From: jmsatb5@aol.com (Jms at B5)
Subject: Re: "Rip-Offs" and Con Organiz
To: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 5/25/1995 9:57:00 AM
|
Message 1 in thread
View this message only
|
Re: Tom C.'s statement that he "had to call in a lot of favors" to get
us into CapriCon is one of the -- no, make that THE -- most ludicrous
thing I have ever heard. More of his trying to inflate his position. I
suspect that if Michael O'Hare or I or anyone else showed up at a con, we
probably wouldn't have a hard time getting in, given the number of requests
that come in for their presence.
More CMC bullshit. Pure and simple, and as with all the CMC bullshit,
painfully obvious for what it is. Which is one of many reasons I withdrew
any endorsement from B5 for their "event." I wouldn't work with these
people if I were dying of cancer and they were paying in chemotherapy.
jms |
|
From: jmsatb5@aol.com (Jms at B5)
Subject: Re: "Rip-Offs" and Con Organiz
To: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 5/25/1995 10:27:00 AM
|
Message 2 in thread
View this message only
|
1) Tom C. informed me that arrangements had been made with Capricon
for the bunch of us to appear there on Saturday, though explaining that it
"couldn't be put into the program because we didn't have an exact time."
Which seemed kinda funny to me at the time.
2) Upon arriving, at Tom's insistence (I at no time even knew about
the convention until Tom told us we were booked to stop by as a "goodwill
investment"), it did seem that *nobody* knew we were coming, which upset
me more than a little.
3) I did insist on a room rather than being stuck in the dealer's
room, at a table selling unauthorized merchandise.
4) As we left the convention, I had a very angry conversation with
Tom, in that insufficient groundwork had been done, no preparations or
arrangements had been made, and the entire thing was sloppily done, and
that it couldn't be allowed to be done this way again.
So Bruce, if you're going to start talking about "the net of a
thousand lies," I strongly suggest you get your OWN facts straight first,
because all of points 1-4 preceding can be verified by all the cast
members who were in that car. You, I note, were not present.
jms |
|
From: jmsatb5@aol.com (Jms at B5)
Subject: Re: "Rip-Offs" and Con Organiz
To: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 5/26/1995 10:20:00 AM
|
Message 3 in thread
View this message only
|
It's very sad, Bruce, that you think the only way to get a response
is to insult people and use emotionally-laden "hot-buttons" to try and
inflame them.
I've generally found that a reasoned, simple, polite question gets
answered far more often. Perhaps next time you should try it.
Jerk.*
jms
(*emotional hot-button #47, I knew you wouldn't mind) |
|
From: jmsatb5@aol.com (Jms at B5)
Subject: Re: "Rip-Offs" and Con Organiz
To: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 5/26/1995 10:50:00 AM
|
Message 4 in thread
View this message only
|
Here's a dilemma I'd like to throw out to those who've run conventions
before, because I don't have a good answer for it, and maybe it'd help to
illuminate the discussion a bit.
I was talking to X, who is a prime mover behind one of the for-profit
convention companies. I noted, in the course of the conversation, my
surprise that Actor Y had not been invited to many conventions by that
company. X's response: "Well, that's because Actor Y keeps showing up at
fan conventions for free. How can we justify paying someone who's lowered
his/her market value like that?"
Initial reaction: that's rather odious thinking.
Secondary and tertiary reactions: you're an actor. You don't really
come out of the SF field, you don't know the ins and outs, or what the
diff is between a fan con and a profit con. Convention A asks you to do
their convention, and will pay $4,000 plus transportation and airfare.
Convention B asks you to their convention, but can't pay anything but the
hotel and a guest pass. Actors are not limitless pools of money; they
have the same fiscal nuts to crack as everyone else...mortgage, car,
alimony, kids, doctors, name it.
It does put things very much in the favor of the paying cons when it
comes to actors and the like. How does one tell an actor not to do it?
(Not that it is my job or anyone else's to do so, and I'm not entirely
sure it would be *right* to do so...any opportunity an actor has to
perform for an audience, and be properly compensated for that performance,
should be seized.) So maybe it isn't so much "don't do this one," as "be
OPEN to the other type as well." But then how do you counter the X/Y
conversation above?
It is, frankly, a real mess....
jms |
|
From: jmsatb5@aol.com (Jms at B5)
Subject: Re: "Rip-Offs" and Con Organiz
To: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 5/27/1995 4:46:00 PM
|
Message 5 in thread
View this message only
|
It's probably a glitch in my brain, but I rarely evaluate conventions
in terms of how "useful" they are, but rather if I and folks seem to have
a good time. So in that sense, I probably enjoy the fan-cons more, because
there's more room for interaction.
jms |
|
