From: "Ted White" <twhite8 at cox.net>
To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: 2007 Worldcon
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:22:48 -0400
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted White" <twhite8 at cox.net>
To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 8:41 PM
Subject: [WSFA] Re: 2007 Worldcon

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Kling" <jkling at nasw.org>
> To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 8:17 PM
> Subject: [WSFA] Re: 2007 Worldcon
>
> > Sunday, August 22, 2004, 5:04:13 PM, you wrote:
> >
> > > Generally speaking, it's also a poorly done convention.  One of the
> > > most notable one being ConDiego (1990)  which managed to typo it's
name
> > > in it's own souvenir book.  And apparently things only got worse.
Which
> > > caused this to become a popular phrase:  "Your name is ConDiego
> Montoya.
> > > You kill my weekend. Prepare to die."
> >
> > Damn, that's funny.
>
> But I wish Mike would learn the difference between the possessive "its"
and
> the contraction for "it is."  (Twice in one sentence....)
>
> > > Since the likelyhood of actually removing NASFiC from the WSFS
> > > Constitution is pretty darn small, the only other alternative I could
> > > think of last year was to vote in the NASFiC site selection, voting
for
> > > No NASFiC.  Well, it's going to Seattle, & I'm not.
> >
> > > But con going fans like to go to cons; wave some cheese in front of
> > > them and off they go . . .
> >
> > Interesting. So why is it that NASFic is consistently run poorly. I
> > assume that different people are involved each year?
>
> It's a poor-second convention, a "losercon" for those who can't get to
the
> Worldcon.   But it usually (unless the Worldcon is in Australia) costs as
> much to get to (unless you live close by) as the foreign Worldcon, given
> modern airfairs.

Make that "airfares"....

--Ted White