Vote of NO confidence in Kage/Anthrocon
PlanetFur
It appears, in the usual Anthrocon fashion, if you're vocal of your
complaints about Anthrocon, they don't want you there.
They're like the Best Buy of Conventions. They want the people who
will give them no trouble, let them keep doing whatever's comfortable
for them, but if you have a problem, shut up or go elsewhere.
Anthrocon, the convention where the staff's right, even if they finally
get around to other people's ideas they said were wrong.
mouse
@velox.critter.net:
> Cool. Just received an email from Dr. Sam Conway overnight.
>
> It appears, in the usual Anthrocon fashion, if you're vocal of your
> complaints about Anthrocon, they don't want you there.
So? I posted stuff about Uncle Kage's top-secret macrofetish thing hes
got going on , and I haven't been BANNED FROM AC FOR LIFE. (not that I've
ever gone to it)
> They're like the Best Buy of Conventions. They want the people who
> will give them no trouble, let them keep doing whatever's comfortable
> for them, but if you have a problem, shut up or go elsewhere.
Sounds like a half-truth.
Its thier convention they can do whatever they want. Id like to know the
people specifically this has happened to - cuz I got a feeling they are
total fuck-ups and thier critism was only part of the reason they arn't
welcomed back. The list will probably read like a who's who of furtards.
Swipecat
>PlanetFur <plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote
>
>> Cool. Just received an email from Dr. Sam Conway overnight.
>> It appears, in the usual Anthrocon fashion, if you're vocal of your
>> complaints about Anthrocon, they don't want you there.
Yes, that IS cool. That's how I'd feel if I was running a convention.
>> They're like the Best Buy of Conventions. They want the people who
>> will give them no trouble, let them keep doing whatever's comfortable
>> for them, but if you have a problem, shut up or go elsewhere.
>
>Sounds like a half-truth.
Probably. Even if it was the whole truth, it's still be cool.
>Its thier convention they can do whatever they want. Id like to know the
>people specifically this has happened to - cuz I got a feeling they are
>total fuck-ups and thier critism was only part of the reason they arn't
>welcomed back. The list will probably read like a who's who of furtards.
Well... Certainly a list of people that get carried away with their own
ideas and don't know how to (or can't be bothered to) present them in a
constructive way. Hmmm?
--
Swipecat
iBuck
Feel, perhaps - act on is another matter...
>Well... Certainly a list of people that get carried away with their own
>ideas and don't know how to (or can't be bothered to) present them in a
>constructive way. Hmmm?
To be banned from every furcon... lets start with the entire list of the Burned
Furs...
"You can have it Quickly,Correct, Complex - Pick 2"
The Yiffy Panzerkampfwagen
until great Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against
him.
In Soviet Russia, the conventions organise you!
---
We fired our cannons till the barrels melted down,
Then we grabbed an alligator and we fired another round.
We filled his head with cannonballs and powdered his behind,
And when we touched the powder off, the gator lost his mind.
PlanetFur
> In Soviet Russia, the conventions organise you!
Heh. /. cliches live on!
Dan Skunk
"PlanetFur" <plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote in message
news:cp2js1$10fr$1...@velox.critter.net...
I don't know what you did, but I can understand not wanting people there who
will complain and possibly cause trouble.
Marc
my thoughts.
Kage and I have had disagreements about many things. Some pretty vocal
and loud. I disagree with several things that happen (and happened) at
Anthrocon, and also disagree over methods.
I personally dont really want to ever go back there, but not for the
reasons one would think; I'm in my 40's, the con is more designed for
the 20-year-old crowd. So unless I want to shop for a lot of stuff, meet
very specific people, or whatever, this severely reduces my reasons for
going.
However...
Anthrocon works, and it works very well. It's run professionally and
Kage has excellent business acumen plus an amazing team of people to
help him. I think he's brilliant, even if I dont agree with him in many
ways. I cant even start to find fault in the way he runs the Convention,
arranges for hotels, and so on. I know how hard it is, I saw it from the
inside since the very first Anthrocon in Albany.
So, unless those of you who are bitching think they can do better than
he has been doing, and volunteer your time to run Anthrocon,
respectfully shut up, dont go, go elsewhere, or start your own
convention. The US is a free country, last I checked, you have all the
rights in the world not to go to Anthrocon, nobody forces you.
Maybe you'll realize, if you bother to stop and think, that it's not a
walk in the park.
Now return to the regular flaming.
Marc
effort and stupidity, including illegal acts, to be banned from Anthrocon.
Disagreeing with Kage (constructively or not) was never listed in the
Policies as a reason for banishment unless actual legal threaths are added.
But if you want to know what it takes to get banned, just read the
policies? Then simply start breaking the Policies.
As for the average amount of hours most of the staff actually worked, we
had calculated it to be between 18 and 20 hours per day, per person,
specially the security and ops staff.
Response time for emergencies, from them being reported to actual
action, was usually less than 30 seconds or to about 5 minutes if staff
were on the top (23rd) floor and had to get to the main meeting rooms.
That was consistently faster than the hotel's own staff, and even faster
than the police or ambulance team.
So, unless things have changed drastically, you can bet that folks who
got banned from AC made quite a few efforts to earn that dubious
privilege. You can also bet they will not admit to the truth.
No, you dont have to believe me one bit.
PlanetFur
> I don't know what you did, but I can understand not wanting people there who
> will complain and possibly cause trouble.
Yes, because people should always pay lots of money and shut up if their
money doesn't get them enough bang for the buck.
And also because it's someone else's event, and if you don't like it,
just go away.
But then, how does someone KNOW when something's not right without
people making it known?
Weird logic there.
PlanetFur
> For those of you who know me, let me assure you that it takes a lot of
> effort and stupidity, including illegal acts, to be banned from Anthrocon.
Let's see...
Member of Anthrocon staff spread lies (yes, outright lies) about me to
other cons. I did not know this until another convention staffer told me
that he had "heard things" about me from Anthrocon, and as such I was
not allowed to participate in events at that con.
This member of Anthrocon's staff *never* talked to any member of the
panel for which these things happened, but they were pretty far-fetched
to begin with. Members of this panel included myself, Nexxus from
FurNation, and Larry Wise, aka Commander Kitsune, who is often a sponsor
or supersponsor of the conventions he attends.
Trying to clear this up to the point that I had to threaten to get a
lawyer involved if the staff would not stop informing people of the
debunked events led to *my* being banned from Anthrocon.
Now, trying to set the record straight that simply giving suggestions to
the convention, which is seemingly always met with either "We can't do
that!" or "If you think you can do better, have your own con!", has led
to the business being banned, so others involved are out of the picture.
To me, Anthrocon's staff *is not* professional, are petty and very
petulant. They put on a good show with the limits they have, yes, and
it's still better than some. Could it be better? Certainly.
But for anyone to think that I've broken any rules, or been stupid,
sorry, but the staff on this has been in the wrong. Still no apologies
for the lies, and definitely no concern over the amount myself and those
involved have spent going to the con since it's been at the Adam's Mark.
The Hyena Who Knows Just As You
until great Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against
him.
>Trying to clear this up to the point that I had to threaten to get a
>lawyer involved if the staff would not stop informing people of the
>debunked events led to *my* being banned from Anthrocon.
Are you banned from anthrocon?
If so, Why?
And why did they start spreading lies about you?
Did someone take a personaly dislike to you?
PlanetFur
>>Trying to clear this up to the point that I had to threaten to get a
>>lawyer involved if the staff would not stop informing people of the
>>debunked events led to *my* being banned from Anthrocon.
>
> Are you banned from anthrocon?
I received an email from Kage directly that instructed me to no longer
associate with them. Doesn't stop Kage from emailing me, of course.
> If so, Why?
Because I had to threaten to speak to a lawyer to stop the con from
acting recklessly about my ability to go to other conventions. Never
once did anyone on the con ask anyone on the panel whether what happened
truly transpired. A staff member "heard" from "several people" that it
happened, and accepted it as gospel.
This same staff member had a beef with me years ago, that I didn't
bother even escalating. I was done with it, and moved on.
But because the bad stuff mentioned was bad, and I was a "bad person",
it had to be true. So off the staff member went to make sure that other
people knew just how bad it was, apparently.
So far, I know of at least one con where I'm not welcome except as a
paying attendee, because of what that con's person heard from
Anthrocon's staff.
To establish, from what I have been told (because the con still won't
fully disclose it):
I ran a panel on how to get published (because, well, I've done it).
I did not know that I was going to do three panels at that year's
Anthrocon until really close to the date, because of the hectic nature
of trying to schedule things. Fine.
I had no time to ask whether I could have copies of something run off to
hand out to people, so I, with my own money, ran to Kinko's to copy off
a copy of my own manuscript (to avoid copyright issues) because I didn't
have anything else really prepared. The purpose was so people could take
it home after the workshop, could write notes, and also a plus, could
have something to read that wasn't on the market *yet*.
The cost to copy each manuscript at Kinko's came out to $1.92 before
tax. Again, I paid this out of my own pocket, and ran a considerable
amount. To defray this, people could take one at the workshop for $2,
and that was it. People were not forced to do so, and people could have
shared. I was working from them to explain how to format the
manuscripts, and there was more to the workshop than that.
Now, to the lies that I've discovered.
I was charging people money for copies of freely-available information
on the internet that wasn't mine.
I was selling my own books at the workshop (I had no books at this time,
so I don't know how this was possible).
I was telling people that they could only submit works to my company (we
don't publish anything, so again, I don't know how this is possible).
Brock Hoagland, furry author extraordinaire, was sitting right in the
front row. In fact, on a couple of occassions, I asked for his input.
After the workshop, he told me how he enjoyed it and got a few ideas of
his own to help his career.
Seated at the panel were publisher Nexxus from FurNation magazine to let
people know what publishers want to see, and Larry Wise, another
published fur who has done many tech publications.
At the end of Anthrocon 2004, as I was breaking down our booth, two
people came up to me and said they thought I had missed this year's
show. When I asked why they thought this, it was because I was not
running panels. I explained to them what Anthrocon had told me about not
being allowed to run panels there again, and the gentlemen said he was
going to complain to Kage. Whether this happened, I'm not sure, but
they, along with Brock, Nexxus and Larry, knew *nothing* of the events
that the staff member was spreading.
And to this day, I still have not gotten an apology and a letter of
clarification in case anyone happened to catch word of the lies. Go figure.
> And why did they start spreading lies about you?
Probably because of the vendetta, and since they were staff, the rest of
the staff took the member's word over anything else. Still to this day,
I can't get them to admit it was wrong with all the proof available or
to apologize for it.
artist
news:DT5td.151$xk3...@fe51.usenetserver.com:
Did this person start the thread about a vote of confidence for Kage
or something? It seems rather fishy, I mean, if it's really that
serious, why start making allegations here? I still haven't seen this
planetfur person tell us specificly what the allegations where, and
I've noticed that his message seems to be using loaded comments and
emtional appeals. It sounds for all the world as if he want's total
freedom with no restraints and to heck with everybody else...
--
AIM: GCCFurryBoy
mell...@yahoo.com
http://www.practialdesigns.com/blog/
Kathmandu
"PlanetFur" <plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote in message
news:cp2js1$10fr$1...@velox.critter.net...
Let's see, a PHD in charge of the largest and most successful furry
convention who has years of experience running a con needs to listen to
basement dwelling troglodites with some sort of lame plan to promote a
fetish or whatever have you; why? He has no real need to listen to anyone
for that matter. The fact he and the other people involved with the con
listen to the vast majority of suggestions is a testement to patience and
the ability to judge and say no is a strong point, not a weakness.
Without more information, I would say most of the fandom is going to side
with Kage. Even with all the facts exposed most will support Dr. Conway's
judgement as it is usually on target.
Dan Skunk
Is this about not getting time for an event you wanted?
Dan Skunk
"Dan Skunk" <dans...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:YJ7td.167$xk3...@fe51.usenetserver.com...
*reads rest of thread*
Oh.
iBuck
>Let's see, a PHD in charge of the largest and most successful furry
>convention who has years of experience running a con needs to listen to
>basement dwelling troglodites with some sort of lame plan to promote a
>fetish or whatever have you; why?
While you may be right about Kage, the problem is it's not a matter of basment
dwelling troglodites with lame plans to promote personal fetishes.
It's about 3 years of fustration over a convention that's been overcrowded in
the hotel it's in since it's gotten there and just getting worse, with untill
now, no sign of change coming untill 2007, the con keeps growing, but it's
facilities are fixed, it couldn't move, it couldn't expand, it couldn't split.
The results that I've been affected by have been a slow squeeze on the dealers
room, first less tables available, then the loss of at-con registration for the
dealers, in a odd sense, things have gotten worse as they've gotten better...
Then you add things like, the slightly inconsistand standard over what hotels
would fit the bill, some dealers getting prefrential ttreatment, while others
don't know what they did to get it.
It leads to quite a bit of fustration, and people have gotten hot under the
collar on both sides...
Add to that a little bit of personal animosity and rumors/misunderstandings
over some panels back in 2003, and the people getting hot under the collar on
-both- sides, and you have the current angry mess.
Personally I'm -really- looking forward to the proposed AC 2008, in Pitsburgh,
but untill then, I anticipate growing pains.
I don't think those pains should result in anyone being banned though, leave
that for people who break the rules -at- the con..
Dale Farmer
PlanetFur wrote:
> The Hyena Who Knows Just As You wrote:
>
> < Tale of woe deleted. >
If you actually put your name in your post, I may actually give
you some credulity. But you don't, so I don't.
--Dale
Tamar
You're vagueness is not going to get you replies that will probably see your
point of view without some facts to what you are talking about.
--
Shawntae Howard
www.extinctioners.com
"PlanetFur" <plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote in message
news:cp2js1$10fr$1...@velox.critter.net...
Tamar
ask since you have now made it a public matter.
--
Shawntae Howard
www.extinctioners.com
"PlanetFur" <plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote in message
news:cp2siq$1afp$1...@velox.critter.net...
Tamar
Kage himself to address a counter point. If this did happen it does seem
unfair. Being an occasional panel runner myself, I know how scheduling and
the organizing of the panels can from time to time be pretty chaotic.
I have not, though ever heard a rule that said even if you had some
published material of your own, you could not try to sell it after your
panel was over (heck, it would only seem fair that you would be allowed to
since you are freely volunteering time to do the panel anyway, and time at a
con is literally money sometimes).
--
Shawntae Howard
www.extinctioners.com
"PlanetFur" <plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote in message
news:cp2u4f$1c75$1...@velox.critter.net...
Tamar
least he's owed is an explanation of why since he did help the con by
volunteering time to do a panel for it. To terminate someone's attendance
based on rumor isn't really fair if that's what happened, and while the
staff is and can be excellent, it does have the occassional person on it
that get's a tad too much of a power rush (and some who should never be
allowed to an open active mic).
--
Shawntae Howard
www.extinctioners.com
"Kathmandu" <Kathmandu@yomomma> wrote in message
news:10ra1b9...@corp.supernews.com...
Marc
I dont know you, so at this point it would be a decision I have no say
in. I'm no longer involved. I stopped when the new security team
(Dorsai?) were brought in.
When I was there, those that were banned were removed for criminal acts,
and even then there was an appeal option.
So, it would be something between you and the current group of directors
to hash out.
And then again, things may have changed. Just remembering it as it was.
PlanetFur
> Not necessarily (after reading the thread) if what he says is true. The
> least he's owed is an explanation of why since he did help the con by
> volunteering time to do a panel for it. To terminate someone's attendance
> based on rumor isn't really fair if that's what happened, and while the
> staff is and can be excellent, it does have the occassional person on it
> that get's a tad too much of a power rush (and some who should never be
> allowed to an open active mic).
>
And you can ask anyone who was on the panel, or Brock himself, whether
those events happened. If you want to ask the staff member, he goes by
"Kristy", is all I can tell you.
My friend, Ian Williams, got the information on what was said, and an
email by Kage which first asked me not to associate with the convention
confirmed that he would speak to him regarding this. To this day, still
no apologies and no explanations.
So, there you go, evaluate away. I hide nothing.
Marc
Sorry to hear it though.
PlanetFur wrote:
> I received an email from Kage directly that instructed me to no longer
> associate with them.
clipped several bits.
> But because the bad stuff mentioned was bad, and I was a "bad person",
> it had to be true. So off the staff member went to make sure that other
> people knew just how bad it was, apparently.
I'd want documented proof before I would put a ban in motion, or see the
actions myself, but that's me.
I have met folks with apparently horrible reputations and they were well
behaved.
All that was required was a short talk with the supposed culprit,
bringing them up to speed, letting them know what is what, and then just
saying that whatever the story is I would not give a damn unless I saw
it (or it was truly illegal).
> I did not know that I was going to do three panels at that year's
> Anthrocon until really close to the date, because of the hectic nature
> of trying to schedule things. Fine.
This date explains why I dont know.
PlanetFur
> All this happened long after I stopped getting involved, so... dont know.
> Sorry to hear it though.
It's not life-ending. As I stated, there are at least three major
conventions, the smallest of which is five times the size of Anthrocon,
about the same time. The cost to attend the smallest is only about twice
the price of AC, as well, for a dealer, and is a four day convention.
If AC doesn't want all the money I've been spending there, I'm sure
these conventions will take it just as easily.
> I'd want documented proof before I would put a ban in motion, or see the
> actions myself, but that's me.
> I have met folks with apparently horrible reputations and they were well
> behaved.
> All that was required was a short talk with the supposed culprit,
> bringing them up to speed, letting them know what is what, and then just
> saying that whatever the story is I would not give a damn unless I saw
> it (or it was truly illegal).
That's what I would have figured, too. And nothing that I did to get
myself banned ever happened at Anthrocon (literally!). Just asking
someone on the panel that day, or after the con, would have cleared it
up, since I'd think Nexxus or Larry Wise would have no reason to lie.
It wasn't until another convention's staffer told me he'd heard bad
things about me from Anthrocon months later that I even knew that this
had happened. No one had even bothered to talk to me from AC's staff.
After the panel, too, Sue Deer had walked into the room and handed me a
$10 off coupon for the membership the following year, and I was informed
I couldn't use it because I was a dealer (and had already paid for my
tables at that point), so it didn't matter. I was not even compensated
as other panelists were for my work (I didn't expect to be), but to be
banned from doing workshops for something I didn't even do, and was
never confirmed, is just stupid.
>> I did not know that I was going to do three panels at that year's
>> Anthrocon until really close to the date, because of the hectic nature
>> of trying to schedule things. Fine.
>
> This date explains why I dont know.
It was the 2003 Anthrocon.
Brian Henderson
<plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote:
>It appears, in the usual Anthrocon fashion, if you're vocal of your
>complaints about Anthrocon, they don't want you there.
Yup, deal with it. It's their home, they have every right to ask that
people who shit on their carpet go elsewhere. If you want to bitch,
take a hike. If you don't like it, start your own convention.
That's life, deal with it.
mouse
news:20041206175858...@mb-m01.aol.com:
> >Well... Certainly a list of people that get carried away with their
> >own
>>ideas and don't know how to (or can't be bothered to) present them in
>>a constructive way. Hmmm?
>
> To be banned from every furcon... lets start with the entire list of
> the Burned Furs...
The burned furs are all long gone, at least the group doesnt exist
anymore.. what the hell is wrong with you?
They still a boogeyman haunting your nightmares, iBuck?
PlanetFur
>>It appears, in the usual Anthrocon fashion, if you're vocal of your
>>complaints about Anthrocon, they don't want you there.
>
> Yup, deal with it. It's their home, they have every right to ask that
> people who shit on their carpet go elsewhere. If you want to bitch,
> take a hike. If you don't like it, start your own convention.
>
> That's life, deal with it.
But then they do have the soapbox to say how successful they are because
they don't get complaints.
Or, as Xydexx has done, said that if people want to help, they should
suggest hotels.
Only suggesting or criticising is always met with the staff constantly
saying "Can't do that!" or "That won't work"... Like it's all from a script.
And the other problem with your theory is that it's something free. It
isn't. If I pay nearly $700 just for my space at a convention, and the
convention completely screws up with that, then hell yes they will hear
about it. If they don't like that, that's $700 they won't get year after
year.
Or, as the crunch has been happening, $200.
When fewer dealers stick around because the cost doesn't justify the
headaches or profits they earn (especially artists who voiced their
complaints that they paid for dealers' tables and the artists who just
paid $5 or $10 are right behind them), then what?
Would you rather the convention suffer because no one should complain?
Or would you rather that the convention listen and consider that
complaints just may be valid and should be worked out before they become
major issues?
I take the latter.
Swipecat
>Only suggesting or criticising is always met with the staff constantly
>saying "Can't do that!" or "That won't work"... Like it's all from a script.
People that have the ability to organise an event as successful as
Anthrocon are not going to be stupid, and have high credibility in my
opinion. If you've been continuously rebuffed by a whole group of
intelligent people, then that's a reflection of YOUR skills at
presenting a viewpoint, YOUR inflated expectations, YOUR attitude, and
YOUR ego.
Case in point: an absurdly counterproductive post to this newsgroup,
damaging your credibility further, and making your ability to function
in this fandom a whole lot harder for yourself. How are other convention
organizers that are aware of this thread going to view you now?
I don't know the whole story here, but it's pretty obvious that you're
exactly the sort of person that would drop himself into trouble like
this by his own foolishness.
--
Swipecat
Swipecat
>And you can ask anyone who was on the panel, or Brock himself, whether
>those events happened. If you want to ask the staff member, he goes by
>"Kristy", is all I can tell you.
I'll take a guess here. The reason that you got banned is probably not
what you claimed at all. The reasons that you gave that you heard second
or third hand were probably corrupted by the Chinese Whisper syndrome.
To me, they sound like convention policy on what it would take to get a
dealer banned, and were probably given as examples by someone that
didn't know who the subject was. I suspect that there are actually very
real reasons for banning you, given your behaviour here.
--
Swipecat
The Hyena Who Knows Just As You
Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
>Let's see, a PHD
are you suggesting that having a PHD somehow makes a person better
than "lesser mortals" who haveth not such a thing?
The Hyena Who Knows Just As You
Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
>PlanetFur wrote:
dude, It's the guy who runs planetfur. go and look up the
planetfur.com/ and/or dragonmagic.com adress or something.
Don't be lazy, or I will spank you. :(
See, the seven seals have been broken
And the world has taken end.
The Hyena Who Knows Just As You
great Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
> I suspect that there are actually very
>real reasons for banning you, given your behaviour here.
Is that the appeal to Secret and/or higher knowledge?
I could claim that I had been told a secret by MI6 which confirms the
truth and indicated that I am right and you are wrong, but since it's
a secret, I cannot tell you.
The Hyena Who Knows Just As You
great Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
>People that have the ability to organise an event as successful as
>Anthrocon are not going to be stupid, and have high credibility in my
Umm... I've know people who got to be principels of colleges and who
were stupid.
I'm not makeing any statement about anthrocon staff, but lack of
inteligence et al is certainly no barrier to sucess.
Indeed, the key to sucess in an organisation is to master the
beurocracy and polotics of that organisation.
Therefore, we can infer that it *might* be so that anthrocon staff
have demonstrated an ability to master the beurocracy and polotics of
the furry fandom as oppose to any overt "inteligence" on their part.
I'm not saying it is, but that is certainly a possibility.
Mike and Carole
"PlanetFur" <plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote in message
news:cp2js1$10fr$1...@velox.critter.net...
> Cool. Just received an email from Dr. Sam Conway overnight.
>
> complaints about Anthrocon, they don't want you there.
>
> will give them no trouble, let them keep doing whatever's comfortable
> for them, but if you have a problem, shut up or go elsewhere.
>
> Anthrocon, the convention where the staff's right, even if they finally
> get around to other people's ideas they said were wrong.
You know, I read through that whole chain, and
STILL don't really understand all of it. Even after Shawntae asked you to
clarify.
First off, who are you? There's not many furry publishers anywhere, and
maybe I'm just not associating your posting name with your business. (One
reason Carole and I do not have furry names etc.)
I'll reserve comment until I can place a face with the posts, but so far as
the way Kage and company run Anthrocon, it really comes down to one thing.
They are the ones taking the risk/paying out the front money/doing the work.
It's like someone getting mad at us because we won't publish their multi
issue opus "SNOT MONKEY", In the end, it's mine and Carole's risk/ fiscal
responsibility/work that goes into publishing.
Yes, it's basically a dictatorship. We risks our asses, we gets to call the
shots.
I know AC, FC, CBS, CNN, MMMS et cetera are the same.
Mike
The Hyena Who Knows Just As You
until great Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against
him.
>Yes, it's basically a dictatorship.
Aha! more proof that Lenin was right.
Why, everyday, lenin gets more and more right.
Marc
Dragonmagic email, but it may or may not reach you.
Dan Skunk
"Swipecat" <swip...@see.replyto.header> wrote in message
news:hamar0tark24p2cjn...@4ax.com...
> Case in point: an absurdly counterproductive post to this newsgroup,
> damaging your credibility further, and making your ability to function
> in this fandom a whole lot harder for yourself. How are other convention
> organizers that are aware of this thread going to view you now?
Obviously, libeling Kage and Anthrocon on Usenet and threatening them with
legal action will not gain any sympathy from them--nor help your reputation.
If anything, it will only give more evidence that they would be wise not to
associate with you.
Oops. ;)
iBuck
>what you claimed at all.
Being that I'm neck deep in this, and having tried to mediate things, and get
stories straight, between both Planet Fur, and the AC programing staff, in
question, i can pretty much say that the event leading to Kage asking PF not to
do buissness is all about how this issue over Planet Fur's panel was handled...
Nobody had the full storey when it began and by the time everyone had the full
story, the damage had been done, because everybody was sufficently mad at each
other not to want to go back to the begining...
"You can have it Quickly,Correct, Complex - Pick 2"
Swipecat
>Being that I'm neck deep in this, and having tried to mediate things, and get
>stories straight, between both Planet Fur, and the AC programing staff, in
>question, i can pretty much say that the event leading to Kage asking PF not to
>do buissness is all about how this issue over Planet Fur's panel was handled...
>
>Nobody had the full storey when it began and by the time everyone had the full
>story, the damage had been done, because everybody was sufficently mad at each
>other not to want to go back to the begining...
Yeah, I figured PlanetFur was the "own worst enemy" type. When he's in
conversation, does he sneer at "fanboy" behaviour at the con? I ask,
because these things tend to go together in my experience.
--
Swipecat
Swipecat
>"Swipecat" <swip...@see.replyto.header> wrote
>> Case in point: an absurdly counterproductive post to this newsgroup,
>> damaging your credibility further, and making your ability to function
>> in this fandom a whole lot harder for yourself. How are other convention
>> organizers that are aware of this thread going to view you now?
>
>Obviously, libeling Kage and Anthrocon on Usenet and threatening them with
>legal action will not gain any sympathy from them--nor help your reputation.
>
>If anything, it will only give more evidence that they would be wise not to
>associate with you.
>
>Oops. ;)
You could have said who you were talking about since I'm the only person
that you've quoted here.
Oops. ;)
--
Swipecat
>
>
Elf M. Sternberg
> But then they do have the soapbox to say how successful they are
> because they don't get complaints.
Hey, it's America. It's their dime. They bought the space,
they get to dictate who they share it with. Don't like it? Don't
contribute.
Elf
Dr. Samuel Conway
him a private email taking exception to his recent accusations, which
I believe to be motivated by his resentment of our refusal to grant
him special dispensation for additional dealer tables beyond the usual
alotment, and indicative of a desire to bend public opinion against
Anthrocon in order to force us to give him his way. I feel that this
is also the intention of his most recent tirades regarding his
supposed banning.
The issues that he seems to believe were behind my motivation for
contacting him were never acted upon by Anthrocon, and his insistance
that he is "banned" because of them are entirely false.
Mr. Bair has indeed made many suggestions to Anthrocon, but I take
offense at his claims that "all suggestions are dismissed out of
hand." Mr. Bair's suggestions included:
+ removing Artists' Alley so that we could put in more dealer tables,
+ removing the Art Show so that we could put in more dealer tables,
+ moving the convention 1000 miles away from its base so we could put
in more dealer tables, and
+ providing dealers with a dedicated elevator that no other convention
attendees could use.
I hope that I am not to be considered closed-minded for dismissing
these helpful suggestions without comment.
The email that I sent to him is private, but since he has insisted
upon making it a public issue I feel that I am left with little choice
but to quote my portion of it here, in its entirety. Having quoted
some of his recent barbs, including one that suggested that there are
many bigger, better conventions being held at the same time as
Anthrocon, I said only:
"I think, Sir, that it is time you took your business to one of those
other conventions."
That is not intended to be a ban. If Mr. Bair was banned from
attending, I assure you, he would know it. It was an expression of my
bewilderment as to why, when Mr. Bair obviously believes that
Anthrocon is not providing him with the service he feels that he
deserves, he continues to attend and be miserable, or at least unhappy
enough that he finds it necessary to stir up antipathy toward our
organization in a public forum frequented by its membership. If it
appears that I am forbidding him from attending the convention, then I
apologize for my vagueness.
Neither I nor Anthrocon's board of directors (who have also taken
exception to his comments) will have any further comment on this
issue. Flamewars take too much time and energy, and right now, as I
hope the reader can understand, we are a little busy.
--- Uncle Kage
PlanetFur
>>Only suggesting or criticising is always met with the staff constantly
>>saying "Can't do that!" or "That won't work"... Like it's all from a script.
>
> People that have the ability to organise an event as successful as
> Anthrocon are not going to be stupid, and have high credibility in my
> opinion. If you've been continuously rebuffed by a whole group of
> intelligent people, then that's a reflection of YOUR skills at
> presenting a viewpoint, YOUR inflated expectations, YOUR attitude, and
> YOUR ego.
I'm sorry, but I think someone's a little deluded.
People who think that Anthrocon is successful should really look outside
Furry.
There are conventions that *regularly* have 10,000 to 150,000 people at
their cons. There are very few complaints at these places, and usually
the complaints are based on changes that are made, and are polished
after it is seen how the attendance feels about them.
Is Anthrocon near that? No. Does Anthrocon fix problems that people
complain about within a year? No.
Is it the largest furry convention? From what I see, yes.
And my ego does well already, especially since the convention has been
implementing ideas I suggested years back, and kept reiterating, but
kept telling me that they couldn't be done.
So maybe the staff isn't the only smart person here?
> Case in point: an absurdly counterproductive post to this newsgroup,
> damaging your credibility further, and making your ability to function
> in this fandom a whole lot harder for yourself. How are other convention
> organizers that are aware of this thread going to view you now?
How has my credibility been hurt? Because I challenge the status quo of
how people view a staff of a convention I and others have already seen
been fallable?
Believe me, there's more to life than Furry. If my credibility has been
hurt in Furry, it certainly won't affect my income or my ability to do
my work.
> I don't know the whole story here, but it's pretty obvious that you're
> exactly the sort of person that would drop himself into trouble like
> this by his own foolishness.
Yes, because it was my doing that caused an Anthrocon staff member to
lie about me and for the whole staff to act irresponsibly. I'm just that
powerful to do this.
Dr. Samuel Conway
<flog...@you-know-the-drill.bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>+ removing Artists' Alley so that we could put in more dealer tables,
>+ removing the Art Show so that we could put in more dealer tables,
I must correct myself on these two points. Looking back on the
correspondences, I realize that Mr. Bair was not advocating removing
them entirely; he was, however, advocating reducing them both
substantially in size in order to expand the number of dealer tables
in the dealers' room.
Mea culpa.
-- U. K.
PlanetFur
> You know, I read through that whole chain, and
>
> STILL don't really understand all of it. Even after Shawntae asked you to
> clarify.
>
> First off, who are you? There's not many furry publishers anywhere, and
> maybe I'm just not associating your posting name with your business. (One
> reason Carole and I do not have furry names etc.)
Christopher Bair, published author and operator of several sites and two
businesses, of which a fair amount of money comes from outside Furry.
I've helped out with a local convention that keeps outgrowing itself
every other year and has to find larger locations. I'm trying to help
the same of another convention that is mostly fan run, but it's a fun
atmosphere.
These are not furry cons, of course, but anime cons. Otakon took about
three to four years to reach the level of where Anthrocon was in 2004,
and to this day they still grow. Any complaints or suggestions people
have at Otakon are regularly collected and discussed, and no one is told
up front that things are impossible.
There are very little politics of power struggles in these other
fandoms, which probably allows them to grow and make available what they
have. I haven't seen any politicking out of Midwest FurFest, either,
which is probably why I still enjoy that small con. That and it's a
worthwhile drive for me.
I've met with you, Mike, on a couple of occassions at Anthrocon. I'm
sorry you don't remember me, but it was just for a quick hello. I've
also purchased a stock of Extinctioners off you a couple years back and
have almost ran out of them selling them locally and at Anime conventions.
> I'll reserve comment until I can place a face with the posts, but so far as
> the way Kage and company run Anthrocon, it really comes down to one thing.
>
> They are the ones taking the risk/paying out the front money/doing the work.
And, like yourself, I take the risk of paying out my money up front to
go to the convention. It's just as much of a risk for me, since I have
limited resources to make back that (table space, time frame, etc.).
If Anthrocon reserves the right to do as it pleases, then why is it so
far-fetched that I cannot raise concerns or complaints about major
problems with how the weekend was? Namely, size of the dealer's room (so
more dealers could be included) and the way the elevators have been handled?
At the end of the last anime convention I did, all the dealers were
asked what could be done to improve how it was handled. All the
suggestions were *written* down and I bet a few of them will be implemented.
With AC, I saw far too many other people told that the ideas were just
written down and passed off to other people. I often heard the same
complaints year after year. I heard of at least two artists who bought
dealers' tables who complained it was unfair for them to spend all that
money when artists tables were just behind them, and they only had to
spend an extra $5-$10 over their badge. A reasonable complaint, but
those artists will see that nothing was done about this.
> It's like someone getting mad at us because we won't publish their multi
> issue opus "SNOT MONKEY", In the end, it's mine and Carole's risk/ fiscal
> responsibility/work that goes into publishing.
Right.
But this isn't the same thing. I'm not advocating that they bow down to
anything I want. This is about the con constantly telling people like me
that they can't do something, which, since they've been implementing
many of my past suggestions, is a clear sign they *can*.
It is about how much more comfortable and less complicated the weekend
would have been years ago if only the stubbornness of the staff would
have been lessened.
It's also about the fact that, according to the code of conduct of the
convention, I've broken 0 rules or concerns, and Kage has made it very
clear all the money I've invested in the convention is meaningless and
I'm not allowed to attend.
The anime conventions will sometimes email me up asking whether I'd like
to attend. Even one I complained about how they kept handling the
dealer's room (they would allow people to buy any amount of tables, and
too many dealers were buying them to make sure no other dealers could
get in, etc.). They finally heard too many complaints from too many
people and did something about this.
I can still send in my money and attend that convention with absolutely
no problems.
This should be a big hint into how different furry conventions are run
than the rest, and why most any other genre's conventions grow and are
larger than the furry ones.
Successful isn't 2500 people. Successful is being able to safely acquire
space for the next two years for your convention because you've planned
well and your growth rate will fit it. That and the amount you've been
able to acquire because of careful planning is safely tucked away in
case of any problems.
Those are the successful conventions.
> Yes, it's basically a dictatorship. We risks our asses, we gets to call the
> shots.
Same with me. If I'm going to shell out $700 to attend Anthrocon 2003,
and I'm going to have the staff lie about me to other conventions about
stuff I never did, and then never confront me about, then yes, I will be
VERY critical of that convention indeed.
It's my ass, too.
PlanetFur
>>Case in point: an absurdly counterproductive post to this newsgroup,
>>damaging your credibility further, and making your ability to function
>>in this fandom a whole lot harder for yourself. How are other convention
>>organizers that are aware of this thread going to view you now?
>
>
> Obviously, libeling Kage and Anthrocon on Usenet and threatening them with
> legal action will not gain any sympathy from them--nor help your reputation.
>
> If anything, it will only give more evidence that they would be wise not to
> associate with you.
>
> Oops. ;)
Let's see... Did I libel? Nope. Please point out where I have?
Did I threaten legal action? Nope. I said I was considering speaking to
a lawyer to get the convention to stop slandering me, sure, because past
attempts to get them to clarify things was met with silence.
As I stated, far larger cons are happy to have me there and have their
situation together. I have no problems going to them and making more money.
PlanetFur
So spending hundreds and hundreds of dollars to help out the convention
gets me nothing?
Weird standards.
PlanetFur
> Contrary to reports, Mr. Bair is not banned from Anthrocon. I sent
> him a private email taking exception to his recent accusations, which
> I believe to be motivated by his resentment of our refusal to grant
> him special dispensation for additional dealer tables beyond the usual
> alotment, and indicative of a desire to bend public opinion against
> Anthrocon in order to force us to give him his way. I feel that this
> is also the intention of his most recent tirades regarding his
> supposed banning.
*ahem*
You sent me an email requesting that I no longer associate with Anthrocon.
Tell me, dear Dr., what would you consider associating with Anthrocon to be?
Then you sent another telling me to take my business to other conventions.
How is this *not* a ban?
I don't care about not getting additional dealer space *if* there were
no exceptions. AC continues to grant Rabbit Valley and Dragon's Lair the
tables they need, and I'm not the only dealer who took offense to this.
The problem lies in the fact that the staff acting irresponsibly with
how the events after the panel happened. Still to this day, you act as
though everything the staff has done was right, accept no responsibility
to fix the problem or come to any sensible agreement to it.
Your actions are always get rid of the complainers, so you don't have to
deal with problems outside your convention. Which is just disappointing.
I wasn't coming back to Anthrocon in 2005, because AC has trouble fixing
its problems. Why spend $200 just for 12' of space at AC, which may have
2500-2800 people, when I can spend $575 for a 10x10' booth at a four day
show the weekend before which should have between 10,000 and 12,000
people, and it's a much closer drive?
I supported Anthrocon with what I could, selflessly did panels and was
willing to do more without compensation at all.
If this is treating Anthrocon poorly because I get tired of raising the
same concerns and complaints of major problems each year, then really,
that's not me painting Anthrocon in a poor light. That is Anthrocon in a
poor light.
This should be concern for anyone else who has a problem with Anthrocon
or wanting to do panels. Your thanks is aggravation enough.
> The issues that he seems to believe were behind my motivation for
> contacting him were never acted upon by Anthrocon, and his insistance
> that he is "banned" because of them are entirely false.
Should I reproduce the emails you sent me, then? The first telling me
not to associate with Anthrocon anymore, and the second telling me to
take my business elsewhere?
If these aren't bans, what would you consider a ban, Dr.?
> Mr. Bair has indeed made many suggestions to Anthrocon, but I take
> offense at his claims that "all suggestions are dismissed out of
> hand." Mr. Bair's suggestions included:
>
> + removing Artists' Alley so that we could put in more dealer tables,
Incorrect.
I suggested moving the art show out of the dealer's room back in 2001,
and in 2002 and 2003. I was told each time that there would be no room
to move the art show, and as such it would have to stay.
In 2004, magically, the art show was moved out of the dealer's room.
When I saw this and the artist den was moved in, what did I do? I came
up to you in the dealer's room, shook your hand and congratulated you
for improving the convention, the hallways and the elevators.
Too bad you forget about that.
But never *once* did I ever mention getting rid of the Artist's Alley to
put in more dealers' tables.
> + removing the Art Show so that we could put in more dealer tables,
Take the re- off the art show and you've got it. And in fact, you
implemented this, didn't you?
My suggestion was to combine the art show and artist's den to make more
of a little-dealer's-room style, much like the big fantasy cons tend to
do. Artists could have just a table with two panels behind him to
showcase off his works (and sell them as auction pieces, etc., when he's
not around), or just have a series of panels in the back for those not
attending. I even drew up a floor plan to explain how this would appear
and sent it to you.
So if I did this, how would I be advocating getting rid of the art show?
Methinks someone has his memory clouded.
> + moving the convention 1000 miles away from its base so we could put
> in more dealer tables, and
Not only dealer tables, artist tables, event rooms, gaming room, and
make it much less congested, everyone in the same hotel, etc.
Indianapolis is only about 600-700 miles away, Columbus closer, and
Boston and Atlanta, what, maybe about the same? I'd have to look it up.
> + providing dealers with a dedicated elevator that no other convention
> attendees could use.
Again, incorrect. My suggestion, that even others continue to bring up,
was to have an elevator specifically for time-sensitive events for
convention goers. If someone had to be at, say, the fursuit parade, and
the elevators were getting congested, gopher one so that fursuiters
could use it to get to their event on time instead of hoping to catch an
elevator with enough room.
Same for the half hour before artists and dealers rooms opened. Allow
those people to get in so they could get to their events.
Guests, same thing. If they have an autograph session, or ceremonies,
why make them wait?
> I hope that I am not to be considered closed-minded for dismissing
> these helpful suggestions without comment.
It would help if you'd get the suggestions correct. Now who's painting
who in a bad light, Dr.?
> The email that I sent to him is private, but since he has insisted
> upon making it a public issue I feel that I am left with little choice
> but to quote my portion of it here, in its entirety. Having quoted
> some of his recent barbs, including one that suggested that there are
> many bigger, better conventions being held at the same time as
> Anthrocon, I said only:
And the earlier one?
Sir, you are seriously beginning to become an annoyance. I shall speak
to the party in question and ask her not to discuss the issue.
Thereafter, I prefer that you not contact us again. I do not feel it is
in the best interest of the organization for us to continue our association.
-- S. C. Conway, Chairman
> "I think, Sir, that it is time you took your business to one of those
> other conventions."
>
> That is not intended to be a ban. If Mr. Bair was banned from
> attending, I assure you, he would know it. It was an expression of my
> bewilderment as to why, when Mr. Bair obviously believes that
> Anthrocon is not providing him with the service he feels that he
> deserves, he continues to attend and be miserable, or at least unhappy
> enough that he finds it necessary to stir up antipathy toward our
> organization in a public forum frequented by its membership. If it
> appears that I am forbidding him from attending the convention, then I
> apologize for my vagueness.
Again, if I'm not to associate with, contact or I'm to take my business
elsehwere, what do you suggest that is?
> Neither I nor Anthrocon's board of directors (who have also taken
> exception to his comments) will have any further comment on this
> issue. Flamewars take too much time and energy, and right now, as I
> hope the reader can understand, we are a little busy.
Yes. I'm sure everyone appreciates you working on getting Anthrocon 2005
going. I hope you certainly do and can make do with what you have to
work with. It's a shame you attempted to libel me, much like your
associate has slandered me, just to try to come out clean, instead of
actually admitting some fallability.
But, I do wish you good luck in getting Anthrocon 2005 going.
iBuck
>him special dispensation for additional dealer tables beyond the usual
>alotment
With appropriate support, given to the con, such as the $700 ($500 to the con,
$200 marketing on our part) some odd that was spent on the pretzel fest in
2003, or an arangement like that Dragon's Lair or Rabbit Valley/Circles got in
2004 (asuming it was within or price range). We were facing a realistic issue,
of given our stock, not having enough room to have enough available to make the
con economical that we solved it through some creative arangement of our space.
>and indicative of a desire to bend public >opinion against
>Anthrocon in order to force us to give him his >way.
As PF's coworker, I can assure people that his intention, was not to "force"
the con to do anything, but simply the result of several extremely strong
willed and opinionated people coming into a conflict of opinion.
The fundametal issue between PF and AC, however is not dealers space, but the
misunderstandings around the 2003 panels, which resulted in PF's proposals for
future panels at AC and other conventions being denied. I did my best to
mediate it, and get the facts of the issue to everyone, and frankly I don't
think the facts of the matter would justify the denial, however the personality
clash that ensued has had the effect that the facts alone should not have.
Now, as to his specific suggestions, the bulk of which can be found below..
http://www.anthrocon.org/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=20
http://www.anthrocon.org/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=721&postdays=0&postord
er=asc&start=0
>+ removing Artists' Alley so that we could put in more dealer tables,
>+ removing the Art Show so that we could put in more dealer tables,
Not -removing- but moving, in the context of a possible distribution of events
between the AM and the spillover hotels.
>+ providing dealers with a dedicated elevator that no other convention
>attendees could use.
Not so much "dedicated" but giving dealers priority during a short and
specific periods, at the opening and closing of the dealers room, when they're
taking stock back and forth to their rooms, and were handicapped large loads,
with the AM's elevators the suggestion also encompased allowing other groups,
priority at other times, such as fursuiters before the masquerade.
>"I think, Sir, that it is time you took your business to one of those
>other conventions."
I think his sense of being banned comes from earlier discussions over the panel
issue, where it was stated...
"Sir, you are seriously beginning to become an annoyance. I shall speak to the
party in question and ask her not to discuss the issue. Thereafter, I prefer
that you not contact us again. I do not feel it is in the best interest of the
organization for us to continue our association.
-- S. C. Conway, Chairman "
As such, we have not applied for dealer space for AC 2005, though I am
attending myself as an artist..
Dale Farmer
The Hyena Who Knows Just As You wrote:
> Dale Farmer <da...@cybercom.net> shall never vanquished be until great
> Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
>
> >PlanetFur wrote:
> >
> >> The Hyena Who Knows Just As You wrote:
> >>
> >> < Tale of woe deleted. >
> >
> > If you actually put your name in your post, I may actually give
> >you some credulity. But you don't, so I don't.
>
> dude, It's the guy who runs planetfur. go and look up the
> planetfur.com/ and/or dragonmagic.com adress or something.
Ah, he runs a web site. I had never heard of it. Good for him,
that gives his opinions on running a web site some credibility. That
still doesn't excuse not using a real name.
--Dale
iBuck
>that gives his opinions on running a web site some credibility. That
>still doesn't excuse not using a real name.
Except that if you go looking, that his real name is pretty easily findable at
the site...
Much the same way people can find out who "Uncle Kage", "Tamar" etc know who
they're talking to...
Pseudonyms just shouldn't be an issue here...
PlanetFur
> Ah, he runs a web site. I had never heard of it. Good for him,
> that gives his opinions on running a web site some credibility. That
> still doesn't excuse not using a real name.
>
> --Dale
Name's Christopher Bair.
Personal site at http://www.christopherbair.com/
Published in FurNation Magazine 3 times, published in Fur Visions once.
Currently helping a local writer's workshop that meets monthly, and I
have a very small business routing vending and arcade machines to local
shops, besides the Dragon Magic/PlanetFur situation.
And except for Ian Williams' help at conventions, art and layout
assistance for the online sites, and his dedication and support, I do
these all alone.
I assisted the anime convention Ohayocon before its initial year with
ideas and suggestions, and they've grown very well on their own since
then. I plan on assisting and helping Ikasucon for next year, as that
was a really fun convention for me and a friend who flew in from out of
the country.
I've been attending conventions since about 1990, and been a dealer or
artist since 1998. All types of conventions, not just furry.
And except for the complaints that Anthrocon's staff supposedly heard,
my workshops and panels have had no complaints I've been informed of,
and still to this day people who have been to them before ask me why I
didn't do any at the con for that year.
These attacks, as some perceive them, isn't to bring down Anthrocon, but
to showcase the problems that persist that still haven't been addressed.
I have seen the same destructive nature with the politicking and the
"good ol' boys" not only in conventions but also in the business world,
and it never does anything any good.
I presented these as wake-up calls. Regardless of what happens, I'm
still not attending Anthrocon with the same staff on board. The value of
other, larger cons cannot be missed, and I'd rather not have the
persistent headaches AC presents.
Dale Farmer
PlanetFur wrote:
Then enjoy yourself at other conventions. Good day.
--Dale
Dan Skunk
"Swipecat" <swip...@see.replyto.header> wrote in message
I believe the individual in question should be fairly obvious to anyone
following the thread.
Dan Skunk
> Dan Skunk wrote:
>
> >>Case in point: an absurdly counterproductive post to this newsgroup,
> >>damaging your credibility further, and making your ability to function
> >>in this fandom a whole lot harder for yourself. How are other convention
> >>organizers that are aware of this thread going to view you now?
> >
> >
> > Obviously, libeling Kage and Anthrocon on Usenet and threatening them
with
> > legal action will not gain any sympathy from them--nor help your
reputation.
> >
> > If anything, it will only give more evidence that they would be wise not
to
> > associate with you.
> >
> > Oops. ;)
>
> Let's see... Did I libel? Nope. Please point out where I have?
>
against them. Which is false and seeks to damage their reputation.
> Did I threaten legal action? Nope. I said I was considering speaking to
> a lawyer to get the convention to stop slandering me, sure, because past
> attempts to get them to clarify things was met with silence.
>
Does not speaking to a lawyers show an intent to examine what legal recourse
you have the right to; and does that not imply that you are considering
legal action?
> As I stated, far larger cons are happy to have me there and have their
> situation together. I have no problems going to them and making more
money.
Dr. Conway did respond to this thread stating, "the issues that he seems to
believe were behind my motivation for contacting him were never acted upon
by Anthrocon..."
If you wish to make an accusation against Anthrocon for slander, we would
need to demonstrate that such slander against you is the official position
of Anthrocon and not just the personal opinion of one of it's staff.
If it's only an individual that you have a dispute with, you should take the
matter up with that individual.
If that individual is claiming to be representing the opinion of Anthrocon
while making slanderous remarks, I'm sure Anthrocon would be quick to
clarify their position (which they seem to have done already) and take
appropriate corrective action against that individual. There is no reason
for them to want to support someone who is misrepresenting them and damaging
their reputation.
Anthrocon is not a vehicle for resolving personal grievances and I'm sure
they will not tolerate being used as leverage in such disputes.
Todd Knarr
> I hope that I am not to be considered closed-minded for dismissing
> these helpful suggestions without comment.
If you dismissed those "suggestions" without comment, you're a better
man than I am.
--
All I want out of the Universe is 10 minutes with the source code and
a quick recompile.
-- unknown
PlanetFur
>>Let's see... Did I libel? Nope. Please point out where I have?
>
> Your inital post saying that they shun anyone who voices any complaint
> against them. Which is false and seeks to damage their reputation.
From what I've observed and experienced, no it's not. I've seen quite a
few other people also have the same thing happen. "Kage, this is wrong."
"Well, what do you want me to do about it!?" "How about this?" "We can't
do that."
That's not libel. That happens.
>>Did I threaten legal action? Nope. I said I was considering speaking to
>>a lawyer to get the convention to stop slandering me, sure, because past
>>attempts to get them to clarify things was met with silence.
>
> Does not speaking to a lawyers show an intent to examine what legal recourse
> you have the right to; and does that not imply that you are considering
> legal action?
Speaking to a lawyer is a way to examine what legal recourses I have. It
is not threatening legal action.
Saying I'm going to sue if something doesn't happen is threatening legal
action.
I talk to lawyers before signing contracts. Does this mean I'm
threatening legal action against the contract bearers?
>>As I stated, far larger cons are happy to have me there and have their
>>situation together. I have no problems going to them and making more
>> money.
>
> Dr. Conway did respond to this thread stating, "the issues that he seems to
> believe were behind my motivation for contacting him were never acted upon
> by Anthrocon..."
>
> If you wish to make an accusation against Anthrocon for slander, we would
> need to demonstrate that such slander against you is the official position
> of Anthrocon and not just the personal opinion of one of it's staff.
Seeing as how it was corroborated by a staff member named Jessie, it
seems at least two staff members were well aware of what happened. And
when I sent that email demanding the con to cease, it was still that
person's assertion that "I did the crime, I should do the time" for what
I did at the panel, which never happened.
And yes, the staff was made well aware that those events did not happen
immediately when they were discovered, and were given neutral parties to
confirm the truth.
They declined.
> If it's only an individual that you have a dispute with, you should take the
> matter up with that individual.
Except that it's not just an individual, but who knows how many staff
members. If Kage or the events planner heard bad stuff about me from a
panel, should not ONE of them have come to me before telling other cons
that it happened?
That is irresponsible of the convention.
What happens if, say, Shawntae Howard does a panel on how to ink comic
book pages, and someone who hates the Extinctioners goes to it. That
person then complains that Shawntae was drawing full nude photos in
front of everyone.
You'd think that the staff would at least ask Shawntae what happened
before telling anyone else about the complaint, no?
> If that individual is claiming to be representing the opinion of Anthrocon
> while making slanderous remarks, I'm sure Anthrocon would be quick to
> clarify their position (which they seem to have done already) and take
> appropriate corrective action against that individual. There is no reason
> for them to want to support someone who is misrepresenting them and damaging
> their reputation.
They haven't yet. According to the person from the other convention, it
was word he received "from Anthrocon", not from the individual.
Anthrocon has yet to apologize for the problem or do anything regarding
it. I've asked several times and still nothing.
> Anthrocon is not a vehicle for resolving personal grievances and I'm sure
> they will not tolerate being used as leverage in such disputes.
Yet, the person who began this whole affair is *still* on staff, last I saw.
PlanetFur
> If you dismissed those "suggestions" without comment, you're a better
> man than I am.
I still notice people are taking Kage's side as truth, even though even
he had to correct his message (still incorrect), and Ian Williams posted
some of my public comments.
Sorry, Kage's insistence that those were my suggestions are false.
Dan Skunk
> Dan Skunk wrote:
>
> >>Let's see... Did I libel? Nope. Please point out where I have?
> >
> > Your inital post saying that they shun anyone who voices any complaint
> > against them. Which is false and seeks to damage their reputation.
>
> From what I've observed and experienced, no it's not. I've seen quite a
> few other people also have the same thing happen. "Kage, this is wrong."
> "Well, what do you want me to do about it!?" "How about this?" "We can't
> do that."
>
> That's not libel. That happens.
>
It would have to be something more like, "Kage, this is wrong." "Shut up or
leave!"
I also think a better way to introduce a suggestion would be, "this would be
improved if..." rather than making an implication of someone making a
mistake. Not that your intention would necessarily be missunderstood the
other way, but this would be more tactful.
I've unfortunately made mistakes in being too insistant on a point and
letting my frustration turn into anger, which turned into a fight, which
pretty much ensure no one is listening to the other. My ideas were later
adopted anyway, so had I shown more patience, there would have been no
problem. Someone who has a lot of responsibilites to fulfill will often just
be too busy to spend a lot of time considering every idea presented to them
immediately.
> >>Did I threaten legal action? Nope. I said I was considering speaking to
> >>a lawyer to get the convention to stop slandering me, sure, because past
> >>attempts to get them to clarify things was met with silence.
> >
> > Does not speaking to a lawyers show an intent to examine what legal
recourse
> > you have the right to; and does that not imply that you are considering
> > legal action?
>
> Speaking to a lawyer is a way to examine what legal recourses I have. It
> is not threatening legal action.
>
> Saying I'm going to sue if something doesn't happen is threatening legal
> action.
>
> I talk to lawyers before signing contracts. Does this mean I'm
> threatening legal action against the contract bearers?
>
No, but in this context, mentioning that course of action, makes an obvious
implication. If you were not trying to gain some kind of legal leverage with
your argument, you should not have mentioned lawyers--who's purpose is to
provide legal counsel.
In which case, I suppose, you would have little choice but to protest in
your defence. Just be very carful about it. Perhaps have others who were
involved corroborate your story and show their support when you make your
appeal.
I don't have the information needed to judge who is right or wrong in this
particular case.
> Anthrocon has yet to apologize for the problem or do anything regarding
> it. I've asked several times and still nothing.
>
> > Anthrocon is not a vehicle for resolving personal grievances and I'm
sure
> > they will not tolerate being used as leverage in such disputes.
>
> Yet, the person who began this whole affair is *still* on staff, last I
saw.
Removal from staff would only be a last resort, I think.
Mike and Carole
Okay, now I remember you. Sorry, at AC, things get intensely busy.
On power struggles at other fandoms.....
There has never been a Superman convention of note attempted. (not
withstanding the Cleveland attempt). Many Superman collectors are extremely
competitive. Right now there are attempts (and I am participating as much
as I can) on doing a George Reeves convention.
>
>> I'll reserve comment until I can place a face with the posts, but so far
>> as the way Kage and company run Anthrocon, it really comes down to one
>> thing.
>>
>> They are the ones taking the risk/paying out the front money/doing the
>> work.
>
> And, like yourself, I take the risk of paying out my money up front to go
> to the convention. It's just as much of a risk for me, since I have
> limited resources to make back that (table space, time frame, etc.).
>
> If Anthrocon reserves the right to do as it pleases, then why is it so
> far-fetched that I cannot raise concerns or complaints about major
> problems with how the weekend was? Namely, size of the dealer's room (so
> more dealers could be included) and the way the elevators have been
> handled?
Raising concerns is no big deal. The delay about Dealer's registration for
2005 upset most dealers, although it really only surprised us.
I think with you and Anthrocon, it's going to have to be an "agree to
disagree" situation, and you may choose to disagree by not attending.
With us, even though the tables are getting more expensive each year, it's
still (for the time being) a good deal for us to attend, not just
financially, but also for most of the far flung SFA Crew to see each other.
In any case, good luck whatever you decide.
Mike
Elf M. Sternberg
> Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
> > PlanetFur <plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> writes:
Not if the contract you agreed to says you don't.
Elf
PlanetFur
> With us, even though the tables are getting more expensive each year, it's
> still (for the time being) a good deal for us to attend, not just
> financially, but also for most of the far flung SFA Crew to see each other.
>
> In any case, good luck whatever you decide.
>
> Mike
Sure thing. I will be restocking before the convention next year, and
Extinctioners is definitely one of the titles I need some extra issues
for. I'll contact you closer to the season.
Thanks again, Mike, and hope next year's con is enjoyable and profitable
for you.
Brian Henderson
<plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote:
>Did I threaten legal action? Nope. I said I was considering speaking to
>a lawyer to get the convention to stop slandering me, sure, because past
>attempts to get them to clarify things was met with silence.
Hmmm, can you prove slander? Can you demonstrate financial loss
solely because of their statements? Can you prove they're saying
anything about you at all, in an official capacity as convention
heads?
Nope? Don't have a case then. Move along.
Brian Henderson
<plan...@nospam-planetfur.com> wrote:
>Only suggesting or criticising is always met with the staff constantly
>saying "Can't do that!" or "That won't work"... Like it's all from a script.
Hate to say it, but it's still their con. They make the decisions,
like it or not. They come up with the hotel criteria based solely on
their own ideas.
>And the other problem with your theory is that it's something free. It
>isn't. If I pay nearly $700 just for my space at a convention, and the
>convention completely screws up with that, then hell yes they will hear
>about it. If they don't like that, that's $700 they won't get year after
>year.
Well, since you seem to be banned, I don't think you have to worry
about it, do you?
Vote with your feet. If you don't like it, go elsewhere.
>When fewer dealers stick around because the cost doesn't justify the
>headaches or profits they earn (especially artists who voiced their
>complaints that they paid for dealers' tables and the artists who just
>paid $5 or $10 are right behind them), then what?
Then Kage will figure it out when his dealer sales go down and his
membership wanes. Is it? Doesn't seem to be...
>Would you rather the convention suffer because no one should complain?
>Or would you rather that the convention listen and consider that
>complaints just may be valid and should be worked out before they become
>major issues?
No, I'd rather that if you want to complain, you do so in a
constructive manner. Xydexx is right, don't just bitch, find
solutions. Suggest, don't demand. It isn't your convention, you have
absolutely no power and no say, but if you try to help them improve, I
see nothing wrong with that.
But the improvements are *THEIRS* to make, if they *CHOOSE* to.
Timmy Ramone
complain about political discussions in a.f.f.
--
Visit the "Usual Suspects" weblog:
http://www.browncross.com/usualsuspects/
"Bowl a strike, not a spare -- revolution everywhere!" -RABL motto
c...@bga.com
PlanetFur wrote:
> How is this *not* a ban?
> If these aren't bans, what would you consider a ban, Dr.?
You know, I'd make fun of this guy, but he seems to do a pretty good
job of making himself look ridiculous on his own, with no help from me.
I guess maybe he thinks if he doesn't get to speak on panels or chat
with the convention director or staff, but is only able to pay the
regular admission fee and attend the events like everyone else, he is
"banned-ed" or "bannified".
Or he thinks that someone OFFICIAL AND IMPORTANT saying "If you don't
like the con you should go to other cons instead" isn't making a
"suggestion" but a "Banishment Proclamation Of Doom".
Or maybe, as he wanders through life, he's just not paying much
attention
to the details along the way. Who knows?
-- Dr. Cat / www.furcadia.com / You know the drill
(Disclaimer: The really funny part though, is how he said that he
wasn't
going to go to Anthrocon 2005 because Anthrocon suxx0rs so much (in his
opinion) - but then when he mistakenly thought he was banned from the
con
he was refusing to go to anyway - he made a big fuss about it! Now
that's
comedy. The food sucks - and the portions are so small!)
(Disclaimer Disclaimer: He actually does have valid reasons for going
on
about Anthrocon's alleged banning policies and practices, even though
he
wasn't going anyway. It's a purely altruistic gesture on his part,
which
he undertook in order to help all the REST of us who still do attend
Anthrocon. He knew it would help us because A) we hold his opinions in
such high regard, and B) he made sure to get his facts straight about
whether he was banned or not right off, so that we could be assured he
was sharing accurate information with us that we might want or need.)
(Disclaimer Disclaimer Disclaimer: Actually part B above is wrong, he
was
totally incorrect about whether or not he was banned from Anthrocon.
My
apologies. But that whole "high regard in which we hold his opinions"
is
enough to keep his altruistic gesture from being wasted here, isn't it?
Huh?)
Swipecat
>After reading all this nonsense I don't ever want to hear anyone
>complain about political discussions in a.f.f.
It might be nonsense, but it's novel nonsense, and on-topic nonsense.
We've not had someone whine about being banned from someplace for,
ohhh... months.
I don't object to off-topic stuff either; what I object to is the SAME
repetitive off-topic stuff, with nothing new to say, day after day, week
after week, month after month, year after year...
--
Swipecat
mouse
news:ezntd.246$xk3...@fe51.usenetserver.com:
>> Oops. ;)
>
> I believe the individual in question should be fairly obvious to
> anyone following the thread.
CatsWipe is notorious for this level of ineptitude. Please forgive him.
Swipecat
>CatsWipe is notorious for this level of ineptitude. Please forgive him.
Was that meant to be an insult, mouse? Upset about something, eh?
Something I said? ;)
--
Swipecat
PlanetFur
>>How is this *not* a ban?
>
> [snip]
>
>>If these aren't bans, what would you consider a ban, Dr.?
>
> You know, I'd make fun of this guy, but he seems to do a pretty good
> job of making himself look ridiculous on his own, with no help from me.
>
> I guess maybe he thinks if he doesn't get to speak on panels or chat
> with the convention director or staff, but is only able to pay the
> regular admission fee and attend the events like everyone else, he is
> "banned-ed" or "bannified".
"Please do not contact Anthrocon"
"Do not associate with Anthrocon"
"Take your business elsewhere"
Damn, I must be so stupid, those aren't bans. Nosirree.
> Or he thinks that someone OFFICIAL AND IMPORTANT saying "If you don't
> like the con you should go to other cons instead" isn't making a
> "suggestion" but a "Banishment Proclamation Of Doom".
That isn't what Kage said in any of the emails. He was direct in telling
me not to go.
If that's not what he meant, perhaps he should stop playing PR for the
con, as he has a terrible time saying what he means.
> Or maybe, as he wanders through life, he's just not paying much
> attention
> to the details along the way. Who knows?
And yet, Dr. Samuel Conway, in his attempt to libel me, had to correct
his own lies after posting them. He could not even get his initial
attack proper.
My details have been dead on.
> (Disclaimer: The really funny part though, is how he said that he
> wasn't
> going to go to Anthrocon 2005 because Anthrocon suxx0rs so much (in his
> opinion) - but then when he mistakenly thought he was banned from the
> con
> he was refusing to go to anyway - he made a big fuss about it! Now
> that's
> comedy. The food sucks - and the portions are so small!)
Again, how am I complaining? I'm pointing out how Kage treats people,
and how the convention's staff takes to "suggestions", as Xydexx kept
complaining people *aren't* doing.
Well, who's going to suggest anything when year after year they keep
getting the suggestions tossed immediately back to them with "We can't
do that!"
Don't let the details get in your way, of course, which is what you
accuse me of missing.
> (Disclaimer Disclaimer: He actually does have valid reasons for going
> on
> about Anthrocon's alleged banning policies and practices, even though
> he
> wasn't going anyway. It's a purely altruistic gesture on his part,
> which
> he undertook in order to help all the REST of us who still do attend
> Anthrocon. He knew it would help us because A) we hold his opinions in
> such high regard, and B) he made sure to get his facts straight about
> whether he was banned or not right off, so that we could be assured he
> was sharing accurate information with us that we might want or need.)
>
> (Disclaimer Disclaimer Disclaimer: Actually part B above is wrong, he
> was
> totally incorrect about whether or not he was banned from Anthrocon.
> My
> apologies. But that whole "high regard in which we hold his opinions"
> is
> enough to keep his altruistic gesture from being wasted here, isn't it?
> Huh?)
No, I am banned. If I'm not, Kage needs to learn what "do not associate
with", "do not contact" and "please take your business elsewhere" mean.
I think the same go to those who follow him religiously.
PlanetFur
> It might be nonsense, but it's novel nonsense, and on-topic nonsense.
> We've not had someone whine about being banned from someplace for,
> ohhh... months.
Maybe mouse is accurate in depicting you, Swipecat. Who's whining? I'm
not returning to Anthrocon with its staff as it is.
I'm pointing out how inaccurate people are in discussing the
infallability of the staff and how Kage treats people who have
complaints and concerns. Sorry if this ruins anyone's view of it, but so
far I haven't lied about anything.
BR
> "Please do not contact Anthrocon"
>
> "Do not associate with Anthrocon"
>
> "Take your business elsewhere"
>
> Damn, I must be so stupid, those aren't bans. Nosirree.
I suppose one test of "banned" would be to go, and see what happens.
--
-- James Fenimore Cooper
The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes,
knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.
Intergalactic Space Hyenas
alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
>You know, I'd make fun of this guy, but he seems to do a pretty good
>job of making himself look ridiculous on his own, with no help from me.
Did Uncle Kage tell you to come post that here?
---
We fired our cannons till the barrels melted down,
Then we grabbed an alligator and we fired another round.
We filled his head with cannonballs and powdered his behind,
And when we touched the powder off, the gator lost his mind.
c...@bga.com
No, I make fun of people entirely out of my own motivation.
Usually I look for whoever's most ridiculous or most obnoxious on the
newsgroup at the time, hoping humor might be at least a partial
antidote.
If it's note - well at least it steal means there's more humor in the
world. :X)
-- Dr. Cat
(Disclaimer: When someone is both the most ridiculous AND the most
obnoxious at the same time, that's just a bonus.)
(Disclaimer Disclaimer: I'm not saying this guy is both, mind you. Of
course
I'm not saying he isn't. You decide for yourselves, 'k?)
Don Sanders
need to be addressed. ***
In article <cp77sm$25a1$2...@velox.critter.net>, planetfur@nospam-
planetfur.com says...
> Swipecat wrote:
>
> > It might be nonsense, but it's novel nonsense, and on-topic nonsense.
> > We've not had someone whine about being banned from someplace for,
> > ohhh... months.
>
> Maybe mouse is accurate in depicting you, Swipecat. Who's whining? I'm
> not returning to Anthrocon with its staff as it is.
I figure that is your choice, no problem with that. However, it does
appear that as you are walking out the door in regards to the con, it
appears you are trying to take as many with you as you can. Although I
can understand that misery loves company, maybe you should think twice
about using the readership to get back at the con. Some of us really
don't feel like being used as tools. That is my impression, my opinion.
>
> I'm pointing out how inaccurate people are in discussing the
> infallability of the staff and how Kage treats people who have
> complaints and concerns. Sorry if this ruins anyone's view of it, but so
> far I haven't lied about anything.
I can safely say that my view has been ruined, but not by the con. If
anything, the unprofessional way this whole affair has been handled
ruined it for me. As for the apology, I'm leaving that open for
definition. If you taken the language of the con chair as an indication
that you have been banned, I just as well take the language of you
saying sorry about ruining everyone's view as not being sincere.
At the least until you can prove otherwise.
--
Don Sanders.
Just a fan, now becoming a disgruntled consumer.
Don Sanders
swip...@see.replyto.header says...
to roam these newsgroup, but now have cloistered himself on a forum with
little relevance and significance to the genre.
--
Don Sanders.
iBuck
>No, I make fun of people entirely out of my own motivation.
Long time no see, by the way...
"You can have it Quickly,Correct, Complex - Pick 2"
c...@bga.com
> "Please do not contact Anthrocon"
> "Do not associate with Anthrocon"
> "Take your business elsewhere"
You know, I never needed to "contact" Anthrocon or "Associate with
Anthrocon" to get in and have fun. All I ever needed to do was give
one
volunteer some money when I get there and get a badge, other than that
I've
been able to attend without having any need to talk to or interact with
the
staff at all. As for "take your business elsewhere", I believe Uncle
Kage
said his exact words were:
Uncle Kage wrote:
> "I think, Sir, that it is time you took your business
> to one of those other conventions."
> That is not intended to be a ban.
I don't see "you must", or "I insist that you do so" or "and if you
don't we won't
take your business". I'd read that more as a somewhat harsh suggestion
than
an act of force or banishment. And given your apparent frequent and
verbose complaining, it doesn't surprise me a bit if their attitude
would be
"You can come to our con, but leave our staff alone, we're sick of
talking to
you, and we don't want you on any panels either". Or if someone would
say to
you "If you hate how we run things and think other cons are better for
you, why
don't you just go there?" Which apparently you had already decided to
do
anyway!
Still, in the ABSENCE of any further clarification to those statements,
I
could see how someone might think "Hey does that mean I'm banned?"
or evenm if they like leaping to conclusions, "Hey I *am* banned". But
since there WAS further clarification afterwards....
Uncle Kage wrote:
> Contrary to reports, Mr. Bair is not banned from Anthrocon.
> If it appears that I am forbidding him from attending the convention,
then I
> apologize for my vagueness.
Well, given that very clear sort of clarification, I have to ask "what
part of
'Mr. Bair is not banned' did you not understand?" Why exactly is it
that
you don't KNOW that you aren't banned from Anthrocon?
Planetfur wrote;
> Damn, I must be so stupid, those aren't bans. Nosirree.
Ah, a theory is presented! In my own defense, I want everyone to note
here that it's Planetfur that suggested maybe it's because he's stupid,
and not me. But I can go farther than that. Take solace, good
Planetfur,
for I have ANOTHER theory that, if true, could possibly provide a quite
credible alternative for the public to believe in, other than this
possibility
that you're stupid. (See how helpful I am?)
My alternative theory is, Planetfur knows that he is not banned from
Anthrocon. But he has decided, for whatever reasons, to say a bunch
of stuff publically about his dislike of Anthrocon, hoping (among other
things) to sway people reading his comments to be closer to his own
personal point of view on the subject. Considering this goal, he then
calculatedly pondered "Will it sway more people to an anti-AC point of
view if I say I wasn't banned, but they suggested I take my business
elsewhere, or would it sway more people to my side if I say I was in
fact
totally forbidden to ever attend again under any circumstances?" I
further
posit that Mr. Planetfur concluded "Saying I was banned would win me
more sympathy and also incur more antipathy towards Anthrocon, and thus
that's what I'll say."
Viewed in this light, you see, Mr. Planetfur doesn't appear so much
"stupid"
or "unable to tell whether he's banned or not", but more like "clever,
scheming,
even brilliant". In much the same manner as Wile E. Coyote, Genius.
Ok, granted, if his plan fails and indeed backfires spectacularly, as
all the
readers of alt.fan.furry realize that he is in fact not banned by
Anthrocon's
staff, but rather is "considered highly annoying"... Then maybe he's
not
going to come off as quite so genius-like. But hey, at least he tried,
so I
think he can come off better here than the kind of TOTALLY stupid guy
who
would fail to realize he wasn't banned after hearing the director of a
con
say publically:
Uncle Kage wrote:
> Contrary to reports, Mr. Bair is not banned from Anthrocon.
I don't care what Mr. Planetfur's worst detractors, such as Mr.
Planetfur say
when they hurl accusations like "Damn, I must be so stupid" against
him.
*I* don't think he's so stupid. I think he's merely making a failed
attempt at
manipulating public opinion. And therefore is actually eminently
qualified
for a high-paying career in politics!
On another subject:
Planetfur wrote:
> Again, how am I complaining?
My first clue, even before I read the text of the first post in this
thread, was
in the title. Which appears on ever single message in the thread to
remind
us. I think most people here would consider "Vote of NO confidence in
Kage/Anthrocon" to fall into the category of "complaints". I (and, I
think,
most people) would also classify pretty much every statement in that
initial post as a complaint. Note that even if everything you said is
100%
correct, that doesn't mean it's not a complaint. To quote Princess
Bride,
"I do not think that word means what you think it means". You could
further sub-categorize complaints as "accurate complaints" and
"inaccurate
complaints", or as "polite complaints" and "whiny complaints", "angry
complaints", "rude complaints", etc. But I think it's quite clear that
what you
said in the initial post (and in the title) falls into the category of
complaints.
If you don't own a dictionary, you can look up the word "complaint" on
websites such as www.dictionary.com.
Planetfur wrote:
> Well, who's going to suggest anything when year after year they keep
> getting the suggestions tossed immediately back to them with "We
can't
> do that!"
Probably not you, any more. At least I'd hope not! I've shown above a
strong possibility that you are, in fact, not stupid. So if you've
found that
the overall process of "suggesting stuff to Anthrocon" has been on the
whole an unsatisfactory or dissappointing one for you, I imagine you'd
stop (or have already stopped). As for other people - I really think
it's
between them and the con committee whether they feel they'd like to
make suggestions or not, and I really don't care whether they do or
don't.
Nor do I much care what percentage of those suggestions are used and
which not, or how they reply (or don't reply) to those giving
suggestions
that aren't used. From years of running Furcadia, I'm VERY aware that
running something large will result in more people giving suggestions
than you could ever possibly have time to reply to individually. And
that
many of the most obvious suggestions will be given to you many many
tmes, and that many things will be suggested that aren't practical but
the
person suggesting it won't necessarily have the background to know why,
and many things you DO plan to do will be suggested to you before you
do them, by people who will probably then later feel they deserve the
credit
for those things happening.
Personally, in spite of the intense desire "people using stuff" have to
make
suggestions to the producers or managers of that "stuff"... I don't
think that
the "implied social contract of human society" includes an obligation
for
anyone to act on suggestions, to reply to suggestions, or even to
listen to
suggestions at all - unless they explicitly state "we are making a
committment
to you to deal with your suggestions in such-and-such a way". If they
make
such a promise and don't keep it, that's bad. If they haven't, and you
expect
more than they promised ya - well expecting it won't make it so.
Personally
I think it's nice that they have a town meeting at the end of furry
cons and let
people not only make suggestions, but make 'em publically. I strongly
suspect
that after ignoring the things they already thought of, or can see in 5
seconds
they couldn't possibly do, or hear from some really rude guy, they
probably
talk over some of it in private later when they're planning the next
con. Though
if they're anything like us, it probably takes more of the form of "We
were
thinking about making these ten changes - but number 2 and number 7
each
got specifically asked for by several attendees at the con, let's think
about
whether we should make those ones higher priorities beacuse of that."
Anyway I think the big issue here is "is it a big deal whether they
handle
suggestions (and the politeness of their replies to them) well or
poorly?
Or is it not such a big deal and most people don't care?" I think the
answer
here is "Planetfur cares a whole bunch, most other people really don't
give
a damn about this tiny little detail of one con in one small fandom".
But
have fun giving a big damn in front of people that don't much care, if
that's
what you're into. I have plenty of popcorn ready for while I watch you
do it!
-- Dr. Cat
(Disclaimer: Just in case I'm mistaken and you, in fact, ARE stupid...
I think
I'd better repeat this again to help you figure out that you aren't
banned from
Anthrocon (even though you don't want to go and so it doesn't matter).
Uncle Kage wrote:
> Contrary to reports, Mr. Bair is not banned from Anthrocon.
I do think it's therefore misleading at best (and dishonest at worst)
to say
or imply "Anthrocon will ban people for minor stuff what they shouldn't
oughta ban people for". But again, if in fact you ARE stupid, then it
would
of course be an honest mistake to give such a misleading impression.
Personally, I think the claim that Anthrocon only bans people for
criminal
behavior is borne out by what I've heard about the very few people who
actually HAVE, unlike yourself, managed to get them banned. Again,
remember, you are NOT banned from Anthrocon, as evidenced by the
following statement from the convention chairman:
Uncle Kage wrote:
> Contrary to reports, Mr. Bair is not banned from Anthrocon.)
Swipecat
>Maybe mouse is accurate in depicting you, Swipecat.
Hmmm. Mouse also thinks that you should tell a police officer that he's
full of s---, if he deserves it. I honestly do wonder if you'd agree
with that too.
> Who's whining? I'm
>not returning to Anthrocon with its staff as it is.
Your choice. Do you consider that you can do no wrong whatsoever? If
something like this happens at another con, will you deal with it in
exactly the same way? Do you think that the reception that you've got so
far is totally perverse, given your flawless PR skills?
>I'm pointing out how inaccurate people are in discussing the
>infallability of the staff and how Kage treats people who have
>complaints and concerns. Sorry if this ruins anyone's view of it, but so
>far I haven't lied about anything.
When you present a viewpoint that runs counter to a consensus opinion
that's developed over several years, you need very good evidence to show
that you're right and the consensus is wrong. You've been throwing
around numerous derogatory terms, and generally characterising the staff
as being able to do no right, and yet other people's experience is that
any problems in that respect are minor. How do you think that reflects
on your credibility?
You've characterised Kage's post and correction as "libel" and having to
correct "lies" in his "attack", and yet we can read and characterise his
post for ourselves, even if we can't verify every fact. So you can
expect any mismatch between your characterisation and ours to reflect on
your credibility, again. If I went back over the last few days posts, I
think I could give a few more examples on the same theme.
But enough. I'll get off your case now.
--
Swipecat
The Saprophyte
c...@bga.com wrote:
(snip)
He said ban, doc, not banana.
(disclaimer: if Planetfur were to the tell the good doctor
to stick it in his ear, no matter how it's intended, it's
bound to be misinterpreted. There's a lesson in that somewheres.)
(Additional disclaimer: Aaaiiee! He's back!)
--
The Saprophyte
--
iBuck
>of stuff publically about his dislike of Anthrocon, hoping (among other
>
>things) to sway people reading his comments to be closer to his own
>personal point of view on the subject.
You know some motive would be helpfull here, it helps a lot to get people to
belive your intrepretation of events...
Let me offer a -very- simple one, PlanetFur is a perfectionist, and he gets
unhappy when things arn't done to makes things better, that he belives could
reasonably be done, and angry when confronted with what he finds to be excuses.
Especally if they don't match up to his personal experiences.
Having been a party to this, and having seen it develop -months- before this
issue came up, here I belive I can pretty unequivocally say that PF honestly
belived himself banned, based on his correspondance with Kage, well before this
incident, taken -literally- it's easy enough to regard "Don't contact AC" as
a ban, or at the very least a ban on attending as a dealer, because the dealers
do in fact have to contact anthrocon, to arrange membership and other matters,
if Kage didn't mean it that way, perhaps a "on this matter" should have been
included.
That being said, as well run and enjoyable as Anthrocon is, it -does- have it's
flaws, in the last few years, these have been concentrated around the growth of
the con, vs the limited amount of space available at the Adam's Mark, this has
lead to 2 problems of perception,
a) that the con staff was not active in exploring the posibility of a new and
larger hotel, (because people outside, untill recently have not known what the
criteria were, and becasue they don't know what hotels the con -has- exploored.
This was only exaberated when the proposal for Pitsburgh came up, and was
-below- the mininmum standard previously given and blew up with the AM going
out.
b) That the dealers, with a few special exceptions, were the ones who were
getting the short end of the stick, with regards to giving up space. (The
inability to make the same arangement in 2004, that was made in 2003, as well
as the change in dealer registration this year didn't help)
On top of it all, you have come cases of staff prefrence for particualar
solutions leading to such things as a voice poll of "do we want to have a
bigger con here at the Adams Mark, or do you want to walk to the Holiday Inn in
the Rain" (I'm paraphraseing, I'd have to look the exact terms up, but it was
I thought rather slanted, for a poll on where the con should go... )
I say these are problems of -perception- because the con at the last minute
-was- able to expand the dealers space. And has found a new venue that meets
all it's criteria (albeit in 2008)
Also, the staff, of Anthrocon, while hardworking and industrious, nevertheless
-are- human, and perhaps even because of their hard work, haven't had time to
throurougly explain the why and why not of why some actions have been taken,
or not taken, and people have sometimes found out about changes, with relitivly
short notice. Also, some responses have seemed a little hot under the collar,
and/or inconsitant. (the DDR tourney, vs Kages statement on the gaming board
that AC would not be sponsoring non anthro related video game tourneys -
inconsistant, but understandable given DDR's popularity)
In short, nobody's perfect here, and while PlanetFur's complaints might seem
overblown, they do point to legitimate issues.
On the other hand, I don't see a resolution coming anytime soon with regards to
the fundamental gap that resulted from the rumors and misunderstandings over
PF's 2003 panels, I did my best to get the facts to everyone, at least what I
was a party to, but the bad blood remains.
Don Sanders
NormD...@nolocale.com says...
Should I fire up my copy of "BananaPhone"?
:)
--
Don Sanders.
Who is glad the good Dr. is back, there has been a second banana
explosion going on here lately. :)
Ferret
"iBuck" <lncra...@aol.com.star> wrote in message
news:20041208175757...@mb-m13.aol.com...
> On the other hand, I don't see a resolution coming anytime soon with
> regards to
> the fundamental gap that resulted from the rumors and misunderstandings
> over
> PF's 2003 panels, I did my best to get the facts to everyone, at least
> what I
> was a party to, but the bad blood remains.
Just how much attention does PF think he, personally, deserves? He's one
attendee out of 2400 and one dealer out of around 130. He's made himself
look like a total insane asshat and yet he's gotten several replies from the
con chairmen during all the negotiation and scrambling that an unplanned for
venue change entails. Kage could just as easily ignored him entirely with
less potential downside. I submit that he's gotten more than he had any
right to expect. If he's such a damn genius with all the answers, then let
him start his own convention. If he wants to deal at larger conventions
focussing on different genres, then great. He's welcome to do so. He sure
seems to be grabbing for every straw he can get for somebody who has so many
other options.
iBuck
As much as any other...assuming it's -about- personal attention, that's -your-
assumption, not mine..
>Kage could just as easily ignored him entirely with
>less potential downside.
He probably should have, I don't think they helped anything.
>I submit that he's gotten more than he had any
>right to expect.
And that might be precicely what the problem is, squeeky wheel gets the axe
type of thing.
>If he's such a damn genius with all the answers, then let
>him start his own convention. If he wants to deal at larger conventions
>focussing on different genres, then great. He's welcome to do so.
And he may well do so... that doesn't mean that AC should be immune to some
legit, if overstated critism.
But, you seem to have missed the entire point, of the one paragraph you quoted.
That the fundametal issue between them is -personal- and not about the con
management, the events between 2003 and 2004, just left too much bad blood,
after the rumors and misunderstanding were cleared up.
PlanetFur
> Just how much attention does PF think he, personally, deserves?
The same as anyone else who paid money to go to Anthrocon?
> He's one
> attendee out of 2400 and one dealer out of around 130. He's made himself
> look like a total insane asshat and yet he's gotten several replies from the
> con chairmen during all the negotiation and scrambling that an unplanned for
> venue change entails.
And I never requested any word with Kage, as I know that gets nowhere.
The only things I've been wanting from Kage are the apology and
clarification for what his staff lied about me, and just to stop telling
people who make suggestions "We can't do that!" or "That's impossible!"
without saying why, when he, and, as this thread begain, Xydexx and Dan
have done, tell people to suggest things to the con.
Look back and stop being clouded with your own misgivings about what
this whole thing has been about.
> Kage could just as easily ignored him entirely with
> less potential downside.
Kage really *should not* be debating anything about the convention. He
should have a person on staff to do this. It didn't help that Kage came
here and lied again to try to cover up his ineptitude.
I don't need to sway anyone's opinions of anything, merely wise people
up to the fact that suggesting things to the convention gets you
nowhere, and complaining is a fast track to make sure you'll be
unwelcome at the convention. And so far, from all the different
conventions I've been to, and others have been to, Anthrocon is the only
place that has these problems.
> I submit that he's gotten more than he had any
> right to expect.
Based on your opinion, of course.
> If he's such a damn genius with all the answers, then let
> him start his own convention.
So, to prove myself better, I have to start my own convention? I still
cannot fathom this elementary-school-logic that persists on AFF.
"If you don't like it, start your own!"
So if you don't like something about Anthrocon, you have absolutely no
right to complain about it or offer suggestions, unless you want to go
start your own convention?
Since when did Anthrocon stop being about the people who attended it,
and start being the staff's convention?
> If he wants to deal at larger conventions
> focussing on different genres, then great. He's welcome to do so.
And I already do, and have been doing so for many years. Dealers,
attendees and volunteers are often treated better at these, and any
politicking is generally weeded out before it gets too far. Those who
can't stop it, usually end up failing in a few years.
> He sure
> seems to be grabbing for every straw he can get for somebody who has so many
> other options.
Again, how am I grabbing at straws to warn people and to showcase the
problems that persist at AC, when I already made the decision not to
return during the 2004 show? This, still, I cannot see logically.
But if it helps you protect that image that Kage, et. al., are
infallable, I'll let you sleep at night.
PlanetFur
> But, you seem to have missed the entire point, of the one paragraph you quoted.
> That the fundametal issue between them is -personal- and not about the con
> management, the events between 2003 and 2004, just left too much bad blood,
> after the rumors and misunderstanding were cleared up.
And, don't forget, the con staffer, and those involved in helping to
propagate the lies, when confronted with the truth, never apologized or
attempted to clear things up.
I'd still like that to happen. I'm sure no one else anywhere would
appreciate an organization with some clout telling others horrible
things you've done, that never ever happened.
c...@bga.com
> Should I fire up my copy of "BananaPhone"?
That's the easiest question I've ever been asked in my life.
"Yes!"
-- Dr. Cat
(Disclaimer: I don't own an actual real bananaphone - yet.)
c...@bga.com
> He said ban, doc, not banana.
Hmmm, that's an important point.
Actually, if Uncle Kage ever starts to banana people from
Anthrocon, let me know. I'll try to find out what kind of
misbehavior I have to perform in order to get him to banana
me from the con. If I could ever get banana-ed from the con,
I'd be sure to go back again every year as long as I live!
-- Dr. Cat / feline since 1980 / www.furcadia.com
(Disclaimer: They've legalized fruit in Massachussets now, but
not in Pennsylvania yet.)
c...@bga.com
> Let me offer a -very- simple one, PlanetFur is a perfectionist, and
he
> gets unhappy when things arn't done to makes things better, that he
> belives could reasonably be done, and angry when confronted with
> what he finds to be excuses. Especally if they don't match up to his
> personal experiences.
Perfectionist - that explains a lot. I've had to deal with
perfectionists
before, they can often be a pain in the ass. I've also BEEN one
myself,
about some aspects of my work & life (not all) - but I know the
critical
"first rule of perfectionists", which he obviously never learned.
Expect
(or at least strive for) perfection ONLY from YOURSELF. Not from
anyone else. Expect imperfection from everyone else, learn to live
with it, learn to deal with it, and don't get pissed off when you see
it.
There's so many corollaries to this. Other people won't always
AGREE with you which way is best, and they have a RIGHT not
to agree. Sometimes they'll be right and you'll be wrong! AND,
on those occasions when you're right and THEY are the one that
is wrong, they have every right to make choices for themselves
based on their own judgement, opinions, preferences, etc.
Furthermore, some people (i.e. most) don't happen to feel
motivated to try as hard as you to be perfect, and guess what -
they have the right to live that way too.
Anyway, perfectionist or not, mentioning some idea you think
someone might want to hear politely is nice. Getting upset if
they don't want to use your idea is non-nice. Getting pushy
about how you present your ideas, berating someone for not
doing what you think they should have, or telling third parties
that they suck for not doing what you thought they oughta do,
that's not nice.
It's worth being nice in life, most of the time. That's what I've
found.
> gets unhappy when things arn't done to makes things better
Buddha realized after sitting in the desert and thinking for a long
time that "all suffering is caused by desire". His first response
was to try and give up desire. "It won't bother me if Anthrocon
doesn't improve if I stop wanting people to improve all of the
imperfections I see as I go through life." That's one approach.
But later in life, I think Buddha realized "I can go back to wanting
stuff again, if I just make up my mind to not really care when I fail
to get something I wanted." Under that thinking you could say "I
want Anthrocon to improve. I'll mention something, maybe it'll
make a difference, maybe it won't, but that's not so important.
Oh, Anthrocon hasn't improved as much as I wanted, oh well.
Time to move on to wanting the next thing I'm going to want
from life and trying to get it, without insulting anyone. Whee!"
Buddha was a smart guy.
> that he belives could reasonably be done
He has a bit too much arrogance about assuming he knows,
in my personal opinion. I suppose most people probably do,
but he's particularly rude about going and shooting off his
mouth about it.
Personally I probably know more about the issues involved
in trying to run a con than the average con-goer. But rather
than get arrogant about it, I would like to think that knowledge
is just enough for me to know why I should give some props
and some respect to people who have a hundred times the
knowledge and experience I do on the subject. If they were
to tell me something would cost more than I might think, or
take more work than I'd think, or involve problems I don't
know about - my default assumption would be "They're
probably right unless I find evidence to believe otherwise",
not "They're probably wrong and I'm right unless they prove
to me otherwise." I also generally presume "They're way too
busy to explain the reasons to me so I won't even ask, and I
would rather have them spend extra time making fun cons
happen for me to enjoy rather than spend extra time explaining
to me why they made the choices they did, which I don't really
need to know anyway."
And I'm not saying this just as someone who pays for a badge
to go in and have fun. I've spoken at various cons, rented
dealer's tables at cons (including a couple of years at AC),
and been Guest of Honor at one con. I still don't feel I need
to have con staff waste time explaining to me how they
allocate space or why they picked the hotels they did. I trust
them to make sure a con actually happens and that I can go
do whatever I was hoping to do there, and also I trust them to
try hard and do a fairly good job. Of the staff members I know
personally from Further Confusion, Anthrocon, and Midwest
Furfest, as well as some people that've helped out with Mephit
Furmeet and Confurence in the past, I have to say that they are,
as a group, one of the highest average intelligence, hardest
working, most competent groups of people I've known. So I
am more than willing to allow them whatever mistakes they've
made and not give them crap over it. Much less second-guess
them and assume "In some of their 'lesser of two evils' choices
they've made *I* knew a better third choice they didn't even
consider, damn them!"
(Well, with the exception of this one staffer at this one con.
But hey, he tried damn hard and I think he really did make
the best choices he was able, even when they were mistakes,
so I guess I forgive him too! So there!)
> and angry when confronted with
> what he finds to be excuses. Especally if they don't match up to his
> personal experiences.
If he doesn't want to hear people's justifications for things that
went less than perfect - maybe he should stop rubbing his own
nose in it so much by trying so hard to talk to con staff, or now
to all of us on alt.fan.furry, about stuff he's dissapointed in. And
when it comes to "match up to his personal experiences" - much
as he has spoken at and run dealers tables at many cons, he has
NOT run one, and he could do well to learn the humility to think to
himself "Even if I know 90% of what's going on, those guys that
have run one know SOME things I don't, and failing to take those
into account might make me wrong about some stuff even though
I feel I'm correct, so maybe I should be LESS FUCKING PUSHY
with how I shove my opinions down people's throats - er, I mean
present my opinions".
That whole thing of "If Phildelphia is a problem they should run the
con at some fine facilities in Colombus - oh and if that's too much
trouble for Uncle Kage he should resign and let someone else do it"
is a fine example of "being really, really naive", for instance. The
number of furry cons that happen at ALL is basically determined by
"how many groups of people exist who have the miniminal level of
people, determination, time, money, effort, chutzpah, etc. to actually
make one happen". If you take this group and have Uncle Kage quit,
you're not going to magically have someone pop up who's an equally
good replacement but is more willing to commute to Ohio a few times
a year for the fandom's benefit. (And don't fool yourself that it's
one
trip a year - Kage visits the con hotel many times to check stuff out,
make arrangements, get to know the hotel staff well, etc. I'm sure
he'd reduce the number of pre-con visits if the hotel were far away,
but not to zero pre-con visits - and reducing it to one or two would
result in some reduction in con quality too). No, if Kage quit, the
Anthrocon team would just have that much less manpower and
experience available to it. Of course it would be a burden on all
the OTHER volunteers to zip over to Ohio all the time too. Some
would probably quit, only being interested in going to Ohio. Others
would do less pre-con prep visits, would have less money left to
spend on stuff 'cause they spent extra on travel, they'd be able to
bring less supplies (art show panels, sandwiches made at home and
drive over to the con suite, audiovisual equipment, computers, etc.
Some of these items would be acquired from new Ohio fans that
would volunteer to help. But the local help would be lesser in number
than the Philadelphia volunteers and staff, because they would have
to be recruited long distance, which is a disadvantage, plus they
would be starting from scratch, rather than drawing on a group of
people they've built up over years back east. Some of the equipment
would be shipped out from Pennsylvania, increasing the cost of running
the con. Some of it would simply be done without, lowering the quality
of the con.
I'm sure there are a myriad of other disadvantages an experienced
con director could mention besides these. Basically, if at a moment
in time there are 10 teams that are sufficient to make a furry con
happen, I think we should expect 10 furry cons located in or near the
cities where those 10 teams exist. If some or all of them were to
arbitrarily pick cities far away from where the team members live,
you're just going to increase costs and difficulties, decrease quality
of the cons, and increase the chance that enough things will go wrong
that the con won't be able to keep running year after year. The "hold
it in your own area" concept is in EVERYONE'S best interests, fan
and con chair alike.
A person who was realistically humble about the quality of his own
opinions would, perhaps, be more open about the possibility that
such reasons might exist beyond the realm of "what I've thought
through on the subject on my own", and would offer up "Maybe
Ohio is a great idea" with a "But maybe it's not" or "hey don't
worry about placating me if I'm barking up the wrong tree though"
or simply a willingness to not go be an asshole about it if they
don't pull up the tent stakes and hop on the next train over.
Planetfur is not terribly humble about his opinions, from what I
have seen so far.
I might not be humble in how I *feel* about my opinions, inside.
Like most people, when I disagree with someone, I usually feel
like I'm right and they're wrong. But since I know I'm sometimes
wrong and mistaken when I feel that way - I try to avoid shoving
my foot in my mouth too often (or too far!)
I think this is why people say "Well why doesn't he try to run a
con if he knows so much". It's because he acts cocky, pushy,
and like he knows how to answer these issues better than Kage.
Personally, I think Kage knows how to run a furry con with 1,000
to 2,500 people better than about anyone. There are certainly
some people floating around that know how to run an anime or
comics or sci-fi con with 5,000 to 20,000 people better than
Kage would know, at least on his first try. But I don't think
Planetfur knows how to run a furry-con-sized con as well as
Kage knows. If you had both of them try to run Dragoncon for
one year, my money's on Kage to do the better job there too.
Planetfur comes off as a back-seat driver here, in a car where
the driver really doesn't want to hear him whining about how he
wants the car driven.
>That being said, as well run and enjoyable as Anthrocon is, it
> -does- have it's flaws, in the last few years, these have been
> concentrated around the growth of the con, vs the limited
> amount of space available at the Adam's Mark, this has
> lead to 2 problems of perception,
I don't want to even go into specific (like Planetfur does) so much
as to comment on a couple basic, generality type issues there.
1) Anthrocon has grown FAST, and that has led to some growing
pains and some problems. Fine. That's NORMAL when you grow
fast. If someone does it WITHOUT these types of problems I would
praise them, if they do it with some problems I don't say "Holy FUCK
you had problems, you guys suck!" Further when it comes to specific
problems, if I put on my backseat driver hat, I might see how I (or
some other person) could have avoided some specific growing pains
that happened - especially with 20/20 hindsight - but I assume that if
I or anyone else had run the con and avoided those specific pitfalls,
the con would have just fallen into some different ones that this
particular con staff DID manage to avoid. And there'd be a debate
on alt.fan.furry about that other group of problems instead - which
might well be a worse group of problems overall, at that.
2) From everything I've heard, there's a certain "stuck in-between"
kind of uncomfortable size where you just don't fit well in most
facilities, and it's a lot easier to arrange a con that's a bunch
smaller
OR a bunch bigger. And it seems like Anthrocon is currently stuck
at that awkward size. I think all of the people complaining about
AC's hotel woes ought to cut them a GIANT amount of slack for
that, but of course they don't realize it. And they and we should
all wish AC luck in being able to grow big enough that it can go to
"big con" facilities like convention centers or such, rather than the
worst-case sort of scenario where its growth peaks at a level
where it's "too small for convention centers, too big for all but
a very few of the biggest hotels". Furry fans aren't as willing or
as able to pay for the pricier hotels as conventions for dentists
or other affluent professions, either. (Apparently we hire less
hookers to come to our hotel rooms too, but that's a plus for
most hotel management, at least!)
Anyway furry fandom is a nice hobby, and when it provided me
with one convention a year to go to, I was greatful for that and
enjoyed the hell out of it. When it got to be 2 or 3 or more -
wonderful, even more fun I can go have! ALL of them were
run with a lower level of perfection and polish and quality than
I see from all sorts of professional services and products I buy
in my life. But I *expect* them to be so, because they're run as
a hobby by the people running them. And for hobbyists, most
of them do a way above average job! And you know what? I
don't need or even want a high level of polish and perfection.
A few "rough edges" in the promotional art, publications,
services, etc. are part of what you expect from a fandom, and
I kinda like it. Since Paramount took over running all the Star
Trek cons, they might have gotten more polished and
professional - but I wouldn't even know, I haven't gone to one.
I *want* to know what you can experience when a group of
dedicated fans tries to put something fun together. And to
date, I've been very satisfied with the results of attending
fan-run conventions.
Planetfur just expects too damned much, and he's too damned
fussy if he doesn't get it. He needs to get over himself a bit,
and not live life by moving from one unrealistically high
expectation to the next... But by moving from one "Hey how
will this next con turn out and if that's what I'm given to work
with what can I do with it" to the next.
Frankly, given the attitude he's evidenced here... If he's that
much of a sourpuss at cons, I'm glad he won't be at AC this
year to run into. I'd rather have more people there that're
actually enjoying themselves, and less sourpusses who're
pissed off. Makes the con more fun for me. Hope he'll have
fun at whatever con he goes to instead, and sells a bunch of
whatever it is he sells - and gets way too distracted enjoying
himself to keep coming here and ragging on AC. Really!
> Long time no see, by the way...
And at these prices, it'll be a long time before...
Oh sorry, I'm in the wrong joke. Never mind!
-- Dr. Cat
(Disclaimer: I do intend to be involved in helping run a Furcadia
con eventually, though I'm not going to be con chair. But hey, to
date I haven't and so I certainly don't know about con-running from
a position of experience.)
(Disclaimer Disclaimer: I have helped set up and tear down art
panels at Dallas Fantasy Fairs though. Therefore my opinions
about cons TOTALLY RULE! Take that Uncle Kage!)
iBuck
>as able to pay for the pricier hotels as conventions for dentists
>or other affluent professions, either.
This is a complete sidebar, but is this -really- true? I'm not thinking of
professional conventions, so much, but I'm a fairly regular attendee, at
GenCon, and a fair number of gaming and SF cons, as well as Furry cons, and
the furry cons are allways at the low end of the expense scale. And it seems
to be that for a crowd with much the same means (often the exact same means,
considring the people I see at both cons) that the furry fandom underestimates
it's resources.
Just how sure are we that the furry fandom, can't afford X,Y,Z be it travel,
hotel costs, comic books? I mean realistically he who will not be named, is
the only one I've been seeing pleading poverty lately, and he's not even been
pleading it for himself...
Dale Farmer
iBuck wrote:
I used to go to about 15 conventions per year, some of which were furry cons.
Last year I went to four. I can't afford it. The rooms at the Adam's Mark
were a little over a hundred bucks per night. Downtown Philly hotels may be
able to negotiate the rooms down to $150 per night. That means I can only
afford two nights in the hotel, not three or four.
Repeat this for a few hundred fans coming to the convention, this costs
the convention several hundred room nights from the convention block. This
probably triggers an attrition clause in the contract, and now the convention
has to pay several thousand dollars, possibly tens of thousands of dollars, to
pay for the function space that it was hoping to get for no charge.
Room night pickup is a very important part of the overall convention
budget.
--Dale
? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
> Or maybe, as he wanders through life, he's just not paying much
> attention
> to the details along the way. Who knows?
>
> -- Dr. Cat / www.furcadia.com / You know the drill
Yay Dr Cat has made his return to AFF, ear banananananas for
everyone.
--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.
? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
[...]
> but so far I haven't lied about anything.
You made staments about being banned which turned out at closer
examination to be exaggerations, I'm willing to accept that they where
missunderstandings and not deliberate mistruths.
Perhaps you should think about the "lies" told about yourself and ask
if they where lies or rather mistruths arising from misscommunication?
Swipecat
>This is a complete sidebar, but is this -really- true? I'm not thinking of
>professional conventions, so much, but I'm a fairly regular attendee, at
>GenCon, and a fair number of gaming and SF cons, as well as Furry cons, and
>the furry cons are allways at the low end of the expense scale. And it seems
>to be that for a crowd with much the same means (often the exact same means,
>considring the people I see at both cons) that the furry fandom underestimates
>it's resources.
It might not be very expensive for you or me (I'm an electronic design
engineer) and probably not too expensive for many of the people that
post on aff with their expensive computers, but I don't think that's
true of this fandom as a whole. After all, it's mostly about artists and
art appreciation, and that often DOES go hand in hand with financial
struggles, if not outright poverty.
--
Swipecat
BR
> It might not be very expensive for you or me (I'm an electronic design
> engineer) and probably not too expensive for many of the people that
> post on aff with their expensive computers, but I don't think that's
> true of this fandom as a whole. After all, it's mostly about artists and
> art appreciation, and that often DOES go hand in hand with financial
> struggles, if not outright poverty.
Hah! This old thing. It's OK, I just have to let the tubes warm up in the
morning, before going online.
c...@bga.com
> > Furry fans aren't as willing or
> > as able to pay for the pricier hotels as conventions for dentists
> > or other affluent professions, either.
>
> This is a complete sidebar, but is this -really- true? I'm not
thinking of
> professional conventions, so much, but I'm a fairly regular attendee,
at
> GenCon, and a fair number of gaming and SF cons, as well as Furry
cons, and
> the furry cons are allways at the low end of the expense scale.
And it seems
> to be that for a crowd with much the same means (often the exact same
means,
> considring the people I see at both cons) that the furry fandom
underestimates
> it's resources.
I don't know if there's much difference between furry fan's ability
(and willingness) to pay more and other fandoms. I would stick
by my belief that dentists and other professional conventions can
get away with much higher room rates, though.
As far as the furry fans, or course, it's not a "yes/no" thing - many
of the very high paid silicon valley engineer type furries, among
others, can afford so much that no hotel room price would have
much impact on their decision to attend. Then there's the ones that
barely manage to cover the costs of cons they go to, and everyone
in-between.
I would pretty much assume that if you get 2400 fans at one particular
price, if you cut $30 off the nightly rate for the hotel you'd get
"somewhat more", and if you add $50 per night you'll get "somewhat
less". The only question is how many you'd gain or lose. It's like
every fan has some secret number written inside their shoe that's
the maximum amount of money they'd scrape up and still go, before
the con's too expensive for them personally and they won't go.
Of course if you have a fan whose secret number is $450, and the
total cost of attending the con goes up from, say, $300 one year to
$400 the next year... He may spend significantly less money in the
dealer's room, too. Which is worth considering - I'd rather have fans
able to support furry dealers more, rather than pump more money
into the hotel industry.
Being in a city that has a "hub" airport can help a lot, as a lot of
people may be able to get cheaper airfares to get there.
-- Dr. Cat / www.furcadia.com / we have more horses than you
(Disclaimer: I don't have anything against the wonderful hotel
industry, whose services I have enjoyed on many an occasion.
I just like furry art and comics more!)
? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
[...]
> CatsWipe is notorious for this level of ineptitude. Please forgive him.
Comming from you this is high praise.