From: "Ernest Lilley" <elilley at mindspring.com>
To: "'WSFA members'" <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Minutes of the November 19th meeting are online
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:22:11 -0500
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

I'd be surprised if this hasn't already been said, or covered, with
regard to SMOFcon (which I'll be at), but I think the useful thing for
us to show is what kind of Con we'd like to have going forward and how
much effort we're willing to put into it.

I'll be bouncing around the country for the next 5-6 years, but am
interested in working on a "home" con...and building up CapClave is
attractive to me.

Ernest

ern at e357.net / (703) 371 0226 hm/cell

-----Original Message-----
From: Elspeth Kovar [mailto:ekovar at worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 1:10 AM
To: WSFA members
Cc: Peggy Rae Sapienza
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Minutes of the November 19th meeting are online

At 12:09 AM 11/29/04, Sam Lubell wrote:
>At 01:39 AM 11/27/2004, Elspeth Kovar wrote:
> >Which is that far from causing panic, being open about at a local
SMOFcon
> >about having lost money could be one of the best things that has
happened
> >to WSFA.  We have a chance at good PR and, more importantly,
resources that
> >we usually wouldn't.
> >
> >I realize that you're worried about what people might think but
there's no
> >shame in saying that one has run into a problem and wants to learn
how to
> >fix it.  In fact, there would probably be far fewer problems if more
people
> >did that and it's something to be encouraged.
>
>Interesting thoughts.  But what I'm worried about, especially since we
>can't give an exact number for how much we lost, is that any discussion
>will become a guessing game as to that number rather than ideas for how
to
>prevent this from happening in the future.

I don't think that that is likely if we give a general amount, which we
have.  Or just call it more than a thousand dollars or, even easier,
that
we lost some money this year rather than breaking even.  If you're
looking
for controversy it's that we can afford the loss because we put on a
World
Fantasy Convention -- there's a con that can get various SMOFs
emotional!

Sam, while all of us who work on conventions have a tendency to gossip
about them I suspect that keeping folks from talking about the actual
amount isn't going to be a problem.  Instead, it will be getting people
to
stay focused on practice -- and what might be useful -- rather than
theory.  Have you ever been around some of these folks when they're
talking
about theory, or tryied to keep things from heading that way?  Even if
not,
trust me: it's rough.  And this from a philosophy major!

Peggy Rae knows far more about things than I do, and can tell you
more.  But she's also chairing a convention in less than a week so may
be a
bit busy.

In any event, even if there isn't a panel on the subject -- which is
entirely up to the SMOFcon committee and what could be shoehorned in at
less than a week out -- we have an amazing resource happening in our own

back yard next weekend.  Would you consider lifting your gag order on
the
subject?

(If nothing else, I can talk with folks from various groups about how
they
handle choosing facilities and have done so but if I'm not allowed to
mention something it's going to cause me to keep thinking about that one

thing and the fact that I'm not allowed to mention it.  It's sort of
like
"Don't think about pink elephants".  Normally pick elephants would be
the
furthest thing from my mind but . . .)

Elspeth