a majority of NA congoers
for furry cons *are* in the US. Once crossing the border, there
are more headaches and planning associated with the trip that
may turn them off. 300 person con across the country in the US
where I can just fly in and get a hotel room and fly back out,
almost no limit to what furry items I may find in the dealer's room
or art show and can choose what I'd like to see, or a 300 person
con in Canada that I may be able to drive to, but I'll still need to
convert my money or have some costs tacked off for using it at
places than just converting it, going through customs, and then
finding out that the con has dictated a severe amount of what I
cannot see at the con off the bat, and then whatever I buy there
I will have to declare on my trip back, and covert leftover money
back.
The region for this con should be considered Canada. If there
are US residents who want to take a trip up there, then that's
fine, but the choice above, I would think the US con would
win out more often, unless the person has some radical aversion
altogether to sex in any form, and demands that it not be anywhere
near him.
I am seriously not trying to tell the con people, "Your con sucks,
don't bother!" I am bringing up valid points based on over ten
years of doing cons myself, and about six years of being a dealer
or associated with cons. These are major issues that should be
addressed and considered.
As well, tying yourself as a con "after Anthrocon", when you're
not in the same region as Anthrocon, nor the same type of furry
con as Anthrocon, will not help the image of what you are. People
go there thinking it's something else, and suddenly the con gets
a bad rap.
> We're keeping the budget smaller by cutting back on some of the
> non-essentials: no dance, having a smaller con book. If we are
> successful as a smaller con, we'll get a bit bigger, and add more
> features, but we don't intend to change our basic philosophy. If that
> means that we'll have to settle to eventually stabilizing at lower
> numbers like 500 or 600 in a few years, that's just fine by me.
Okay, so really it's becoming more of a gathering with some
workshops and events. An art show, artist's alley with maybe
some dealers, and some workshops. Sounds like the only real
advantage that is trying to be marketed here is "no spooge".
Many congoers enjoy the advantage of relaxing and being social
at the dance. They want to shop at a con at tables filled with
items they can't find near their home. They enjoy seeing artists
up close and personal.
What I think CACE should do, instead of stating what they
have been, take these considerations to their next meeting, open
up a public poll or suggestion mail box, and just hear what
many other congoers say about what they propose for their
con. The more you hear "I would not attend a con like this"
and the less you hear "I would rather attend a con like this",
the plans should be rethought.
> As for customs and excise, we are looking into these issues. This is
> somewhat complicated, so please give us some time. We are hoping this
> won't be too difficult for individual artists.
Don't forget about dealers you may want. Most furry dealers reside in the
US. You'll probably get some fantasy or comic shops near you interested,
though.
But the biggest tasks, Guests, Artists, Dealers and Events. If these aren't
there, the membership won't be either. With each one that you cannot
fulfill for the audience you target, the less you'll get.
Mutt
<snip>
Takes a narrow mind to paint so many people with such a wide paintbrush. I
don't give a rats ass if a doesn't have the erotic element, since while I do
enjoy erotic art, I also enjoy normal stuff. And if someone has a problem
with the absence of porn, you know what? Nobody's holding a gun to their
heads to go there. From your rant here, you seem to make out anybody who
enjoys adult material to be obsessed sickos with one track minds. For your
information, I enjoy adult material, yet I can certainly live without it if
I had to. So if you would please withhold anymore generalizations...
--
Mutt
Creator of Perki Goth/Candi Raver
http://mutt.keenspace.com
And furry not-so-artist
http://www.furnation.com/mutt
Greylocks
>
> First off, CACE originally came off as wanting to be another
> Anthrocon. Whether that was the intention now, it wasn't when
> it was first brought up. Those who keep arguing one way, and
> then those who tell those arguing against those ideas that the
> con is small, need to thoroughly read the threads.
We are not an AC alternative, and we will be a very small con. We are
shooting for an attendance of 300-400 guests.
>
> Secondly, why on earth would the con, and others here saying
> that "porn should be outlawed" pretty much, be trying to promote
> itself as some major event, that the US audience should attend,
> and finding out about customs, etc., if they just want to be a
> small, local con?
We are following local laws and trying to reduce the amount of
logistical issues. Since this is not the US, guests coming from the
States will have to deal with the Border. It can be annoying, and the
staff will do it's best to study the issue to ensure a pain free travel.
The 'no porn' was a core choice. Full details about what that means will
be made public as soon as they are 100% clear.
Please note that the staff is not against adult art, or rabid crusaders.
It's just a choice, and we hope it works.
>
> Some people just argue to argue anymore, and they stretch out
> arguments just to argue.
>
> Read back through the threads before you start telling others
> off.
Agreed, too much was blown out of proportion.
It's a small first furry con that only wants to follow local laws. No
hidden agenda or evil plotting in effect.
--
Marc Lacourciere, aka Greylocks
Operations Director
Atara
<YYJe7.9464$nh4.1...@typhoon.neo.rr.com>:
>Right. There are man cons already going, each one with its own unique
>flavour.
Yeah, what we need is a good, old-fashioned WOMAN con! =)
>Conifur Northwest was also near a major area of furs. I believe there
>are two major mailing lists for that region, and a major metropolis and
>airport hub for the US there.
CACE will be held in a national capital. If that's not big enough I don't know
what is. Also, take a peek at http://www.furry.ca - there are a signifigant
number of Canadian furs.
>The region for this con should be considered Canada. If there
>are US residents who want to take a trip up there, then that's
>fine, but the choice above, I would think the US con would
>win out more often, unless the person has some radical aversion
>altogether to sex in any form, and demands that it not be anywhere
>near him.
You're also forgetting the financial advantage that US attendees will have. For
example, a $40CAN membership will only cost about $26US.
>Iam seriously not trying to tell the con people, "Your con sucks,
>don't bother!" I am bringing up valid points based on over ten
>years of doing cons myself, and about six years of being a dealer
>or associated with cons.
IIRC, Mephit originally had no art show, no dealer's room... And yet it has
survived and grown, and people kept going back year after year. (Now they do
have small dealer's room, but no art show.) Shifting away from the "formula"
convention is difficult, but it is possible, and that's what CACE is trying to
do.
>As well, tying yourself as a con "after Anthrocon", when you're
>not in the same region as Anthrocon, nor the same type of furry
>con as Anthrocon, will not help the image of what you are. People
>go there thinking it's something else, and suddenly the con gets
>a bad rap.
It's being called "after Anthrocon" because it's after Anthrocon. If it was
after Midwest Furfest, it would be called "after Midwest Furfest." Also, I
can't think of anyone who would go to a convention without reading the webpage,
the advertising or talking with other people who are attending and getting a
very good idea of what the con will be like.
>What I think CACE should do, instead of stating what they
>have been, take these considerations to their next meeting, open
>up a public poll or suggestion mail box, and just hear what
>many other congoers say about what they propose for their
>con.
That's what this has been, as Jeff stated a few weeks ago. So far, you're the
only really vocal complaintant. I'm sure CACE would love to have you there, but
if you decide not to go, that's your decision. For the most part the feedback
has been positive and excellent, and people have expressed a real interest in
CACE.
Kyle L. Webb
Dragon Magic wrote:
> Some people just argue to argue anymore, and they stretch out
> arguments just to argue.
Indeed.
Now why is it you're arguing again?
Seriously, the development of a bunch of regional cons, each having a
slightly different main emphasis is one of the best things that has
happened to furry in the past few years.
There is a group of people who don't feel comfortable going to a con
with explicit adult artwork at it, and CACE seems to be trying to fill
that niche. More power to them. They also are setting up in an area
that's not had a regional furry con. Again, more power to them.
As to any change in emphasis, planning a con is a dynamic thing,
especially while it's still in the "BS over coffee" stage. Everybody
brings up ideas, and then they get winnowed down to whatever form it
finally takes.
Kyle L. Webb
Hartree Fox on yiffnet
Dragon Magic
> >flavour.
>
> Yeah, what we need is a good, old-fashioned WOMAN con! =)
2am typing gets you some lost letters, I see.
> >Conifur Northwest was also near a major area of furs. I believe there
> >are two major mailing lists for that region, and a major metropolis and
> >airport hub for the US there.
>
> CACE will be held in a national capital. If that's not big enough I don't
know
> what is. Also, take a peek at http://www.furry.ca - there are a
signifigant
> number of Canadian furs.
Right, but most of the information devoted to communications on the
page are for Toronto furs. Two of the major citizens are in Montreal,
but the rest are in Ottawa. Now if the CACE people said, "We'll
hold our con in Toronto", I could see a significant jump in attendance,
since that is a decent drive from New York and other cities near
Erie/Ontario.
> >The region for this con should be considered Canada. If there
> >are US residents who want to take a trip up there, then that's
> >fine, but the choice above, I would think the US con would
> >win out more often, unless the person has some radical aversion
> >altogether to sex in any form, and demands that it not be anywhere
> >near him.
>
> You're also forgetting the financial advantage that US attendees will
have. For
> example, a $40CAN membership will only cost about $26US.
You're also forgetting the financial disadvantage that gas usually costs
more
per translated size, customs charges on duties if you purchase too much,
the hassles if you have Canadian money leftover in getting it exchanged
back (ask your back how easy it is to get $100 canadian changed),
and that it is still a major haul into Canada in the first place.
Who cares that my $20 becomes $30 in Canadian money at most
restaurants off the bat, if it costs me an extra $20 in Canadian money
for the gas to get there? Things like *that* need to be considered.
> >Iam seriously not trying to tell the con people, "Your con sucks,
> >don't bother!" I am bringing up valid points based on over ten
> >years of doing cons myself, and about six years of being a dealer
> >or associated with cons.
>
> IIRC, Mephit originally had no art show, no dealer's room... And yet it
has
> survived and grown, and people kept going back year after year. (Now they
do
> have small dealer's room, but no art show.) Shifting away from the
"formula"
> convention is difficult, but it is possible, and that's what CACE is
trying to
> do.
Okay, so again, people on a.f.f have decided to stretch arguments with
non-parallels to "win" arguments. Mephit is in Tennessee, I notice,
which is about an eight hour drive for me, and there's no money
exchange, no customs . . .
CACE is trying to be a "regional" con up and away from any furry
regions but their own. Therefore, LOCAL con. But they're trying
to say "it's a con people can go to after Anthrocon". How many
people who went to Anthrocon would go to a local Montreal con?
Not many at all. But how many people who went to Anthrocon
would be near enough to go to Mephit? Probably many more.
> >As well, tying yourself as a con "after Anthrocon", when you're
> >not in the same region as Anthrocon, nor the same type of furry
> >con as Anthrocon, will not help the image of what you are. People
> >go there thinking it's something else, and suddenly the con gets
> >a bad rap.
>
> It's being called "after Anthrocon" because it's after Anthrocon. If it
was
> after Midwest Furfest, it would be called "after Midwest Furfest." Also, I
> can't think of anyone who would go to a convention without reading the
webpage,
> the advertising or talking with other people who are attending and getting
a
> very good idea of what the con will be like.
You pick up a furry comic with an ad, "CACE, the new furry con, located
in Montreal, Canada, the after-Anthrocon con!" with an order form and some
minor information. You're telling me no one would figure, "Hey, I liked
Anthrocon, it's a little cheaper, I guess I've always wanted to see
Canada"? Or that they would enjoy it just as much as Anthrocon, even
if they are two different cons?
> >What I think CACE should do, instead of stating what they
> >have been, take these considerations to their next meeting, open
> >up a public poll or suggestion mail box, and just hear what
> >many other congoers say about what they propose for their
> >con.
>
> That's what this has been, as Jeff stated a few weeks ago. So far, you're
the
> only really vocal complaintant. I'm sure CACE would love to have you
there, but
> if you decide not to go, that's your decision. For the most part the
feedback
> has been positive and excellent, and people have expressed a real interest
in
> CACE.
Okay, so I'm the only one who read, maybe, fourteen other people in a long
thread saying the difficulties and problems associated with their original
plan?
Or that some BF ranted his head off that we're all perverts because of it?
I'd say that with all those people sounding off, it's something that they
really
need to discuss and figure whether they want to try to swim upstream instead
of finding a route around the falls.
Atara
>Right, but most of the information devoted to communications on the
>page are for Toronto furs. Two of the major citizens are in Montreal,
>but the rest are in Ottawa.
There are more than two citizens in Montreal! (Looks at the page again.) Oh.
Heh - I see what you're looking at. See, the fellow who runs that page is from
Toronto, and the "citizens" page is mostly a listing of his friends. =) And as
it says on that page: "Please keep in mind that this list is nowhere near
representative of the full population of furs in this country." Perhaps I
should have been more specific - sorry for confusing you. There ARE more than
seven furry fans in Canada. =) The Ottawa Fur mailing list has 40 members, for
example. Toronto is only about 4 and a half hours away, which is nothing to a
Canadian. ;) (Try driving across southern Saskatchewan sometime. Brings new
meaning to the words "middle of freakin' nowhere...")
>Okay, so again, people on a.f.f have decided to stretch arguments with
>non-parallels to "win" arguments. Mephit is in Tennessee, I notice,
>which is about an eight hour drive for me, and there's no money
>exchange, no customs . . .
So now you're saying that the con will fail because it's small, and far away
from YOU, and because there won't be any porn, and because it's in another
country. Or is it just because there's no porn? Which is it? You keep changing
your argument.
>You pick up a furry comic with an ad, "CACE, the new furry con, located
>in Montreal, Canada, the after-Anthrocon con!" with an order form and some
>minor information.
Now you're just being silly. No such ad has been produced, and I sincerely
doubt that Anthrocon will be mentioned at all in advertising for the con. (And
once again, it's in *Ottawa*, not Montreal.)
Well anyway, thank you for your comments.
Dragon Magic
away
> from YOU, and because there won't be any porn, and because it's in another
> country. Or is it just because there's no porn? Which is it? You keep
changing
> your argument.
Nope. I am in the center of many major cities (Chicago, Indianapolis,
Cleveland,
Columbus, Pittsburgh, Memphis, Philadelphia, Buffalo, Detroit, Toronto),
etc.
I can get to any of them in under 8 hours. That includes the travel over the
border
to Toronto.
And in Ohio, there are many many furry fans. However, don't forget, one of
the
Ohio fans was unfortunately the man who gave most of the dirt to VF on the
article, so we do have a few thoughtless ones.
But still, huge furry culture here, most of whom plan a trip to Mephit,
Midwest
or Anthrocon. Not many would travel far up to Montreal.
That saying, that's a large market who goes to Anthrocon who would have a
larger
travel to get to a smaller con.
You're still stretching, without even considering the sound flaws that
people
have pointed out. CACE threw out the idea in hopes to get feedback, people
gave it, and then people like you are arguing them into saying, "it's their
con,
let them do as they want!"
Well, that's cool, but they did ask for the advice, and they're starting to
pitch
out what the con really is, and it's not going to work if they continue to
tell
people like "same region as Anthrocon" when it's far away, or "like
Anthrocon
in the early days" when many people didn't attend Anthrocon's early days who
went this year (it grew!), etc.
Just bad ideas coming out, best to point them out so that they can be
addressed.
Believe it or not, the people who are pointing these out, WANT THIS CON
TO HAPPEN. They just don't want it to fail because it had a small niche
market without trying to make up the downfalls.
If they can manage a large artist base, hell, people will think CACE as the
furry art gathering up north. That would be good! But they'd need to get
enough artists who want to go that far knowing that they can't be selling
or doing spooge. All spooge artists can draw non-spooge, just, do they
want to go that far to do it?
With all this now, will you go back and re-read what's been discussed, and
stop thinking that anyone who points out these problems are against this
con or against squeeky clean cons, and are instead wanting this con to
make it and make it well?
> >You pick up a furry comic with an ad, "CACE, the new furry con, located
> >in Montreal, Canada, the after-Anthrocon con!" with an order form and
some
> >minor information.
>
> Now you're just being silly. No such ad has been produced, and I sincerely
> doubt that Anthrocon will be mentioned at all in advertising for the con.
(And
> once again, it's in *Ottawa*, not Montreal.)
Ah, my mistake.
Greylocks
>
> As to any change in emphasis, planning a con is a dynamic thing,
> especially while it's still in the "BS over coffee" stage. Everybody
> brings up ideas, and then they get winnowed down to whatever form it
> finally takes.
>
> Kyle L. Webb
> Hartree Fox on yiffnet
Heh, in our case the Canadian flavor shows; it's still at the "BS over
Beer" stage.
We have a good staff, but really, less than a week of internal
discussions is a little bit low for everyone to expect perfection.
Tamar
get to come to a con that bans all adult work? Now, I'm not a big producer
of adult material nor do I usually sale such at cons (maybe an artshow piece
for the heck of it, and I did try this year some oooooold prints I had
laying around to see how they'd go against my other stuff). I don't make my
money as a dealer at cons off of adult work, but I do know that those people
who come looking for it also spend money on nonadult work too, and the more
the merrier.
So just what artists would come to such a con if it existed (you could
almost count Hardiman out from the start). I go to cons myself first out of
what friends while be there and secondly if I could cover the cost of going
through sales. If you reduce the ability to sale adult work that's
eliminating a lot of artists who actual do do adult work and dealers who
(let's face it sex sales) make a lot of money off of saling adult folios and
comics. I'd have to say I'd have to really think twice about a con that has
a total adult ban just cause it could reduce overall attendance thus
lowering the sales of my own cleaner work. And if folks that I know do
produce adult art wouldn't go cause of the ban, then I'd doubt I would just
cause like I said, cons are a nice place to meet friends you've made over
the years and only get to see maybe once or twice a year.
Now, I'm not saying a clean con is a bad thing, I just question as a dealer
and artists who makes money to cover traveling cost if it would be worth
going to, economically, especially if it was in another country or long
distance.
--
Tamar the Ebony Leopard
http://www.extinctioners.com
http://www.geocities.com/xenif/extinctioners.html
http://www.yerf.com/howashaw
Dragon Magic
"Tamar" <ta...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tnol2in...@corp.supernews.com...
I've been saying this all along, and all it's gotten me is that I am trying
to
make the con fail and I'm a perverted spooge lover.
Best not to mention anything. Let them ignore sound advice, and others
to feel that this is god's gift to cons. When the low attendance comes
around
and most attendees are from the local area, we'll not have to hear of it
again.
Sorry to sound bitter, but I'm tired of the bullshit on a.f.f anymore when
people give sound advice and discussions and people have to flame them.
scot...@home.com
On 16-Aug-2001, "Tamar" <ta...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Now, I'm not saying a clean con is a bad thing, I just question as a
> dealer
> and artists who makes money to cover traveling cost if it would be worth
> going to, economically, especially if it was in another country or long
> distance.
In point of fact, I was just at a convention where the Guests of Honor were
Boris Vallejo and Julie Bell. They celebrate the beauty of the form by
exposing its fullness in awesome detail, using fantastic imagery. And yet
their presence would have been an impossibility with such a ban.
Just a monkey,
Scott
P.S. - had a blast at MidWest Gather 2001! Can't wait for MWG 2002!
http://www.dreamwater.org/moonfriend/fandom/kygather.html
http://members.iglou.com/shadowr/conglomeration.htm
Draconity 64%, 26.6% pure, 49% Wierd, Dispenser of Ponder Points, Proud
owner of 13 Chocolate Points!
Dragon code:
DC2.~Mm{L- Sku Crb'>rb'}/Df^Et{L-- Sks Crb'.rb',wrb'_>wrb'_} Gm T+ Ben A
Fr N! M- H+ $- Foj+ Ac+ U* V+++![chaos] Q++[prec] Tc++[sw] Df+++
Email me at scott644(at)home.com
Visit me at http://www.dreamwater.org/moonfriend/index.html
Jeff Novotny
> I don't think one can really market a con saying it's aligned or somehow
> attached in a schedule with Anthrocon without saying it's comparable
> with it.
Just one clarification here: CACE is not aligned in any way, shape, or
form with AnthroCon. We think that Kage and his crew run a great show,
and of course, we hope that some people who attend AC decide to visit
our Expo too, but that's all. We are not drawing any comparison between
the two events in terms of scope or attendance.
Beyond that, we are just going to have to agree to disagree. We're not
going to come to any conclusion.
Best;
Jeff
Jeff Novotny
> I'd have to say I'd have to really think twice about a con that has
> a total adult ban just cause it could reduce overall attendance thus
> lowering the sales of my own cleaner work. And if folks that I know do
> produce adult art wouldn't go cause of the ban, then I'd doubt I would
just
> cause like I said, cons are a nice place to meet friends you've made over
> the years and only get to see maybe once or twice a year.
>
> Now, I'm not saying a clean con is a bad thing, I just question as a
dealer
> and artists who makes money to cover traveling cost if it would be worth
> going to, economically, especially if it was in another country or long
> distance.
Hi, Tamar. I tried e-mailing you on this, but got a bounceback;
If people start seeing that fans and artists are attending, we'll
probably get a good rush toward the end of July and early August. Time
will
tell. Early indications are that the Canadian crowd is shaping up
nicely.
If you do decide to attend, we'd love to have you. We can give you an
update a bit later on, and let you know how the crowds are looking, and
then you could decide.
Remember, we'll be promoting into the comic and cartooning crowd too!
Best;
Jeff, President, Canadian Anthro & Cartooning Expo
PeterCat
> > a dealer and artists who makes money to cover traveling cost if it
> > would be worth going to, economically, especially if it was in
> > another country or long distance.
Most of the people who go to a con do not make enough money to cover
their traveling costs -- they don't expect to. They go to cons to have
fun and meet other people who share their interests.
If a small con can fill their space -- 10 dealers and 20 artists, or
whatever -- it _doesn't matter_ that there were 80 dealers and 100
artists who didn't want to attend, for whatever their reasons (too far
away, too small, no X-rated artwork). If 300 people attend, it _doesn't
matter_ that 1200 others didn't attend for the same reasons.
Yes, it's a calculated risk, but the fact that the general section
_only_ of the Anthrocon 2001 Art Show was _almost three times_ as large
as the _entire_ Anthrocon 1997 Art Show would suggest that furry fandom
has grown big enough to make a con like the Canadian Anthro and
Cartooning Expo viable.
"Ah, but a man零 reach should exceed his grasp, Or what零 a heaven for?"
(Robert Browning)
> "Dragon Magic" <cust...@dragonmagic.net> wrote:
> I've been saying this all along, and all it's gotten me is that I am
> trying to make the con fail and I'm a perverted spooge lover.
I get the impression you believe, in spite of evidence to the contrary,
that X-rated artwork is essential to the success of a con. I, for one,
can (and have) seen how cons can be successful without allowing X-rated
artwork. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of small SF conventions that
are as successful as they want to be -- and their art shows and dealers
rooms are as "clean" as CACE plans to be, because that's the
expectation. Furry fandom (and anime fandom, too, for that matter) have
grown up with the expectation of X-rated artwork, so for those who have
experience of only furry cons, it's difficult to imagine how a con could
be successful without it. But they happen all the time.
> Best not to mention anything. Let them ignore sound advice, and
> others to feel that this is god's gift to cons. When the low
> attendance comes around and most attendees are from the local area,
> we'll not have to hear of it again.
Perhaps it's true that if a con wants to be come as big as possible, it
has to allow X-rated artwork. --But if a con doesn't _want_ to become as
big as possible, they have the freedom to set their own preferences.
Which might include a deliberately low attendance.
> Sorry to sound bitter, but I'm tired of the bullshit on a.f.f anymore
> when people give sound advice and discussions and people have to
> flame them.
Your advice may be sound, but it is just that -- advice, based on your
own experience and perceptions. I give advice based on my own experience
and perceptions, and it's different from yours. Whose is correct?
Nobody's -- it's advice, opinion. It's up to those who solicit advice to
decide what they can use, and ignore the rest. I don't take it
personally when that happens, since people have the right to judge for
themselves what they think is appropriate for them to do.
Dragon Magic
"PeterCat" <pete...@furry.fan.org> wrote in message
news:petercat-7C52EC...@news.chameleon.net...
> > "Tamar" <ta...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > Now, I'm not saying a clean con is a bad thing, I just question as
> > > a dealer and artists who makes money to cover traveling cost if it
> > > would be worth going to, economically, especially if it was in
> > > another country or long distance.
>
> Most of the people who go to a con do not make enough money to cover
> their traveling costs -- they don't expect to. They go to cons to have
> fun and meet other people who share their interests.
We're talking about dealers and artists. Believe it or not, the more serious
artists and nearly every dealer go to shows to try to turn a profit, or at
least
not take a serious hit on their investment. That's what we've been
discussing the whole time.
Without a reason to go to a hotel on a weekend other than, you know
maybe 20 other furs may show up that you met at one point on IRC,
then what's the point of going to a new con instead of an established
con?
> If a small con can fill their space -- 10 dealers and 20 artists, or
> whatever -- it _doesn't matter_ that there were 80 dealers and 100
> artists who didn't want to attend, for whatever their reasons (too far
> away, too small, no X-rated artwork). If 300 people attend, it _doesn't
> matter_ that 1200 others didn't attend for the same reasons.
You still need to fill those spaces. If there are ten spaces, and ninety
dealers wanted to go, and eighty-one decide it's not worth it at all,
still have to attract the other nine.
> Yes, it's a calculated risk, but the fact that the general section
> _only_ of the Anthrocon 2001 Art Show was _almost three times_ as large
> as the _entire_ Anthrocon 1997 Art Show would suggest that furry fandom
> has grown big enough to make a con like the Canadian Anthro and
> Cartooning Expo viable.
Whether another con is viable is not denied in any discussions.
Read back on the threads, you have completely missed the point of
many other con people, artists and dealers.
> > "Dragon Magic" <cust...@dragonmagic.net> wrote:
> > I've been saying this all along, and all it's gotten me is that I am
> > trying to make the con fail and I'm a perverted spooge lover.
>
> I get the impression you believe, in spite of evidence to the contrary,
> that X-rated artwork is essential to the success of a con. I, for one,
> can (and have) seen how cons can be successful without allowing X-rated
> artwork. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of small SF conventions that
> are as successful as they want to be -- and their art shows and dealers
> rooms are as "clean" as CACE plans to be, because that's the
> expectation. Furry fandom (and anime fandom, too, for that matter) have
> grown up with the expectation of X-rated artwork, so for those who have
> experience of only furry cons, it's difficult to imagine how a con could
> be successful without it. But they happen all the time.
Imagine that, someone on a.f.f stretching what was said to make a
point. Guess the Formosa gene exists in more than one person around here.
I never said that spooge makes a show. Most people don't do 100%
spooge anyways.
What has been pointed out, is the fact that when you declare up front,
that there will be no excessively mature themes allowed, you shut off
a major portion of your intended audience and money makers. That's
what's been pointed out many many many times. You can still GET
people with no spooge allowed, and the BF movement will probably
make it their headquarters, but if that's all you got, with no serious
artists or any dealers, then why bother going clear up to Canada to
do it if you live in California? Just plan to meet at someone's house,
stay the night at a local motel or something.
See the difference? We're pointing out flaws in engineering before the
bridge is built, to keep it from possibly crumbling down. Not one person
yet has said that spooge must fluorish or the con will die. We've just
said it will be difficult to build a first year con so far away and limiting
the scope all in one.
> > Best not to mention anything. Let them ignore sound advice, and
> > others to feel that this is god's gift to cons. When the low
> > attendance comes around and most attendees are from the local area,
> > we'll not have to hear of it again.
>
> Perhaps it's true that if a con wants to be come as big as possible, it
> has to allow X-rated artwork. --But if a con doesn't _want_ to become as
> big as possible, they have the freedom to set their own preferences.
> Which might include a deliberately low attendance.
Right. But read up on their pitches, which I've pointed out have been
bad and the conpeople have been hurrying to declare they didn't mean
it that way:
"Like Anthrocon's early days"
"After-Anthrocon Con"
"Same Region As Anthrocon"
I mean, they're trying to market it as an Anthrocon con, which they're
not, and saying they didn't intend it to be so. They shouldn't have attached
the name at all if they didn't want to mean they were in any way trying
to build off the name.
Basically, they're not trying to be like Anthrocon's early days, they're
not trying to say they're attached to AC, and that they're not in their
backyard.
*shrugs* Whatever.
But still, that's a long drive from Anthrocon, so why on earth it ever
came up, I don't know. Especially if they intended to be a local con.
If they wanted to be a local con, there were many other forums more
focused to their intended audience besides this one.
Catch the drift yet?
> > Sorry to sound bitter, but I'm tired of the bullshit on a.f.f anymore
> > when people give sound advice and discussions and people have to
> > flame them.
>
> Your advice may be sound, but it is just that -- advice, based on your
> own experience and perceptions. I give advice based on my own experience
> and perceptions, and it's different from yours. Whose is correct?
> Nobody's -- it's advice, opinion. It's up to those who solicit advice to
> decide what they can use, and ignore the rest. I don't take it
> personally when that happens, since people have the right to judge for
> themselves what they think is appropriate for them to do.
But whose experience would be accountable?
If you ask someone who's only done janitor work all his life, and someone
who's been an accomplished CPA all his life, about what to do with an
IRA account that doesn't seem to bring forth enough interest, whose advice
would matter? Just because they differ doesn't mean both or neither are
correct.
You should take the advice and cautions from the very people who would
be at the show to attract the guests. Like . . . The Artists! The Guests!
The Dealers! The Events People!
Without any of these people, you just have a bunch of furs renting hotel
rooms for a weekend. They need something to do. Art to view and
appreciate doesn't hurt. Events that will make people talk about the
con after they go home would be a plus for a con which wants a
second year at least. And dealers are a must if people come with
credit cards looking for goodies.
So, are you saying that these people, who have sounded off about
95% in favour that the idea behind the con already should be
reconsidered or at least taken back to being a local con and
not pushed as "the same region as Anthrocon" con, are not to
be considered more than just someone who feels the con is
a novel effort, who may not even bother attending any cons
at all next year?
And the con people *did* solicit for advice, but instead of letting
it soak in, or seeing the merits behind it, we had people flame us,
calling us perverts and saying all we care about is spooge, and can't
we have a con anywhere where people don't have to see it?
That's the bullshit I meant, and it was quite clear.
If they don't want to reconsider and know that they'll make it,
that's their choice, and more power to them. But if they fail, will
people still feel that they're a novel bunch who are doing good to
furrydom, even when they're no longer around? Or will they be
forgotten in a few years, when other cons, bigger and better, start
branching off into that area?
Blackberry
>
>[...]
>I've been saying this all along, and all it's gotten me is that I am trying
>to
>make the con fail and I'm a perverted spooge lover.
>
>Best not to mention anything. Let them ignore sound advice, and others
>to feel that this is god's gift to cons. When the low attendance comes
>around
>and most attendees are from the local area, we'll not have to hear of it
>again.
>
>Sorry to sound bitter, but I'm tired of the bullshit on a.f.f anymore when
>people give sound advice and discussions and people have to flame them.
Well, there are some Burned Fur artists who have stopped going to other cons
(like Eric Blumrich) who might love to go to this one. Let's let them have it
and see if there's enough room in the fandom for it to be successful.
--------------------
"It's ludicrous to have these interlocking bodies and not interlock. Please
remove your clothing now." -- Anya, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"
Tamar
con would be (of if such a thing is actually going to be, but just tossed
out for question). I was more commenting on the what if factor.
So it's going to be in Canada? Then I guess a nother factor to throw in is
when it would be and exactly were. Going to another country with art of any
kind can be a pain sometimes cause they ask about everything in customs (I
should know, I was just up there 3 weeks ago).
--
Tamar the Ebony Leopard
http://www.extinctioners.com
http://www.geocities.com/xenif/extinctioners.html
http://www.yerf.com/howashaw
"Jeff Novotny" <j.no...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3B7C7B1F...@sympatico.ca...
Tamar
covered expenses of going (lucky I guess). And no, I don't usually sale
adult material (this past AC being the first time I sold 10 adult prints
just to see how they would go). So I'm not saying that it's essencial to
have x rated material, but on the flip side, if only adults can get into the
artshow and all x material has to be covered so that only adults how are
interested in seeing it in the first place can, then what's the probably to
begin with? You'd only know there was x-rated stuff if you sought it our,
or a friend showed you what they bought, right?
And knowing fans, there's bound to be someone asking for a topless pic or
something in there sketch books.
--
Tamar the Ebony Leopard
http://www.extinctioners.com
http://www.geocities.com/xenif/extinctioners.html
http://www.yerf.com/howashaw
"PeterCat" <pete...@furry.fan.org> wrote in message
news:petercat-7C52EC...@news.chameleon.net...
Greylocks
Tamar wrote:
>
> Well, I came into the conver rather late, I'm not even sure where this clean
> con would be (of if such a thing is actually going to be, but just tossed
> out for question). I was more commenting on the what if factor.
>
> So it's going to be in Canada? Then I guess a nother factor to throw in is
> when it would be and exactly were. Going to another country with art of any
> kind can be a pain sometimes cause they ask about everything in customs (I
> should know, I was just up there 3 weeks ago).
>
> -
--
Marc Lacourciere, aka Greylocks
Operations Director
Kyle L. Webb
Greylocks wrote:
>
> Heh, in our case the Canadian flavor shows; it's still at the "BS over
> Beer" stage.
I can live with that. I'd be up for a good dark ale, or a Black and Tan.
Tamar
during the summer sometime. June would be a nice month.
--
Tamar the Ebony Leopard
http://www.extinctioners.com
http://www.geocities.com/xenif/extinctioners.html
http://www.yerf.com/howashaw
"Greylocks" <grey...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:3B7D9DA8...@videotron.ca...
Greylocks
not to cause major problems.
If we can get the guests we are hoping for, it will be mind-boggling.
Tamar wrote:
>
> yes I have. Very nice area. So when is it supposed to be? I really hope
> during the summer sometime. June would be a nice month.
>
--
Jeff Novotny
>
> yes I have. Very nice area. So when is it supposed to be? I really hope
> during the summer sometime. June would be a nice month.
Hi. It's scheduled for mid-August. I will make an official announcement
as soon as I confirm a couple of bits of information. August is quite
nice here, not too much rain and the worst of the summer heat has
typically died down.
Best;
Jeff
Custer James Winston
I put this together after Anthrocon. There are 11 furry conventions (or
similar events) that I know of, and 8 of those happen between the middle
of July and the middle of November.
Now yet another convention is being proposed, and the organizers want to
put it in the same time frame. To me at least, this sounds like a
formula for turning most of these into local area events. Why fly to a
convention when you can drive to the event that happens a week later?
One thing Confurence has going for it these days is that there is no
other furry convention for 10 weeks either before or after it.
It's the only event in April. February, March, May & June have nothing.
Or is there something else going on during that time?
Dragon Magic
> Or is there something else going on during that time?
You hit the other genre events during these months.
February and March are good months to find Comic shows,
April and May spark the early Anime shows . . .
But as for furry, dunno. The majority seem to peak about the
time of the fall semesters of college.