Great Googly Moogly

[akirlu]

Another Tun, successfully weathered, brought the disturbing smoffish rumor that Seattle will definitely be launching a bid for the 2011 Worldcon. Waugh! Arrrrgh! And, furthermore, Aiiiiiiiii!

Okay, in case anyone is unclear on the inclination of my sentiments, let me just explicitly say that this sounds like a rilly bad idea. Pragmatics are key. Merely wanting a Worldcon in your city because it hasn't had one in a long time is not a good enough reason to bid for one. A committee needs to have big-con experience, competence, national smof connections, and enough emotional distance to take a hard look at their facilities & resources and make their decisions accordingly, in order to field a bid that doesn't threaten the physical and emotional health of the fans who eventually make the thing fly. I deeply suspect that Seattle has none of those, really. And you know, I watched people giving themselves ulcers trying to salvage NolaCon II. I'd rather not have to bear witness to that sort of thing again.

Comments

May I have a Lesser Googly Moogly, please?

[barondave.livejournal.com]

One of the things I've always admired about Mpls fandom is that we have the talent and experience to run a Worldcon, and choose not to.

[thirdworld.livejournal.com]

Didn't Seattle prove themselves somewhat with last year's NASFiC? Granted they are not remotely as experienced or solid a site as Boston, LA, Chicago, etc, but then who is? Somehow Worldcons have to move to other cities outside of the usual suspects. Yes they need help, but unlike Nolacon the Seattle fans already know this and plan to make use of as many existing skilled volunteers as they can. I'll probably help too, since I'm moving to Portland soon (3-hr drive away) -- well, if I'm still there then as it is still a long way off. Aside from that they have local fans involved on Worldcon staff and I understand they have a lot of support from others in the wider region. Seems like a good outsider bid to me. Am I missing something?

[shelleybear.livejournal.com]

The alternative is a worldcon that bounces between a few cities and that's it.
Also, size and experience don't always matter. There have been catastrophes involving experienced concom and staff as well as relatively green committees doing a good job.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

Didn't Seattle prove themselves somewhat with last year's NASFiC?

Sure, but not in their favor. The only reason their facilities were not disastrously inadequate was because attendance was much lighter than they had hoped for or planned. It's precisely this willingness to go ahead with what they can get rather than what they need that I consider such a very bad sign in the local Worldcon aspirants.

Somehow Worldcons have to move to other cities outside of the usual suspects.

Why?

Aside from that they have local fans involved on Worldcon staff

Anybody besides Bobby DuFault?

they have a lot of support from others in the wider region

Not helpful if you mean Northwest fandom, which is historically insular and not really plugged into the national smof culture.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

The alternative is a worldcon that bounces between a few cities and that's it.

If there's a choice to be made between limiting Worldcon to a few regular cycling committees, and the actinic burnout phenomenon associated with salvaging a dubious committees, I see nothing wrong with a limited slate of Worldcon capable cities. Or, for that matter, with re-thinking the size and scope of Worldcon.

There have been catastrophes involving experienced concom and staff as well as relatively green committees doing a good job.

Yes but when what's at risk is the emotional and physical well-being of people I care about, I'd rather go with the safer bet.

[shelleybear.livejournal.com]

Save money.
Scrap bid parties.
Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles
Year, after year after year (well, except for the occassional furriner bid).

[thirdworld.livejournal.com]

Sure, but not in their favor. The only reason their facilities were not disastrously inadequate was because attendance was much lighter than they had hoped for or planned. It's precisely this willingness to go ahead with what they can get rather than what they need that I consider such a very bad sign in the local Worldcon aspirants.

Ah, I see. I'll be sure to ask around. Thanks for the info. I'll be sure to consider that.

Somehow Worldcons have to move to other cities outside of the usual suspects.
Why?

I believe in both the "world" in Worldcon and also in the Worldcon belonging to everyone. I like the idea of Worldcons going to new places and helping to expose locals to the whole fannish scene and Worldcons in general.

Anybody besides Bobby DuFault?

At Noreascon Four I sat at a breakfast table with three people from the NASFiC staff who were also on Worldcon staff. Yes, Bobbie was one of the three. Not sure how many there were in total. I'm sure they'll need more, but they do have some.

Not helpful if you mean Northwest fandom, which is historically insular and not really plugged into the national smof culture.

The support I know of comes from experienced individuals, not groups. Some Portland fans are likely to help, going by chats I had at Smofcon. As for the Bay area, I have no idea. I know they will get help from a couple of individuals there that I know.

Thanks for answering. I'll be sure to look into all this in more detail and to ask around a bit. I still like the idea of a Seattle Worldcon bid. The city is a great Worldcon city from the perspective of tourism and active fandom. We will have to see how many more of them get more involved with Worldcons between now and then. And I'd like to see their approach of listening to advice continue.

[kate-schaefer.livejournal.com]

Who else is bidding? Is anyone else bidding yet? (Kate Googles.) Ah: there are two other bids: Washington, D.C., and Chernobyl/Minneapolis in '73. Okay, there's one other bid.

We went to Alaska during the NASFiC. It worked very well for us, and I can recommend it wholeheartedly as a strategy for anyone else who wants to avoid being here if a worldcon should hit Seattle.

[thirdworld.livejournal.com]

No, Seattle first checked with DC and DC have changed their dates to 2012 for various reasons, including their facility's construction only being finished in 2010. Seattle want 2011 as it is the 50th anniversary of their last Worldcon.

[sfrose.livejournal.com]

If there's a choice to be made between limiting Worldcon to a few regular cycling committees, and the actinic burnout phenomenon associated with salvaging a dubious committees, I see nothing wrong with a limited slate of Worldcon capable cities. Or, for that matter, with re-thinking the size and scope of Worldcon.

And just how long do you think it will take before those recycled committees have major burnout?

A few "short cycles" in a row, and you've just reduced the number of capable cities without helping to encourage new staff elsewhere.

Re: May I have a Lesser Googly Moogly, please?

[davidschroth.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure that Mpls fandom has the talent and experience to run a Worldcon. At one time, maybe.

This makes the decision to concentrate on the strengths of mpls fandom (i.e., throwing parties) very wise.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

I believe in both the "world" in Worldcon and also in the Worldcon belonging to everyone. I like the idea of Worldcons going to new places and helping to expose locals to the whole fannish scene and Worldcons in general.

Yes, well, understandable enough, but I don't see why that constitutes "have to" move to other cities as opposed to "it would be nice, when feasible". If we have to move Worldcon around to cities that are barely or not really capable of hosting a modern Worldcon, then of course hang the costs to fans and fandom and full speed ahead. But if it's a matter of would be nice, then surely the costs in good will, enthusiasm, money, and human suffering ought to be weighed into the decision process.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

And just how long do you think it will take before those recycled committees have major burnout?

Given that I see many of the same players involved every year, year after year, I don't see that as a factor. I tend to see hot-burn salvage operations as being much more productive of burnouts than a steady and predictable pace.

[marykaykare.livejournal.com]

Would you like me to have a talk with these prospective bidders? Do you think they'd listen to a dose of unpleasant reality?

MKK

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

Frankly, I doubt it would do any good. Bobbie and a bunch of other folks Really Want This. I give Bobbie full marks for listening to advice and opinions and going out and seeking experience and connections to make this happen, but about the ultimate goal I would be really surprised if she were moveable at all. And maybe 2011 is far enough in the future that the tools can be built and the resources will gel, but what worries me is that I have no reason to believe that if they *don't* gel, anybody will be clear-eyed enough to call no-go.

[sfrose.livejournal.com]

Yes, there may be "many of the same players", but not all. Some people will work at all Worldcons, but the role they take will be different from year-to-year. Sometimes they will be a division or area head, others they will just be staff, just attend ot not go at all. (There are a handful of people who can take a high-level role every year, but even they will take the occasional year off.)

That is very different than an obligation for (if) a Worldcon was to show up in your city every 3-5 years.

In the 80's Boskone was known as the "Winter Worldcon." It was the largest regional convention back then (in 1985 it was larger than the Worldcon and NASFiC!) The burnout was hitting us pretty strongly from running that size convention year after year until it all blew up on us.

The "steady and predictable" just causes a different sort of burnout.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

There are many more compelling reasons to scrap the vast majority of bid parties. And it is just possible that modern Worldcons are not a long-term sustainable project.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

So you agree with me that the modern Worldcon model may simply not be sustainable?

But if you look at modern Worldcons in the last quarter century or so you see a pretty steady cycling of UK/Boston/Chicago/LA/Australia/Bay Area, each getting the Worldcon approximately once every ten years, with Canaday, Europe, and one-off US cities filling the gaps. I can't speak to the majority of the one-offs, but I know that both Atlanta and New Orleans pretty much devoured their local fan-base and left each city unable to muster another Worldcon for multiple fannish generations afterward. If you pull those one-offs out of the mix, that still leaves a cycle of hosting Worldcon at most every six years, not 3-5, and with the assumption of one competent one-off city (or the PFWCC choosing to use a different city as base, as in the Boston-in-Orlando bid) per decade, that brings it up to hosting Worldcon once every seven years, which isn't very different from what happens now, and isn't *any* different from the schedule that you'd see if the major players won every bid they fielded. Frankly, if the gigantic portable circus of throwing bid parties at every plausible and many implausible convention were cut back, and all of that energy were ported to running slightly more frequent actual conventions instead, I would be very surprised if the net amount of work went up at all.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

And I'd like to see their approach of listening to advice continue.

Yes, Bobbie in particular does an excellent job of listening to people, seeking out advisors and mentors and resources, and I think she encourages that attitude in others which is great, and really, really different from the historical Norwescon approach to convention-running. That part is all to the good, and I'm encouraged by it.

What I don't see, and I think it's crucial, is a hard-nosed willingness to look at what would be the go/no-go conditions for going ahead with the bid in terms of facilities and infrastructure. Which is only a problem if the bid passes an unseen no-go condition and doesn't stop, but if that happens, it could be a really big problem. I see knowing when to pull the plug as an essential component in a realistic bidcom.

[pnh.livejournal.com]

"I believe in both the 'world' in Worldcon and also in the Worldcon belonging to everyone."

The Worldcon does indeed "belong to everyone," or at least to everyone in that part of SF fandom that cares about the Worldcon.

Why this means it needs to be run by poorly-prepared groups in cities with inadequate facilities is less clear.

Surely, if the Worldcon "belongs to everyone," this means that everyone who cares about the Worldcon deserves Worldcons which are run well, at minimal risk to the well-being of volunteers and members alike. Or are we to understand that the word "everyone" in the sentence "The Worldcon belongs to everyone" only refers to local groups who feel they ought to be allowed to run things, rather than the other 4000-8000 people who attend Worldcons?

[thirdworld.livejournal.com]

Why this means it needs to be run by poorly-prepared groups in cities with inadequate facilities is less clear.

I have no idea how it means that, certainly not implied by me. I think you can have both. I do think that fandom as a whole should work to help these cities, in much the same way other international events do. Worldcon is too complex even for cities like Boston, Chicago or LA to run alone. All of them have powerful foundations, but still need fans from all over the world to make it possible. And if there is no outreach, no mentoring, etc, etc, then Worldcon will rarely leave those power-bases, and they too will fall away one by one. Bobbie is as open to outside help as anyone I've ever seen. She has almost single-handedly galvanized their fan base and got them more involved in Worldcons. This has grown their poor of dependable locals, meaning she is not alone in this. Plus they are in a great city for Worldcons with a decent local fan base. If we can't help them, then who? It seems to me we need to look at all the problems honestly and then come up with solutions, instead of just saying that it can't be done.

They will accept help. We have but to give it. And then we all will benefit from this diversity of flavor and the new blood it brings in. Otherwise why call it Worldcon at all?

[thirdworld.livejournal.com]

Per my reply below, I think the more senior fans get involved and help a group that is very open to help, the less these problems will be an issue.

[thirdworld.livejournal.com]

I plan to talk to Bobbie. I will ask all the hard questions I hear from anyone at all. And she will have to have answers come smofcon time, as the senior smofs will have plenty. I think she will ensure that she can answer them all.

[pnh.livejournal.com]

Actually, if there's one thing "establishment" Worldcon culture is good at, it's bringing in new blood and providing, yes, mentoring. If anything, this is more true when the Worldcon is in places like Boston, Chicago, or LA, and less true when it's run in crap facilities by local-chauvinist committees with chips on their shoulders and something to prove.

If the current bunch of Seattle would-be Worldcon-runners is indeed open to working with the rest of Worldcon fandom, that would be a nice change from the long and dire history of previous Seattle bids. I imagine we'll find out more as time goes on.

[marykaykare.livejournal.com]

Oh, I wasn't talking about asking questions. I was talking about sharing my experiences in the upper echelons of a worldcon comittee. Not good ones I'm afraid.

MKK