?

Log in

No account? Create an account
If you don't know what this is about, don't worry. - Songs of innocence and of experience [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Douglas Spencer

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Friends| (full) (people) (communities) (both) (feeds) (friendsfriends) ]
[Using| (new) (rec) (clu) (inb) (tag) (bot) (adm) (mod) (poll) ]
[Other| (DJ) (DW) (IJ) (JF) (Scribbld) ]
[Me| (AoOO) (eF) (FB) (GP) (LI) (Tu) (Tw) (Wk) ]
[Links| (AVDAR) (Exchange) (il_calmo) (LGCM) (ZZ9) ]

If you don't know what this is about, don't worry. [Oct. 5th, 2009|09:21 pm]
Douglas Spencer
[Tags|]

In order to dispel any doubt that there may be over my opinion on the matter:

Firstly, It's my firm belief that the correct response of a convention committee hearing criticism of their convention, or its current or previous committees, is to prove those critics wrong by running a great event.

Secondly, it seems to me that banning your critic from your event, refusing to enter into any online discussion on the matter, and refusing to discuss it with any other persons, seems (on the face of it) to be a little odd.

Thirdly and finally, I'm trying to remember any occasion when a committee has banned a critic and then refused to discuss it, and then gone on to find that their public image has improved in any way. No success yet.

Anonymous comment spam:
2011-01-29 19:21 (from 88.190.14.18)
2011-03-05 20:59 (from 178.73.206.111)
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: jemck
2009-10-07 08:38 am (UTC)
Er, yes, unfortunately. I can't really go into specifics without dragging up a lot of unedifying stuff but hey, they're not going into specifics either.

Are you willing to accept that much from me, on the basis of having been a pro-writer guest at a handful of Octocons this past decade? A writer, who as I told the committee in 2007, won't be going back until I hear reliable third-party reports of colossal improvement.

The two central chaps here detest each other and have done for a decade. There have been encounters with faults on both sides - but I am aware of nothing that even remotely justifies these wild accusations.

I do take pains to get my facts from third parties who work very hard to be fair to both sides and stay as neutral as possible. Which makes the fact so many are now standing in support of Padraig even more telling.

I would also endorse Annafdd's and Captain Lucy's assessments of Padraig's character.

I was at what appears to be the key convention in question - and the Brophy version of events goes so far beyond 'speculative fiction' that it's crossed the event horizon and is accelerating with its arse on fire.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jon_a_five
2009-10-07 08:50 am (UTC)
Well I don't know any of the involved, although like I say, I'd heard a lot of really good things about Octocon and hoped to go one day (as I've yet to go to Ireland as well). But if the opinion (from a number of people I do know) is that Padraig has a good rep and the committe somewhat doesn't (from one person I don't know) on balence he looks to be the innocent party.

The only reason I weighed in is I've been on convention and society committees and it always annoys me to see somebody attack a bunch of people who've given up their free time to do something for others. Even if they've not done a good job they deserve respect for effort and being the ones who actually got off their bum and tried. Also in one particular club I'm in it's ones who have done a good job before who seem happiest to attack the current incumbents.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bellinghwoman
2009-10-07 09:00 am (UTC)
I've yet to go to Ireland

Come to P-Con!

www.pcon.ie


Edited at 2009-10-07 09:01 am (UTC)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jon_a_five
2009-10-07 09:14 am (UTC)
I need a job before I can go to any cons! I was meant to be on 3 panels at next year's Eastercon but have had to withdraw as it looks like I won't get to go :-(
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bellinghwoman
2009-10-07 09:23 am (UTC)
Ah sorry - that was insensitive of me, especially as I am aware of your situation. My apologies.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jon_a_five
2009-10-07 09:48 am (UTC)
Not at all. I wasn't annoyed, just saying.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jemck
2009-10-07 09:11 am (UTC)
I'm with you entirely on disliking the way naysayers will so often carp from the sidelines, with no real understanding of the very hard work that goes into organising any successful event/volunteer-based organisation.

I too have served my time on assorted committees across a whole range of things and have seen the behaviours you describe.

So I have been taking your points in the spirit I felt they were meant, and now see that was indeed correct.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jon_a_five
2009-10-07 09:13 am (UTC)
I did miss saying that their actions are totally wrong. Even if Padraig did something that bad he should be told exactly what it was and a ban should only be a last resort.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: davesangel
2009-10-08 08:42 pm (UTC)
The only reason I weighed in is I've been on convention and society committees and it always annoys me to see somebody attack a bunch of people who've given up their free time to do something for others. Even if they've not done a good job they deserve respect for effort and being the ones who actually got off their bum and tried. Also in one particular club I'm in it's ones who have done a good job before who seem happiest to attack the current incumbents

Couldn't agree more.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)