Yahoo Archive: Page 11 of 67

 

Messages in runacc group. Page 11 of 67.

Group: runacc Message: 501 From: Byron Connell Date: 3/21/2004
Subject: Re: CC20
Group: runacc Message: 502 From: Trudy Leonard Date: 3/22/2004
Subject: CC22 ads
Group: runacc Message: 503 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 3/23/2004
Subject: Re: CC20
Group: runacc Message: 504 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 3/25/2004
Subject: Changes to the Costume-Con ConStitution
Group: runacc Message: 505 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?
Group: runacc Message: 506 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Re: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?
Group: runacc Message: 507 From: Elaine Mami Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Re: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?
Group: runacc Message: 508 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Re: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?
Group: runacc Message: 509 From: Byron Connell Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Re: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?
Group: runacc Message: 510 From: betsy Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Offline
Group: runacc Message: 511 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/9/2004
Subject: CC-22
Group: runacc Message: 512 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Changing the deadline for bidding for all future bids…
Group: runacc Message: 513 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Participants and awards (incomplete) for CC22
Group: runacc Message: 514 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Bruce’s comments on Ricky’s review
Group: runacc Message: 515 From: Karen Heim Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Re: Participants and awards (incomplete) for CC22
Group: runacc Message: 516 From: Trudy Leonard Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Re: CC-22
Group: runacc Message: 517 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/11/2004
Subject: Re: CC-22
Group: runacc Message: 518 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/12/2004
Subject: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 519 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 520 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 521 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 522 From: martingear Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 523 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 524 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 525 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/14/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 526 From: Byron Connell Date: 4/14/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 527 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/14/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 528 From: Byron Connell Date: 4/14/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 529 From: henryosier@cs.com Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 530 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 531 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 532 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 533 From: martingear Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 534 From: Byron Connell Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: [ICG-D] Ninjas? re: CC22 Review
Group: runacc Message: 535 From: Byron Connell Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 536 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 537 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 538 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 539 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Hotel Contracts
Group: runacc Message: 540 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: [ICG-D] Ninjas? re: CC22 Review
Group: runacc Message: 541 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: Hotel Contracts
Group: runacc Message: 542 From: David Doering Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: Hotel Contracts
Group: runacc Message: 543 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/16/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Group: runacc Message: 544 From: martingear Date: 4/16/2004
Subject: Re: Hotel Contracts
Group: runacc Message: 545 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers
Group: runacc Message: 546 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers
Group: runacc Message: 547 From: henryosier@cs.com Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers
Group: runacc Message: 548 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers
Group: runacc Message: 549 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers
Group: runacc Message: 550 From: martingear Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers

 


 

Group: runacc Message: 501 From: Byron Connell Date: 3/21/2004
Subject: Re: CC20

Thank you, Eileen. To quote Rhett Butler, “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a
damn!”

Byron

—– Original Message —–
From: “Cliff and Eileen” <capsam@nucleus.com>
To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 12:31 PM
Subject: RE: [runacc] RE: CC20

> Byron,
>
> I can understand your frustration, because like you, the ICG to me is a
> group of people I know. However to anyone who has never traveled to
outside
> cons, the ICG is a faceless organization.
>
> Many Calgary members also were very bitter against the faceless ICG after
> CC19. Calgary was encouraged by a certain large west coast chapter to bid
> for a CC, and then due to events in the intervening years, the members of
> that chapter stayed away en masse. Despite the fact that many east coast
> members came to CC19, many locals who worked on the con felt let down by
> “the ICG”. (Ironically, the members who did not work on the con are more
> friendly to the ICG because of meeting the people who came.) A year after
> CC19, a vote held by our chapter on following the ACG out of the ICG was a
> tie.
>
> I think in Australia the problem was even more intense. They had worked
for
> several years to throw a party, and the number of North Americans who came
> could be counted without taking off your shoes.
>
> By the way, I did not know that CC23 never received the site selection
fees.
> I deducted the voting fee when I sent in my membership and was never told
> otherwise.
>
> I will be out of town for the next five days, so if anyone replies to
this,
> I am not ignoring you.
>
> Eileen
>
> —–Original Message—–
>
> Why did CC 20 lead to animosity against the ICG? The ICG had nothing to
do
> with the con, except that, as ICG President, I heavily promoted CC 20 here
> in North America. I feel like I was bitten on the hand that I was using
to
> feed the con!
>
> Resentfully,
>
> Byron>

 

Group: runacc Message: 502 From: Trudy Leonard Date: 3/22/2004
Subject: CC22 ads
Sorry to do this to you, guys, but I don’t have everyone’s individual
address.

This is the last call for ads for the CC22 Program Book. If you are
interested in taking an ad, please contact me for rates, and send ad copy to
brownatl@earthlink.net by Wednesday. We start printing this weekend, and
although we will make every effort to include your ad, there has to be a
cutoff date. Wednesday, March 24 is it.

Thank you for your time,

Trudy

_________________________________________________________________
Check out MSN PC Safety & Security to help ensure your PC is protected and
safe. http://specials.msn.com/msn/security.asp

 

Group: runacc Message: 503 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 3/23/2004
Subject: Re: CC20

At 11:25 PM 3/17/2004 -0700, you wrote:

>Other than the bitterness against the ICG that was fostered in Australia,
>why do you consider CC20 to have been a failure?
>
>Eileen Capes

(1) CC20 committee utterly ignored their obligation to send required
materials (one copy of all publications) to me per the CC ConStitution.
[They did pay their $1 licensing fee.]

(2) Committee utterly failed to communicate with me when I emailed them
(specifically Chris Ballis) with questions regarding the con.

(3) Committee significantly changed venue without bothering to tell me
(also see (2), above).

(4) Committee utterly botched the site selection process.

(6) The convention, for whatever reason, was very poorly attended, and the
“Big Three” events had very poor low participation, or were eliminated
entirely (Fashion Show). As CC’s “mom,” having a 20th anniversary
convention with one of the lowest attendances in CC history is just plain SAD.

Having said that, I just saw CC20’s F&S/F competition last night for the
first time (thanks to Carl Mami), and while it was extremely small, the
costumes and presentations were all of very high quality.

–Karen

 

Group: runacc Message: 504 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 3/25/2004
Subject: Changes to the Costume-Con ConStitution
Hi, folks!

In response to recent conversations concerning what Costume-Con is and
isn’t, the Service Mark Holders have provided a clarification to the
required events. This change is in effect for all bids after CC25, since
their bid was accepted prior to the clarification.

If you have any questions about the language of the change, please
contact Karen Dick.

Text follows. For the entire document, visit:

http://www.costume-con.org/procedure/ccconstitution.shtml

Thanks!

Betsy Delaney
Costume-Con Archivist

-snip-

1.4 Conference Activities

As tradition has established, each Costume-Con conference must have the
following program items: (a) staged costume events, including Science
Fiction/Fantasy themed competition, Historical themed competition, and
Future Fashion themed fashion show (based on a pre-conference future
fashion design competition); (b) at least ten (10)
instructional/educational presentations of some sort (which can take the
form of lectures, panel discussions, seminars, hands-on workshops,
etc.); (c) Site Selection voting for a future Costume-Con conference
(see Article 2); and (d) at least two hours and a meeting area provided
for the Annual Meeting of the International Costumers’ Guild (as
dictated by their By-laws).

Traditionally, conference activities have also included: (a) a Social
(party) on the first night of the conference; (b) costume exhibit, and
(c) a dealer/merchant area. Other events and competitions have been
added now and then at the committee’s discretion. Some of these
activities are: The Single Pattern Contest, $1.98 Contest, Iron Costumer
competition, and Doll Contest.

The Service Mark Holders reserve the right to reject any bid that does
not, in their opinion, uphold the competitive staged events and overall
high standards set by the long history of the conference. [Amended
Thursday, March 25, 2004.]


Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large

************************************************************************
http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 505 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?
Hi, folks!

For those of us who will be at CC22, we seem to have come to a consensus
that we should meet for dinner on Friday. I’ll probably be running to
Burger King for Erin, so I’m game to find a good place to hang out and
chat. If people really want a sit-down dinner before the party, we might
be able to find someplace reasonable outside the hotel, once we get there.

I don’t know how late the dealer room is open, but it seems to me that
6ish is a good time to meet and still have some time to get dressed for
the party. Or should we try for 5 – 5:30?

I’m not doing a lot of costuming this year (for some obvious and some
not so obvious reasons), so I’m going to go about the party prep fairly
casually.

I’m on the road (with the computer!) starting Wednesday morning,
stopping at Greensboro that night. If there’s a reason to reach me (and
who knows – there might be…) feel free to call my cell phone at
301.922.1865. I’m not allergic to having it on and accepting calls on it.

Note that I’m not presently planning to bring the archive stuff I
brought with me last time. I’m working on the CC10 photos, and I’ll have
the site available (I hope) for casual tours.

I am hoping to run another raffle, to replace some more of the funds
I’ve spent out of pocket for photos and videos, too.

See folks there!

Betsy


Betsy R. Delaney
Costume-Con Archivist
Costume-ConNections (http://www.Costume-Con.org/)

 

Group: runacc Message: 506 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Re: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?

If we’re going to a restaurant, we’d prefer something reasonable to cheap
price-wise.
And are we sure a discussion can be had in a restaurant setting? Always
seems a littl difficult to me.
What happened to the idea about Thursday night at the consuite?

Nora

—– Original Message —–
From: “Betsy Delaney” <costume-con@costume-con.org>
To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 11:23 PM
Subject: [runacc] Reminder – Dinner on Friday?

> Hi, folks!
>
> For those of us who will be at CC22, we seem to have come to a consensus
> that we should meet for dinner on Friday. I’ll probably be running to
> Burger King for Erin, so I’m game to find a good place to hang out and
> chat. If people really want a sit-down dinner before the party, we might
> be able to find someplace reasonable outside the hotel, once we get there.
>
> I don’t know how late the dealer room is open, but it seems to me that
> 6ish is a good time to meet and still have some time to get dressed for
> the party. Or should we try for 5 – 5:30?
>
> I’m not doing a lot of costuming this year (for some obvious and some
> not so obvious reasons), so I’m going to go about the party prep fairly
> casually.
>
> I’m on the road (with the computer!) starting Wednesday morning,
> stopping at Greensboro that night. If there’s a reason to reach me (and
> who knows – there might be…) feel free to call my cell phone at
> 301.922.1865. I’m not allergic to having it on and accepting calls on it.
>
> Note that I’m not presently planning to bring the archive stuff I
> brought with me last time. I’m working on the CC10 photos, and I’ll have
> the site available (I hope) for casual tours.
>
> I am hoping to run another raffle, to replace some more of the funds
> I’ve spent out of pocket for photos and videos, too.
>
> See folks there!
>
> Betsy
> —
> —
> Betsy R. Delaney
> Costume-Con Archivist
> Costume-ConNections (http://www.Costume-Con.org/)
>
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

 

Group: runacc Message: 507 From: Elaine Mami Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Re: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?

5:30 – 6-ish sounds good to me.

Elaine

>
>For those of us who will be at CC22, we seem to have come to a consensus
>that we should meet for dinner on Friday. I’ll probably be running to
>Burger King for Erin, so I’m game to find a good place to hang out and
>chat. If people really want a sit-down dinner before the party, we might
>be able to find someplace reasonable outside the hotel, once we get there.
>
>I don’t know how late the dealer room is open, but it seems to me that
>6ish is a good time to meet and still have some time to get dressed for
>the party. Or should we try for 5 – 5:30?

_________________________________________________________________
Get rid of annoying pop-up ads with the new MSN Toolbar � FREE!
http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200414ave/direct/01/

 

Group: runacc Message: 508 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Re: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?

I don’t see why we can’t get together then, too, but I suspect there are
some people who would like to participate who won’t be in until Friday.
I know Marty and Bobby aren’t coming in until then.

I also know Karen and Ricky are tied up with the dealer table, and I’m
hoping they can be there too.

And I’m right there with you on the Cheap plan. I just got a $980
estimate to fix the cosmetic stuff we need to on our current house, and
we are about to spend a metric ton of money on a new house (and we still
don’t know where, yet), so any money I can save on this trip will be a
good thing down the road.

See you folks Thursday!

Betsy

Bruce & Nora Mai wrote:

> If we’re going to a restaurant, we’d prefer something reasonable to cheap
> price-wise.
> And are we sure a discussion can be had in a restaurant setting? Always
> seems a littl difficult to me.
> What happened to the idea about Thursday night at the consuite?
>
> Nora
> —– Original Message —–
> From: “Betsy Delaney” <costume-con@costume-con.org>
> To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 11:23 PM
> Subject: [runacc] Reminder – Dinner on Friday?
>
>
>
>>Hi, folks!
>>
>>For those of us who will be at CC22, we seem to have come to a consensus
>>that we should meet for dinner on Friday. I’ll probably be running to
>>Burger King for Erin, so I’m game to find a good place to hang out and
>>chat. If people really want a sit-down dinner before the party, we might
>>be able to find someplace reasonable outside the hotel, once we get there.
>>
>>I don’t know how late the dealer room is open, but it seems to me that
>>6ish is a good time to meet and still have some time to get dressed for
>>the party. Or should we try for 5 – 5:30?
>>
>>I’m not doing a lot of costuming this year (for some obvious and some
>>not so obvious reasons), so I’m going to go about the party prep fairly
>>casually.
>>
>>I’m on the road (with the computer!) starting Wednesday morning,
>>stopping at Greensboro that night. If there’s a reason to reach me (and
>>who knows – there might be…) feel free to call my cell phone at
>>301.922.1865. I’m not allergic to having it on and accepting calls on it.
>>
>>Note that I’m not presently planning to bring the archive stuff I
>>brought with me last time. I’m working on the CC10 photos, and I’ll have
>>the site available (I hope) for casual tours.
>>
>>I am hoping to run another raffle, to replace some more of the funds
>>I’ve spent out of pocket for photos and videos, too.
>>
>>See folks there!
>>
>>Betsy
>>–
>>–
>>Betsy R. Delaney
>>Costume-Con Archivist
>>Costume-ConNections (http://www.Costume-Con.org/)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>



Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large

************************************************************************
http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 509 From: Byron Connell Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Re: Reminder – Dinner on Friday?

Betsy —

Dinner on Friday sounds OK to me. An Indian place would be nice, if there’s
someplace reasonably near. (We’ll have a car, too.)

I owe you a write-up on the Green Room for the CC runners’ guide. It’s
almost done. However, if I can’t get it off tomorrow (unlikely), I’ll get
it to you shortly (I hope) after the con.

See you at CC

Byron

—– Original Message —–
From: “Betsy Delaney” <costume-con@costume-con.org>
To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 12:23 AM
Subject: [runacc] Reminder – Dinner on Friday?

> Hi, folks!
>
> For those of us who will be at CC22, we seem to have come to a consensus
> that we should meet for dinner on Friday. I’ll probably be running to
> Burger King for Erin, so I’m game to find a good place to hang out and
> chat. If people really want a sit-down dinner before the party, we might
> be able to find someplace reasonable outside the hotel, once we get there.
>
> I don’t know how late the dealer room is open, but it seems to me that
> 6ish is a good time to meet and still have some time to get dressed for
> the party. Or should we try for 5 – 5:30?
>
> I’m not doing a lot of costuming this year (for some obvious and some
> not so obvious reasons), so I’m going to go about the party prep fairly
> casually.
>
> I’m on the road (with the computer!) starting Wednesday morning,
> stopping at Greensboro that night. If there’s a reason to reach me (and
> who knows – there might be…) feel free to call my cell phone at
> 301.922.1865. I’m not allergic to having it on and accepting calls on it.
>
> Note that I’m not presently planning to bring the archive stuff I
> brought with me last time. I’m working on the CC10 photos, and I’ll have
> the site available (I hope) for casual tours.
>
> I am hoping to run another raffle, to replace some more of the funds
> I’ve spent out of pocket for photos and videos, too.
>
> See folks there!
>
> Betsy
> —
> —
> Betsy R. Delaney
> Costume-Con Archivist
> Costume-ConNections (http://www.Costume-Con.org/)

 

Group: runacc Message: 510 From: betsy Date: 3/30/2004
Subject: Offline
Hi, folks!

I won’t have time to check my email tomorrow before getting in the car and
going. If people want/need to get ahold of me, try my cell at 301.922.1865.

Note to the Run A CC folks: I’ve goofed. I really want to go on the puppet
museum tour, and I don’t think I’ll be able to go until Friday. If that’s the
case, I’m not sure when I’ll be back at the hotel for dinner before the party.

OOPS!

I’m going to try Really Hard to get down there in time for the Thursday tour,
but I’m not holding my breath.

If all else fails, we can try and catch each other during the weekend.

Sigh.

See you Real Soon Now!

Betsy
Your Site Selection Commissioner

(ps: Traveling with one small child was interesting. Two? I’ve got chills…)

Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large
WebInvent.com, Inc.

************************************************************************
www.WebInvent.com * www.Costume-Con.org * www.hawkeswood.com
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 511 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/9/2004
Subject: CC-22
Hope everyone is recovering nicely.
seems we’re working on getting colds now.
Trudy and Fiona, you did a wonderful job on the con, and I for one had a
great time.

As I comment on things, my intention is just to give ideas to future
con-coms, not pick on you.

Hotel- for the size of the con, it was fine.
we could have fit another 100 people in it just fine.
I really liked the central area layout.
yes I know exhibits were far off, as was one panel room, but overall it was
much better layout than some.
It made it easy to get between panels, ditch out from a panel to see if
it’s your tech time yet, etc..

It seems these days that amenities once you get to the con are more
important than closeness to the airport.
yes there are many folks who don’t drive, and a $35.00 cab ride stinks, but
the availability of food and other stuff outside the hotel within walking
or 5 min. drive, seems like a fair trade-off. and while I don’t like paying
to park where I rent a room, it sure as heck beats the 24.00 per day at
Arisia to park.

Dealers- If there had been more space, more would have been nice, but for
the attendance size, it was good as is.
I’m sure people would like a million dealers there, but then the dealers
don’t make money and it’s not worth it. Trust me, if Janet thought there
was gonna be 600 people there, she’d have been there and paid for the extra
security. but with a small con, there’s only so much pocket money walking
around these days.

Programming.
I know they had trouble getting everything straight till the last minute,
but it worked out all right.
Having panelists know what they’re doing 2-3 months out would be nice, though.
I can talk for an hour about anything whether I have a clue or not; most
people would like to be more prepared than that.
On the good side, once the schedule was set, we found everyone very
accommodating as far as any changes we needed. so much so that I could be
on panels that friends wanted help with, that weren’t originally on my
schedule. And thanks to Kevin for doing the basic makeup, so I could just
do the advanced, which freed me up to help others.

Masquerades- as a percentage of attendance all 3 events were up to snuff,
if you lump in single patterns with the FFS.

Half time- I assume that the con got a deal on the radio folks being there,
since it was so many con-com folks performing. That’s not a comment I would
make on the ICG list, I only make it here as we talk about budgets so
often, and I personally feel that money can be spent elsewhere before live
entertainment, unless it’s too good a deal to pass up. At a regular con,
half time entertainment is important only if you want the crowd to stick
around for awards. That’s not a problem at a CC.
On one hand, it was great to see what all our friends are like as
performers away from us, on the other, it might have been too long. So
what, I guess, the folks who liked it stayed and watched, the folks who
didn’t could spend time relaxing and drinking .
I REALLY liked having fan photography as part of half-time. Sad it won’t
happen like that next year due to the logistics of the stage. Here’s hoping
that even if it’s not on stage, Dan and Charles can organize basically the
same thing out in the theater lobby or somewhere, before we all walk back
to the hotels.

Social- What a blast. It was a theme that was easy to deal with. If you
wanted to go to extremes and make something, great (you know that ol’
pressure to make costumes bit, LOL) or you could just muggle out and look
bewildered. Great atmosphere.
The band was funny. Hard to hang out inside and enjoy your friends with
them playing, but because of the hotel layout, you could be nearby . I hope
that didn’t cost them much $$ and I hope future cons aren’t going to think
that live entertainment is expected.

Con Suite- Everybody enjoyed how overstocked the con suite was. I hope this
wasn’t a budget buster. It was way more than necessary, and again, I hope
that future cons don’t feel obligated to try to have hot food and so much
up there if it’s a money concern. I’m hoping that so many folks sponsoring
the suite helped out with this and it seems that each sponsor left the
leftovers, and we just accrued more food as we went throughout the weekend.

It was only too small because people wanted to watch the videos in the
evenings. Trying to be polite so all can see takes up a bunch of space.
In and out all day, there was plenty of room. not worth paying for a third
room; just for space for the two evenings.

Tech.–Enough bucks for a spot and it would have all been just fine. Sound
worked well, rehearsals weren’t too bad. Odd to not have the MC there for
the SF tech , but I assume he was on panels and such and couldn’t clone
himself, so it’s understandable. He made the effort to talk to everyone
back stage, and I think he did a very good job.

Historic pre-judging. seems like we need X amount of minutes scheduled per
PERSON, not per entry, or some formula in between 5 minutes a group and 5
minutes a person, or something. We gave up and told them we’d be in the
dealer room, call us if you want us.
Deb Salisbury did a GREAT job as the clerk, running around keeping track of
a schedule gone wacky and letting folks know what’s up.

Hope this is taken as constructive ideas, we had a great time overall. On
the personal fun scale, it’s in our top 5

Ricky

 

Group: runacc Message: 512 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Changing the deadline for bidding for all future bids…
Hi, folks!

I just checked the site, and I never posted the deadline for CC26’s bid.
After discussing the ramifications with Karen and Ricky, it’s my feeling
that we’re making it too hard on ourselves for figuring out the date of
deadline for bid materials. Setting the date at September 30 of each
year gives every bid at least 90 days prior to the start of the con to
circulate its information so that when bidding occurs the site selection
materials reach everyone. And the date is fixed, so each year the
deadline will be the same. Since we’re hearing about bids another five
years out (at least!), this should simplify the process some.

To that end, the ConStitution will be updated shortly to reflect this
change.

I’ve already talked to Kevin and Andy, to warn them.

I’ve also just uploaded what I have so far for CC22, but I have a few
more things to change – which may be done tonight or in the next day or so.

I’m up too late again tonight.

Questions? Fire away!

Cheers,

Betsy


Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large

************************************************************************
http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 513 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Participants and awards (incomplete) for CC22
Hi, folks!

You can now find the info on the masquerades (no pictures yet) on the
Costume-ConNections site.

As always, if you notice an omission, error or other, please let me know
ASAP!

See: http://www.costume-con.org/CClink/lists.shtml

(Yes, I know this is just a URL – I’ll post the lists in plain text
sometime after I get the Fashion Folio/Single Pattern stuff!

Right now, I gotta go to BED!

Thanks!

Betsy


Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large

************************************************************************
http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 514 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Bruce’s comments on Ricky’s review

I’ve got my own con-goer’s review in the works (contributed to by a number
of people — not just my viewpoint), but I thought I’d add my experience to
Ricky’s for this list.

> Hotel- for the size of the con, it was fine.
> we could have fit another 100 people in it just fine.
> I really liked the central area layout.

I noticed this too. CC25’s will be laid out this way as well. I also made
a mental note to perhaps try to put all the various bid tables,
registration, etc, closer together, somewhat like at CC21. I think having
them all out there in the central area, along with all the costumed people
passing each other back and forth, would lend more of a sense of creative
energy, if you know what I mean.

> It seems these days that amenities once you get to the con are more
> important than closeness to the airport.

Yes, well, there’s that whole thing about having to pay more at a hotel
that’s close to the airport….

> yes there are many folks who don’t drive, and a $35.00 cab ride stinks,

but

> the availability of food and other stuff outside the hotel within walking
> or 5 min. drive, seems like a fair trade-off. and while I don’t like

paying

> to park where I rent a room, it sure as heck beats the 24.00 per day at
> Arisia to park.

Ow. Yeah. Our only beef was that it would have been nice to have the $5 a
day info sooner than the last PR.

>
> Dealers- If there had been more space, more would have been nice, but for
> the attendance size, it was good as is.
> I’m sure people would like a million dealers there, but then the dealers
> don’t make money and it’s not worth it. Trust me, if Janet thought there
> was gonna be 600 people there, she’d have been there and paid for the

extra

> security. but with a small con, there’s only so much pocket money walking
> around these days.

Well, the potential for Chicago being bigger must have been the driving
factor, because I don’t think 21 was much bigger. Just an observation.

> Programming.
> I know they had trouble getting everything straight till the last minute,
> but it worked out all right.
> Having panelists know what they’re doing 2-3 months out would be nice,

though.

> I can talk for an hour about anything whether I have a clue or not; most
> people would like to be more prepared than that.

Yeah, we found out we were on panels and no one told us until we mentioned
that we noticed it. And then I forgot about responding (this was a couple
of weeks out, mind you). We probably would have been more than willing to
do more panels if we’d been contacted about what we could do, rather than
just someone looking over the previous year’s programming and sliding us in
that way.

> I personally feel that money can be spent elsewhere before live
> entertainment, unless it’s too good a deal to pass up. At a regular con,
> half time entertainment is important only if you want the crowd to stick
> around for awards. That’s not a problem at a CC.
> On one hand, it was great to see what all our friends are like as
> performers away from us, on the other, it might have been too long. So
> what, I guess, the folks who liked it stayed and watched, the folks who
> didn’t could spend time relaxing and drinking .

No insult intended to the folks involved, but for us personally, the
halftime entertainment
after the Historical was WAY too long. I found out why later, during the
con post-mortem, but
nonetheless, it was an interminably long time with the fan photos AND the
show. At least the fans had something to do, taking pictures, so they were
on their feet. the saving grace is, like any genre, people were more
forgiving and seemed to enjoy the show because it was people they knew.

> I REALLY liked having fan photography as part of half-time.

Unless I’m mistaken, Trudy and Fiona borrowed this concept from Archon, and
yes, it seems to go over very well. The only problem one can encounter is
if the stage is very high. Archon’s is raised rather high, so the angle is
not as good as it was here.

> Social- What a blast. It was a theme that was easy to deal with. If you
> wanted to go to extremes and make something, great (you know that ol’
> pressure to make costumes bit, LOL) or you could just muggle out and look
> bewildered. Great atmosphere.

Even though I “muggled it” (didn’t really have anything appropriate, so I
was one of the few Muggles there), this was probably one of the most
successful Socials I seen, participation-wise.

> The band was funny. Hard to hang out inside and enjoy your friends with
> them playing, but because of the hotel layout, you could be nearby . I

hope

> that didn’t cost them much $$ and I hope future cons aren’t going to think
> that live entertainment is expected.

Chances are we won’t, but it does point to the importance of having music of
some sort to lend a little atmosphere to the theme.

> Con Suite- Everybody enjoyed how overstocked the con suite was. I hope

this

> wasn’t a budget buster. It was way more than necessary, and again, I hope
> that future cons don’t feel obligated to try to have hot food and so much
> up there if it’s a money concern. I’m hoping that so many folks sponsoring
> the suite helped out with this and it seems that each sponsor left the
> leftovers, and we just accrued more food as we went throughout the

weekend.

This definitely raised the bar on quality of hospitality. I can tell you
having protein (wings, pizza rolls, mostaccioli, cheese, etc.) served was
appreciated by a number of people. While I don’t think we’ll be going that
far, I have passed on to our Hospitality guy that he has a challenge.

> Tech.–Enough bucks for a spot and it would have all been just fine. Sound
> worked well, rehearsals weren’t too bad. Odd to not have the MC there for
> the SF tech , but I assume he was on panels and such and couldn’t clone
> himself, so it’s understandable. He made the effort to talk to everyone
> back stage, and I think he did a very good job.

> Historic pre-judging. seems like we need X amount of minutes scheduled per
> PERSON, not per entry, or some formula in between 5 minutes a group and 5
> minutes a person, or something. We gave up and told them we’d be in the
> dealer room, call us if you want us.

I can tell you what happened here and cover two subjects at once. I was
being judged early-on on Saturday, so I missed the first hour or two. I was
there at the rehearsals almost all of the rest of the time. Sorry I missed
you guys. One of the main reasons for the judging delays was because we had
such a large group.

I’ll hit this a little more on the general review, but here are the bullets:

1. Assign a schedule for the judges.

2. Judges shouldn’t blame the participants for delays. Pre-registration
should have helped anticipate problems.

3. The judges didn’t follow the format regarding awards for workmanship,
documentation and presentation. We thought the precedent was set at 18.
Was this a one time event?

That’s it from me/us.

Bruce

 

Group: runacc Message: 515 From: Karen Heim Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Re: Participants and awards (incomplete) for CC22

Note on Historical Masquerade – After the Rain: the two Hillens are
Rachel and Genie (you perhaps heard her proper first name, which is
Eugenia – but definitely NOT Jeanine). Also, Karen McFerran constructed
an outfit, but did not appear in the presentation.

Note on Doll Show: I know Steve and Cathy can look a bit stiff, but I
assure you they were the creators of the outfits for the Jedi Mouster
and Pandawan Learner, not vice versa.

Karen

Betsy Delaney wrote:

> Hi, folks!
>
> You can now find the info on the masquerades (no pictures yet) on the
> Costume-ConNections site.
>
> As always, if you notice an omission, error or other, please let me know
> ASAP!
>
> See: http://www.costume-con.org/CClink/lists.shtml
>

 

Group: runacc Message: 516 From: Trudy Leonard Date: 4/10/2004
Subject: Re: CC-22

Ricky (and others who post reviews here) –

With your permission, I would like to pass these on to the folks on the rest
of the committee (who aren’t already on this list).

I’m either getting a cold of the pollen is really getting to me. Since I
went out and worked in the yard yesterday and have been hanging laundry out
everyday since we go home, I’m betting on the pollen. The front porch floor
is yellow…

Some comments in reply –

The band on Friday night were friends and former collegues of Fiona and
Alton’s from the Georgia Renaissance Festival. They agreed to play in
exchange for the chance to sell tapes and CD’s.

The Radio Theatre group also performed for free in exchange for the right to
sell tapes and CD’s. We had originally planned a two-part play performed
during each half-time. When our writer died unexpectedly, we decided to go
with Fiona’s play and do it on Sunday because of the theme. Since people
had objected last year to having the winners announced during breaks of Iron
Costumer, we waited until it was over to annouce them. Also, as actors, you
don’t want to break the flow of the play. Of course, we were also trying to
fit in Fan Photo and the auctions to benefit the archives. Probably too
much, in retrospect. We didn’t feel that we had anyone with the time and
energy to do something like Iron Costumer, so we went with what we had. We
were very pleased with the audience response, but understand that the
contestants were anxious for the results.

>From: Ricky & Karen Dick <castleb@pulsenet.com>
>Reply-To: runacc@yahoogroups.com
>To: runacc@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [runacc] CC-22
>Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 22:42:39 -0400
>
>Hope everyone is recovering nicely.
>seems we’re working on getting colds now.
>Trudy and Fiona, you did a wonderful job on the con, and I for one had a
>great time.
>
>As I comment on things, my intention is just to give ideas to future
>con-coms, not pick on you.
>
>Hotel- for the size of the con, it was fine.
>we could have fit another 100 people in it just fine.
>I really liked the central area layout.
>yes I know exhibits were far off, as was one panel room, but overall it was
>much better layout than some.
>It made it easy to get between panels, ditch out from a panel to see if
>it’s your tech time yet, etc..
>
>It seems these days that amenities once you get to the con are more
>important than closeness to the airport.
>yes there are many folks who don’t drive, and a $35.00 cab ride stinks, but
>the availability of food and other stuff outside the hotel within walking
>or 5 min. drive, seems like a fair trade-off. and while I don’t like paying
>to park where I rent a room, it sure as heck beats the 24.00 per day at
>Arisia to park.
>
>Dealers- If there had been more space, more would have been nice, but for
>the attendance size, it was good as is.
>I’m sure people would like a million dealers there, but then the dealers
>don’t make money and it’s not worth it. Trust me, if Janet thought there
>was gonna be 600 people there, she’d have been there and paid for the extra
>security. but with a small con, there’s only so much pocket money walking
>around these days.
>
>Programming.
>I know they had trouble getting everything straight till the last minute,
>but it worked out all right.
>Having panelists know what they’re doing 2-3 months out would be nice,
>though.
>I can talk for an hour about anything whether I have a clue or not; most
>people would like to be more prepared than that.
>On the good side, once the schedule was set, we found everyone very
>accommodating as far as any changes we needed. so much so that I could be
>on panels that friends wanted help with, that weren’t originally on my
>schedule. And thanks to Kevin for doing the basic makeup, so I could just
>do the advanced, which freed me up to help others.
>
>Masquerades- as a percentage of attendance all 3 events were up to snuff,
>if you lump in single patterns with the FFS.
>
>Half time- I assume that the con got a deal on the radio folks being there,
>since it was so many con-com folks performing. That’s not a comment I would
>make on the ICG list, I only make it here as we talk about budgets so
>often, and I personally feel that money can be spent elsewhere before live
>entertainment, unless it’s too good a deal to pass up. At a regular con,
>half time entertainment is important only if you want the crowd to stick
>around for awards. That’s not a problem at a CC.
>On one hand, it was great to see what all our friends are like as
>performers away from us, on the other, it might have been too long. So
>what, I guess, the folks who liked it stayed and watched, the folks who
>didn’t could spend time relaxing and drinking .
>I REALLY liked having fan photography as part of half-time. Sad it won’t
>happen like that next year due to the logistics of the stage. Here’s hoping
>that even if it’s not on stage, Dan and Charles can organize basically the
>same thing out in the theater lobby or somewhere, before we all walk back
>to the hotels.
>
>Social- What a blast. It was a theme that was easy to deal with. If you
>wanted to go to extremes and make something, great (you know that ol’
>pressure to make costumes bit, LOL) or you could just muggle out and look
>bewildered. Great atmosphere.
>The band was funny. Hard to hang out inside and enjoy your friends with
>them playing, but because of the hotel layout, you could be nearby . I hope
>that didn’t cost them much $$ and I hope future cons aren’t going to think
>that live entertainment is expected.
>
>Con Suite- Everybody enjoyed how overstocked the con suite was. I hope this
>wasn’t a budget buster. It was way more than necessary, and again, I hope
>that future cons don’t feel obligated to try to have hot food and so much
>up there if it’s a money concern. I’m hoping that so many folks sponsoring
>the suite helped out with this and it seems that each sponsor left the
>leftovers, and we just accrued more food as we went throughout the weekend.
>
>It was only too small because people wanted to watch the videos in the
>evenings. Trying to be polite so all can see takes up a bunch of space.
>In and out all day, there was plenty of room. not worth paying for a third
>room; just for space for the two evenings.
>
>Tech.–Enough bucks for a spot and it would have all been just fine. Sound
>worked well, rehearsals weren’t too bad. Odd to not have the MC there for
>the SF tech , but I assume he was on panels and such and couldn’t clone
>himself, so it’s understandable. He made the effort to talk to everyone
>back stage, and I think he did a very good job.
>
>Historic pre-judging. seems like we need X amount of minutes scheduled per
>PERSON, not per entry, or some formula in between 5 minutes a group and 5
>minutes a person, or something. We gave up and told them we’d be in the
>dealer room, call us if you want us.
>Deb Salisbury did a GREAT job as the clerk, running around keeping track of
>a schedule gone wacky and letting folks know what’s up.
>
>Hope this is taken as constructive ideas, we had a great time overall. On
>the personal fun scale, it’s in our top 5
>
>Ricky
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page � FREE
download! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/

 

Group: runacc Message: 517 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/11/2004
Subject: Re: CC-22
Just a few quick, personal comments:

1. The Social was the most fun I’ve had (watching and participating) in
quite some time. I was very impressed, not just with the layout of the
room, but with the effort the majority of participants put into their
party attire.

2. To the hotel’s credit, when we pointed out that it took less than
five minutes to unstop our toilet once Engineering made it to our room
in the morning, they graciously removed two nights from our bill. And
when we checked out, the desk clerk failed to charge us for parking.
Yeah, we didn’t get our extra towels – apparently they’re running on
very short supply.

3. I only noticed two tech glitches (one light, one sound), and neither
one affected the show.

4. Yeah, the radio show timing might have been better. It’s my
suggestion that if you choose to run a main tent show during half time,
delaying the start of it for the fan photos may not be the best choice.
I’d have reversed the process, and allowed the photos after the show, or
out in the hall during it.

5. While I’m very grateful to the con for arranging the second Puppetry
tour, we were the only ones to attend it (Barb, Erin, Katie and I). I’m
sorry that the information about the change in date of my panel wasn’t
communicated – I only had two people attend and they weren’t planning to
do it originally. A method for announcing changes to the program should
be established before the start of the con to avoid that sort of
problem. (It wasn’t a big deal – I don’t know if people were planning to
attend the panel in the original slot.)

6. Dan sez he was disappointed that the Regency Dance was cancelled, but
I have to be honest that I didn’t miss it myself, and…well…Dan
wasn’t actually “there” for the weekend…

I’d be fishing for an official review of the con for the newsletter, but
I won’t have room to print it until the July issue at the earliest. If
someone wants to provide me with something in the 400-500 word range for
that issue, that’d be cool.

It’s a tribute to the quality of the weekend that by Sunday night I was
SOOO exhausted I couldn’t stay up to SMOC. In fact, I think this is the
first time in almost 20 years of CCs that I hit the bed before 11:30pm
on a Sunday, and I’ve been known in the past to greet the dawn. (Right,
Pierre?)

In fact, I’m still recovering – it’s a good thing I haven’t had much in
the way of billable work to do (in a quirky sort of way) because I
really needed to catch up on sleep.

Oh, and one more comment: I LOVE having the ICG meeting on Friday. If I
had a choice, I’d like to see it stay that way.

Thanks for a GREAT TIME!

Cheers,

Betsy



Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large

************************************************************************
http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 518 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/12/2004
Subject: CC22 review
This is the version of the SLUT review more tailored for the Runacc list.
You will find different info on this one, so you might want to read the
ICG-D version also. I preface this review by saying that I’m the
mouthpiece — the review reflects an group opinion. No malice is meant, but
if it was a totally glowing report, everyone would suspect something.

So.

Let’s start at the beginning with the CC22 website. There was some
disappointments here. As of this year, a larger percentage of people were
finding out about the con or seeking info via the Internet. Yet, the
convention website was not being regularly updated. Also, all the
masquerade entry forms were formatted in PDF. Since you couldn’t register
online with them, there didn’t seem to be much point to them.

A few glaring errors in regards to the Folio: The list of Folio members was
not kept up to date online — thereby defeating its purpose. Apparently
the contact address for Nora, the Folio Show Director, was not correct, nor
were the sponsors of the prizes for the show. I believe corrections were
sent via e-mail in January, but they were not posted on the website until
the beginning of this month.

Once we got to the con:

We understand there were serious problems with the site location. We were
willing to cut a lot of slack on this factor. As a convention facility, it
was pretty good. Having the meeting rooms all in one area was a plus. I
made a mental note that perhaps having the various registration and bid
tables etc., closer together might be better from a creative energy level
standpoint. Something for CC25 to consider. It would have been nice to
have more lounge furniture in that area. The hotel’s location was good,
with plenty of places to eat within easy walking distance. As others have
mentioned, towels and toilet paper were a somewhat rare commodity at times.
We also understand that some guests had the locks on their doors
re-configured in the middle of the weekend, so they couldn’t get into their
rooms. What was up with that?

“Housekeeping has gone home” (after 6:00 pm?) was apparently the excuse du
jour for the shortage of towels and toilet paper. Great cost cutting
measure, there, guys. Oh, and the little $1.80 charge we had on our bill
(mentioned on the D list)? We had to go to the gift shop to get the person
to take it off. Sadly, either she was clueless or was not real good on
English. There were hand-written notes of charges (??) and quite plainly the
$1.80 we couldn’t account for was right there, credited to room 555, not
533, but this was apparently not a concept she could quite grasp. She even
turned the pages back to February at one point (say what?). Nonetheless,
once we went back to the front desk and said it was wrong, the charge was
taken off. Not a big deal, just the principle of the thing.

We were pleased to see the Con Suite open on Thursday evening. It allowed
us to unwind and pick up most of our membership packets.

Friday:

Holding the ICG meeting on Friday morning was perceived by many to be a good
thing, rather than waiting to hold it on Monday. The only down side to this
was we were there way too long. Combined with the Board meeting beforehand
for an hour, that meant a total of 3 hours of discussions. My ears only
stopped bleeding a day or so ago.

Registration for the con seemed well organized and adequately staffed. The
computer database they were using for membership appeared to work well.
The Dealers Room, while small, was open on time. Exhibits were not.

The Friday Night Social:

Of all the socials we’ve attended, this appeared to be one of the most
successful on record. It allowed everyone to participate, even if one came
as a Muggle. The refreshments were plentiful – always a plus. There were
very few negatives:
While most liked the band, it interfered with the “social” aspect of the
event, forcing people either to yell at each other or leave the room. Also,
the lights were so low that it was hard to see people’s costumes.

Saturday:

Tech rehearsals for the SF & F masq were well organized and ran smoothly.
The SF & F masquerade ran relatively smoothly, also. The crew pretty much
knew what they were doing. It was good to see Sue Kulinyi and Eric Cannon
again, after having last worked with them at CC16.

I saw only minor problems – the speakers were a bit loud at times. I
understand that people were fairly pleased with my turn as MC. There could
have been more ninjas, but this was just indicative of the lightly attended
convention. Some said that perhaps the ninjas were inexperienced and not
very helpful at times with getting people off-stage.

In both the SF & F and Historical masqs, it was observed that the Stage
Manager was behind on some cues, causing a few late sound and/or light cues
along the way. It seems that during the planning, no one had given thought
to wrangling the individual costumers onto the stage for their fan photog
moments. I was pleased to be asked to do it. Also, the handing out of the
awards hadn’t quite been worked out, so I suggested that Fiona and I
tag-team handing them to the winners.

The Green Room was cramped, but we understand it was the only space
available. Nonetheless, I’ve been told that the dens could have been better
arranged, and there would have been some room to place a den or so behind
the official photography area. Also, while we realize that they are
necessary for parents, baby strollers should be kept out of the aisles where
people are trying to get back and forth in the room. The Green Room for
both nights of the masqs was run with the usual professionalism, but the
repair table was blocked by the narrow aisles full of people and a single
large den. There were not enough mirrors, and they were frequently hogged
by a few people. Good grub, though.

Too bad about the stage problems, including the pipe and drape (see other
review).

A suggestion has been made that the video people be given some sort of
paperwork in the future to allow them to know where and when entries are
made, so things aren’t missed.

Sunday:

A thumbs up to the committee for publishing a reminder about daylight
savings time in the program, as well as making announcements repeatedly the
night before.

One nice thing about having the tech rehearsal and then having the costumers
stay in the Green Room until the Folio show was that it allowed people to
relax a bit before actually going on stage. Folks might want to take note
of this in the future.

Thoughts on the Single Pattern contest: This was not as well organized. The
person in charge did not have good communications, and then we understand
they could not come at the last minute. Apparently we got a notification
via email on the day we left – after we’d already taken our computer to the
repair shop – so we had no clue tthere was a problem until we got to
Atlanta. A little sooner notification would have been nice.

Historical judging suggestions:

1. The Masquerade Director should assign a schedule for the judges, rather
than depend on them to finish in a timely manner. With that in mind.

2. Be realistic about the time required for judging each participant, not
each entry. Sometimes the judges didn’t take very long, but others took
longer.

3. the Masq Director shouldn’t blame the participants for delays. We know
our group, the Rainbow Cavaliers, took a lot of time and it set the judging
back a bit (forcing some judging to be done in a central room), but this
should have been anticipated when we pre-registered. And even though our
group took roughly 90 minutes to get through, with 14 people that only
averaged 7-8 minutes each.

4. The MD needs to enforce the Historical judging format (re: Workmanship,
Documentation and Presentation). Was the idea of a documentation award a
one-time thing? I thought a precedent had been set.

On the plus side, we were really glad to be able to be judged in our rooms,
even if it was a group of us in a room at a time. It was less like a Board
Exam. Also, the judges were quite thorough, asking good questions.

Taking myself completely out of these next comments, I have been told the MC
seemed less confident and made several mispronunciation mistakes. I don’t
know whose fault it was, but one or two names were left off the credits for
our presentation, even though we took pains to make sure that they weren’t.

The biggest gripe for us was intermission between the masquerade and the
awards. While the radio play was apparently of high caliber, it was way too
long for the amount of time involved. People in corsets or other
restrictive clothing shouldn’t kept waiting that long. Sure, you can tell
them to feel free to change, but the audience likes to see the costume that
won. If it were me, while it might have caused problems, the play should
have been truncated at the very least, or completely stricken when it was
obvious how long it would be before awards would be read. And let’s not
forget the accompanying announcements, which added even more time.

The Con Suite: We understand that there was some sort of bait-and-switch
with the hotel so that it wasn’t very big. Not the concom’s fault. The
guys who ran this raised the bar for standards of supply. Real food with
protein (like chicken wings!) was greatly appreciated. We would have liked
to have seen more vegetables, though.

Showing costume movies as entertainment background in the con suite has
certain drawbacks. While it’s a good idea on paper, it tends to suck
attention spans and conversation right out of the room. This is especially
so when the audio is up very loud. So, if you wanted to have a nice
conversation in that room, you (and the person who you are conversing with)
had to talk over the audio and fight getting distracted by what was on TV.
I have a suggestion if future cons continue this idea – how about a video of
BIS or highlights of either past International entries or of the host city’s
regional masquerade?

Finally, we were a bit uncomfortable with the way the presentation of the
ICG Lifetime Achievement Award was handled. Yes, there are people who have
been overlooked for this recognition, but to say so publicly lessened the
honor to both of this year’s recipients. In addition, since these mentions
closely followed the subject of a posthumous award, at least one person
gasped aloud because they thought the implication was that one or the other
of these deserving people had died. We know that was not the intention.
Anyone who wasn’t familiar with the presenter and the intent of the
posthumous award might not have understood the context.

Overall, we had a pretty good time, even if some of us didn’t get to see
many of the panels, due to certain commitments. We welcome those organizers
to the “Never Again” club and look forward to the day when the do it again.

 

Group: runacc Message: 519 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

At 08:55 PM 4/12/2004 -0500, you wrote:

>As others have mentioned, towels and toilet paper were a somewhat rare
>commodity at times.

This did not happen to us personally, but we know others had problems.

Because we have long hair, and because I have severe skin allergies to the
detergents used to wash hotel linens, we always bring at least one bath
towel each in self-defense.

But it shouldn’t be a problem to get toilet paper or towels, agreed.

>We also understand that some guests had the locks on their doors
>re-configured in the middle of the weekend, so they couldn’t get into their
>rooms. What was up with that?

This has happened at other conventions many times. It’s the just the
irritation of getting the cards re-programmed.

I was at one LunaCon where the battery in the card reader in the door
failed, and hotel security had to break us into our room with a crowbar.
Then we had to leave somebody in the room at all times because the door was
broken and the hotel had no rooms available for a transfer. So it could
have been worse.

>One nice thing about having the tech rehearsal and then having the costumers
>stay in the Green Room until the Folio show was that it allowed people to
>relax a bit before actually going on stage. Folks might want to take note
>of this in the future.

Only one comment here. Cait and I had to miss Tech Rehearsal for the
Historical because we were getting into hair, makeup, and costume for the
Future Fashion Show dress rehearsal. And neither Cait nor I could sit down
in our FFS entries without getting (as my 8th grade Home Ec teacher would
have called it) “rump-sprung,” so we stood from the time we got into
costume until the FFS was over. I would rather have done the FFS rehearsal
to get the blocking, then gone back to my room and changed, then come back
and done the show. Just MHO.

Maybe most people don’t do both the FFS and the Historical (but both Ricky
and I have, multiple times), but keep in mind that this could be an issue.

>Be realistic about the time required for judging each participant, not
>each entry.

Amen.

>And even though our
>group took roughly 90 minutes to get through, with 14 people that only
>averaged 7-8 minutes each.

Not unreasonable for detailed costumes.

>The MD needs to enforce the Historical judging format (re: Workmanship,
>Documentation and Presentation). Was the idea of a documentation award a
>one-time thing? I thought a precedent had been set.

The MD should not be dictating anything to any judges in either masquerade.
Judging the masquerade is not in the MD’s job description.

It is my understanding that awards for documentation are at the discretion
of the judges.
I wasn’t a judge, so I can’t speak for them. I’m sure they would be happy
to comment re documentation if someone would ask them.

It is also the judges’ discretion to roll Workmanship and Presentation into
one set of awards if they so choose. The Historical has always been an odd
animal in that Workmanship (and documenting what you’re doing) has always
been weighted more heavily than on-stage presentation (at least since
Costume-Con 1, where a flamboyant stage presentation trumped thousands of
hours of research and handwork, and after the howls of protest died down,
the whole process got re-thought). Therefore, an extremely accurate costume
with a very mediocre presentation may end up being Best-In-Show. The
Historical has always been very hard to gauge from an audience point of
view, as the audience does not get to see the documentation and costumes up
close the way the judges do.

>Taking myself completely out of these next comments, I have been told the MC
>seemed less confident and made several mispronunciation mistakes. I don’t
>know whose fault it was, but one or two names were left off the credits for
>our presentation, even though we took pains to make sure that they weren’t.

As a first-time MC, the MC is allowed some mistakes as part of the learning
process.
If the same mistakes are being made by the same MC after several
masquerades, then it is time to make radical course corrections.

Without first-time MCs, we will never have trained replacements for other
popular MCs when they retire.

>The guys who ran this raised the bar for standards of supply. Real food with
>protein (like chicken wings!) was greatly appreciated. We would have liked
>to have seen more vegetables, though.

To me, anything beyond drinks and chips is gravy. Greatly appreciated (like
chicken wings!), but not expected.

Larger conventions can afford to have “real food” in the con suite and feed
their staff out of it all weekend. Costume-Con just hasn’t been that large
lately.

At CC-6, once we had gotten LOTS of walk-in memberships, we immediately
upgraded con suite fare and asked the hotel to put out coffee and tea
services on the con floor as a “thank you” and immediate benefit to our
members.

–Karen (and Ricky)

 

Group: runacc Message: 520 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

—– Original Message —–
From: “Ricky & Karen Dick” <castleb@pulsenet.com>
To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: [runacc] CC22 review

>
> As a first-time MC, the MC is allowed some mistakes as part of the
learning
> process.
> If the same mistakes are being made by the same MC after several
> masquerades, then it is time to make radical course corrections.
>
> Without first-time MCs, we will never have trained replacements for other
> popular MCs when they retire.

As a second-timer, I agree, although the impressin I got is that this was
not his first time. I stand corrected if I’m wrong.

Bruce

 

Group: runacc Message: 521 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

On Apr 12, 2004, at 9:42 PM, Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

> At 08:55 PM 4/12/2004 -0500, casamai (Bruce, I think) wrote:
>> The MD needs to enforce the Historical judging format (re:
>> Workmanship,
>> Documentation and Presentation). Was the idea of a documentation
>> award a
>> one-time thing? I thought a precedent had been set.
>
> The MD should not be dictating anything to any judges in either
> masquerade.
> Judging the masquerade is not in the MD’s job description.

The MD should provide judging instructions to the panel. These should
be clear, short and simple. I concur that the instructions should not
mandate or dictate anything more than that the judges are expected to
be fair and impartial in their deliberations.

> It is my understanding that awards for documentation are at the
> discretion
> of the judges.
> I wasn’t a judge, so I can’t speak for them. I’m sure they would be
> happy
> to comment re documentation if someone would ask them.

I know the judges considered giving a “Best Documentation” award but
chose not to. I probably shouldn’t have admitted knowing this, but I
think in this group we can keep to the general discussion. If anybody
wants any more specific information, they need to speak to the judges
(I don’t have more specific information, so don’t ask me). Don’t
expect, though, to get any comments from the judges on anything but
your own entry.

From an MD’s perspective, I would include a line in the judging
instructions encouraging the judges to award a “Best Documentation”
award (as I did for BIS for last year’s F&SF), but nothing stronger.

> It is also the judges’ discretion to roll Workmanship and Presentation
> into
> one set of awards if they so choose. The Historical has always been an
> odd
> animal in that Workmanship (and documenting what you’re doing) has
> always
> been weighted more heavily than on-stage presentation (at least since
> Costume-Con 1, where a flamboyant stage presentation trumped thousands
> of
> hours of research and handwork, and after the howls of protest died
> down,
> the whole process got re-thought). Therefore, an extremely accurate
> costume
> with a very mediocre presentation may end up being Best-In-Show. The
> Historical has always been very hard to gauge from an audience point of
> view, as the audience does not get to see the documentation and
> costumes up
> close the way the judges do.

I’m going to go simpler on this one.

In F&SF competition there are two panels of judges. Workmanship judges
grant workmanship awards. Presentation judges grant presentation
awards.

In Historical competition, one panel of judges does both pre-judging
(workmanship) and show judging (presentation). Makes it much more
difficult for the judges to compartmentalize their opinions on
workmanship separately from presentation.

They’re also judging to two different standards. In historical
recreation, workmanship and documentation must weigh very heavily when
choosing a best-in-show. In historical interpretation, workmanship and
documentation may weigh equally with presentation.

Rather than mandating separate workmanship and presentation awards, MDs
need to give historical judges the freedom to grant awards not just for
workmanship and presentation, but also for a combination of the two
since they are directly observing both. Again, something for the
judging instructions…

“If an entry’s merit is primarily found in workmanship or presentation,
the award name should include ‘workmanship award’ or ‘presentation
award.’ If an entry shows excellence in both spheres, please do not
include ‘workmanship’ or ‘presentation’ in the name.”

“Since the goal of a historical recreation entry should be the faithful
recreation of an actual garment using period materials and techniques,
workmanship and documentation are of paramount importance when
selecting Best Recreation in Division/Show.”


andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen
http://www.irlm.org/ – mailto:webmaster@irlm.org
“Anybody who takes this seriously deserves to”
— Donna Barr

 

Group: runacc Message: 522 From: martingear Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

Andrew T Trembley wrote:

>On Apr 12, 2004, at 9:42 PM, Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:
>
>
>
>>At 08:55 PM 4/12/2004 -0500, casamai (Bruce, I think) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The MD needs to enforce the Historical judging format (re:
>>>Workmanship,
>>>Documentation and Presentation). Was the idea of a documentation
>>>award a
>>>one-time thing? I thought a precedent had been set.
>>>
>>>
>>The MD should not be dictating anything to any judges in either
>>masquerade.
>>Judging the masquerade is not in the MD’s job description.
>>
>>
>
>The MD should provide judging instructions to the panel. These should
>be clear, short and simple. I concur that the instructions should not
>mandate or dictate anything more than that the judges are expected to
>be fair and impartial in their deliberations.
>
>

<snip>

The only area in which I disagree with Andy is that as MD for the
Historical I would, and did, insist that the judges base their ratings
of the costumes (particularly the recreations) on the documentation
submitted… not what they “know” about the source period, place, etc.
Having watched three panels of Historic judges (not recently) play
oneupsmanship with each other to the detriment of the contestants that
is one area in which I feel strongly the MD has the right to insist.

^M^

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 

Group: runacc Message: 523 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

On Apr 13, 2004, at 6:38 PM, martingear wrote:

> The only area in which I disagree with Andy is that as MD for the
> Historical I would, and did, insist that the judges base their ratings
> of the costumes (particularly the recreations) on the documentation
> submitted… not what they “know” about the source period, place, etc.
> Having watched three panels of Historic judges (not recently) play
> oneupsmanship with each other to the detriment of the contestants that
> is one area in which I feel strongly the MD has the right to insist.

Point taken. That’s definitely a situation to avoid.

We almost need a handbook for historical judging alone. Between
ensuring the judges know how to interpret footnotes and identify
primary and secondary sources (after all, an Elizabethan based on Janet
Arnold would likely be more accurate than an Elizabethan based on a
Victorian reference source or a theatrical costuming book) and the
issue of avoiding personal knowledge bugaboos, it’s definitely tricky.


Andy Trembley, Bull-in-Drag
The Bovine Illuminati (It’s the Cows, Inc.)
http://www.bovil.com/
Moo!

 

Group: runacc Message: 524 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/13/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

>Bruce, You may not be wrong, tho I’m pretty sure it was his first CC at least.

I’m usually more nervous doing a historic as MC than anything else. Names
of contestants would hopefully be easy compared to the different languages
and odd names of techniques or other outdated verbage I’m not used to.

My High School German teacher would be amazed at some of the stuff I’ve
managed to get through.

Yes anybodies names messed up is painful and to be avoided, but I thought
Ron did a nice job overall. ( as did you)

Ricky

 

Group: runacc Message: 525 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/14/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review
Andy–

Good comments re the Historical.

This year’s judges also commented that they would like to see a panel on
what constitutes good Historical Masquerade documentation, with examples
given, but I’m not sure it would do any good if it were held at the same
convention where people were competing with their documentation already set
(and no way to make changes). Maybe there eventually needs to be something
on-line that potential competitors could view in advance to get ideas…?

I really hope someone solicits the CC22 judges for their comments re
documentation, because I had a conversation with two of them on Monday
morning while they were waiting to leave for the train station, and they
could readily describe several types of common documentation flaws using
only a couple of sentences for each.

–Karen

 

Group: runacc Message: 526 From: Byron Connell Date: 4/14/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

I’ve never before directed a Historical and have agreed to do so at both CC
24 and 25. Consequently, I am taking particular interest in this
discussion.

I believe the award of separate documentation, presentation, and workmanship
awards originated at CC 16. I believe that this was a decision by the
judges’ panel, not the Masquerade Director. I do not recall whether more
recent panels have followed that pattern in awards at the Historical but, in
any event, the pattern is fairly new — no more than six years old in an
event that now is 22 years old.

Some patterns persist and become custom; others wither for one reason or
another. This is a good time to discuss the pros and cons of which way this
pattern should go, especially since the discussion is likely to affect the
Historical at two of the next three CCs!

Please continue,

Byron

—– Original Message —–
From: “Andrew T Trembley” <attrembl@bovil.com>
To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: [runacc] CC22 review

>
> On Apr 12, 2004, at 9:42 PM, Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:
>
> > At 08:55 PM 4/12/2004 -0500, casamai (Bruce, I think) wrote:
> >> The MD needs to enforce the Historical judging format (re:
> >> Workmanship,
> >> Documentation and Presentation). Was the idea of a documentation
> >> award a
> >> one-time thing? I thought a precedent had been set.
> >
> > The MD should not be dictating anything to any judges in either
> > masquerade.
> > Judging the masquerade is not in the MD’s job description.
>
> The MD should provide judging instructions to the panel. These should
> be clear, short and simple. I concur that the instructions should not
> mandate or dictate anything more than that the judges are expected to
> be fair and impartial in their deliberations.
>
> > It is my understanding that awards for documentation are at the
> > discretion
> > of the judges.
> > I wasn’t a judge, so I can’t speak for them. I’m sure they would be
> > happy
> > to comment re documentation if someone would ask them.
>
> I know the judges considered giving a “Best Documentation” award but
> chose not to. I probably shouldn’t have admitted knowing this, but I
> think in this group we can keep to the general discussion. If anybody
> wants any more specific information, they need to speak to the judges
> (I don’t have more specific information, so don’t ask me). Don’t
> expect, though, to get any comments from the judges on anything but
> your own entry.
>
> From an MD’s perspective, I would include a line in the judging
> instructions encouraging the judges to award a “Best Documentation”
> award (as I did for BIS for last year’s F&SF), but nothing stronger.
>
> > It is also the judges’ discretion to roll Workmanship and Presentation
> > into
> > one set of awards if they so choose. The Historical has always been an
> > odd
> > animal in that Workmanship (and documenting what you’re doing) has
> > always
> > been weighted more heavily than on-stage presentation (at least since
> > Costume-Con 1, where a flamboyant stage presentation trumped thousands
> > of
> > hours of research and handwork, and after the howls of protest died
> > down,
> > the whole process got re-thought). Therefore, an extremely accurate
> > costume
> > with a very mediocre presentation may end up being Best-In-Show. The
> > Historical has always been very hard to gauge from an audience point of
> > view, as the audience does not get to see the documentation and
> > costumes up
> > close the way the judges do.
>
> I’m going to go simpler on this one.
>
> In F&SF competition there are two panels of judges. Workmanship judges
> grant workmanship awards. Presentation judges grant presentation
> awards.
>
> In Historical competition, one panel of judges does both pre-judging
> (workmanship) and show judging (presentation). Makes it much more
> difficult for the judges to compartmentalize their opinions on
> workmanship separately from presentation.
>
> They’re also judging to two different standards. In historical
> recreation, workmanship and documentation must weigh very heavily when
> choosing a best-in-show. In historical interpretation, workmanship and
> documentation may weigh equally with presentation.
>
> Rather than mandating separate workmanship and presentation awards, MDs
> need to give historical judges the freedom to grant awards not just for
> workmanship and presentation, but also for a combination of the two
> since they are directly observing both. Again, something for the
> judging instructions…
>
> “If an entry’s merit is primarily found in workmanship or presentation,
> the award name should include ‘workmanship award’ or ‘presentation
> award.’ If an entry shows excellence in both spheres, please do not
> include ‘workmanship’ or ‘presentation’ in the name.”
>
> “Since the goal of a historical recreation entry should be the faithful
> recreation of an actual garment using period materials and techniques,
> workmanship and documentation are of paramount importance when
> selecting Best Recreation in Division/Show.”
>
> —
> andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen

 

Group: runacc Message: 527 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/14/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

Thanks, Byron! I was trying to recall at which CC the decision was made.
If it wasn’t CC16 then it was CC17. Janet Wilson Anderson was part of
the panel of judges.

It’s been in my list of things to do to reproduce the competition rules
from all the CCs on the list. I’m near to the end of the process of
adding competition photos. Perhaps I should concentrate on the rules next?

In any case, I have the programs from all but one – CC4 – and can
provide viewing time or copies (with a small fee for reproducing and
mailing them) to anyone who asks prior to having the data online.

One word of caution – we’re taking steps to pack up our house in advance
of putting it on the market, and while the materials are here, they may
be packed up temporarily, and thus unavailable for viewing until after
we move.

Just an FYI: We’ve already written one contract (beaten out by an
escalation clause of $3k, when ours was only $2.1k, so moving may take
some time…).

Cheers,

Betsy

Byron Connell wrote:

> I’ve never before directed a Historical and have agreed to do so at both CC
> 24 and 25. Consequently, I am taking particular interest in this
> discussion.
>
> I believe the award of separate documentation, presentation, and workmanship
> awards originated at CC 16. I believe that this was a decision by the
> judges’ panel, not the Masquerade Director. I do not recall whether more
> recent panels have followed that pattern in awards at the Historical but, in
> any event, the pattern is fairly new — no more than six years old in an
> event that now is 22 years old.
>
> Some patterns persist and become custom; others wither for one reason or
> another. This is a good time to discuss the pros and cons of which way this
> pattern should go, especially since the discussion is likely to affect the
> Historical at two of the next three CCs!
>
> Please continue,
>
> Byron
>
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: “Andrew T Trembley” <attrembl@bovil.com>
> To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 9:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [runacc] CC22 review
>
>
>
>>On Apr 12, 2004, at 9:42 PM, Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:
>>
>>
>>>At 08:55 PM 4/12/2004 -0500, casamai (Bruce, I think) wrote:
>>>
>>>>The MD needs to enforce the Historical judging format (re:
>>>>Workmanship,
>>>>Documentation and Presentation). Was the idea of a documentation
>>>>award a
>>>>one-time thing? I thought a precedent had been set.
>>>
>>>The MD should not be dictating anything to any judges in either
>>>masquerade.
>>>Judging the masquerade is not in the MD’s job description.
>>
>>The MD should provide judging instructions to the panel. These should
>>be clear, short and simple. I concur that the instructions should not
>>mandate or dictate anything more than that the judges are expected to
>>be fair and impartial in their deliberations.
>>
>>
>>>It is my understanding that awards for documentation are at the
>>>discretion
>>>of the judges.
>>>I wasn’t a judge, so I can’t speak for them. I’m sure they would be
>>>happy
>>>to comment re documentation if someone would ask them.
>>
>>I know the judges considered giving a “Best Documentation” award but
>>chose not to. I probably shouldn’t have admitted knowing this, but I
>>think in this group we can keep to the general discussion. If anybody
>>wants any more specific information, they need to speak to the judges
>>(I don’t have more specific information, so don’t ask me). Don’t
>>expect, though, to get any comments from the judges on anything but
>>your own entry.
>>
>> From an MD’s perspective, I would include a line in the judging
>>instructions encouraging the judges to award a “Best Documentation”
>>award (as I did for BIS for last year’s F&SF), but nothing stronger.
>>
>>
>>>It is also the judges’ discretion to roll Workmanship and Presentation
>>>into
>>>one set of awards if they so choose. The Historical has always been an
>>>odd
>>>animal in that Workmanship (and documenting what you’re doing) has
>>>always
>>>been weighted more heavily than on-stage presentation (at least since
>>>Costume-Con 1, where a flamboyant stage presentation trumped thousands
>>>of
>>>hours of research and handwork, and after the howls of protest died
>>>down,
>>>the whole process got re-thought). Therefore, an extremely accurate
>>>costume
>>>with a very mediocre presentation may end up being Best-In-Show. The
>>>Historical has always been very hard to gauge from an audience point of
>>>view, as the audience does not get to see the documentation and
>>>costumes up
>>>close the way the judges do.
>>
>>I’m going to go simpler on this one.
>>
>>In F&SF competition there are two panels of judges. Workmanship judges
>>grant workmanship awards. Presentation judges grant presentation
>>awards.
>>
>>In Historical competition, one panel of judges does both pre-judging
>>(workmanship) and show judging (presentation). Makes it much more
>>difficult for the judges to compartmentalize their opinions on
>>workmanship separately from presentation.
>>
>>They’re also judging to two different standards. In historical
>>recreation, workmanship and documentation must weigh very heavily when
>>choosing a best-in-show. In historical interpretation, workmanship and
>>documentation may weigh equally with presentation.
>>
>>Rather than mandating separate workmanship and presentation awards, MDs
>>need to give historical judges the freedom to grant awards not just for
>>workmanship and presentation, but also for a combination of the two
>>since they are directly observing both. Again, something for the
>>judging instructions…
>>
>>”If an entry’s merit is primarily found in workmanship or presentation,
>>the award name should include ‘workmanship award’ or ‘presentation
>>award.’ If an entry shows excellence in both spheres, please do not
>>include ‘workmanship’ or ‘presentation’ in the name.”
>>
>>”Since the goal of a historical recreation entry should be the faithful
>>recreation of an actual garment using period materials and techniques,
>>workmanship and documentation are of paramount importance when
>>selecting Best Recreation in Division/Show.”
>>
>>–
>>andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen
>
>
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>



Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large

************************************************************************
http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 528 From: Byron Connell Date: 4/14/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

Marty —

I agree with you. The documentation should be the basis for decisions, not
what a judge believes he or she is expert on. I know of some “expert”
opinions about uniforms that bear little relation to either the official
uniform requirements or the reality of uniforms as actually worn .

Byron

—– Original Message —–
From: “martingear” <MartinGear@comcast.net>
To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 9:38 PM
Subject: Re: [runacc] CC22 review

> Andrew T Trembley wrote:
>
> >On Apr 12, 2004, at 9:42 PM, Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>At 08:55 PM 4/12/2004 -0500, casamai (Bruce, I think) wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>The MD needs to enforce the Historical judging format (re:
> >>>Workmanship,
> >>>Documentation and Presentation). Was the idea of a documentation
> >>>award a
> >>>one-time thing? I thought a precedent had been set.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>The MD should not be dictating anything to any judges in either
> >>masquerade.
> >>Judging the masquerade is not in the MD’s job description.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The MD should provide judging instructions to the panel. These should
> >be clear, short and simple. I concur that the instructions should not
> >mandate or dictate anything more than that the judges are expected to
> >be fair and impartial in their deliberations.
> >
> >
> <snip>
>
> The only area in which I disagree with Andy is that as MD for the
> Historical I would, and did, insist that the judges base their ratings
> of the costumes (particularly the recreations) on the documentation
> submitted… not what they “know” about the source period, place, etc.
> Having watched three panels of Historic judges (not recently) play
> oneupsmanship with each other to the detriment of the contestants that
> is one area in which I feel strongly the MD has the right to insist.
>
> ^M^

 

Group: runacc Message: 529 From: henryosier@cs.com Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

In a message dated 4/14/04 6:32:40 PM Central Daylight Time,
castleb@pulsenet.com writes:

> This year’s judges also commented that they would like to see a panel on
> what constitutes good Historical Masquerade documentation, with examples
> given, but I’m not sure it would do any good if it were held at the same
> convention where people were competing with their documentation already set
> (and no way to make changes). Maybe there eventually needs to be something
> on-line that potential competitors could view in advance to get ideas…?

Karen,
That is great idea! Especially since I have Historical Masq ideas. I
hope its not too late to see this added for CC23.
Henry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 

Group: runacc Message: 530 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

> This year’s judges also commented that they would like to see a panel
> on what constitutes good Historical Masquerade documentation, with
> examples given, but I’m not sure it would do any good if it were held
> at the same convention where people were competing with their
> documentation already set (and no way to make changes). Maybe there
> eventually needs to be something on-line that potential competitors
> could view in advance to get ideas…?

Let’s see… what would I like to see in documentation for a Historical
recreation entry?

I’d like to see a picture or two of the garment being recreated,
whether we’re talking a photos of garments in museums or reproductions
of period artworks.

I’d like to see a paragraph or two on period materials (fabric, thread,
and ornaments) used to make this sort of garment, or that was used in
the original garment. This ought to also include differences between
modern and period names for materials (taffeta being a good example).

I’d like to see a paragraph or two about patterning and cutting in
period, including whether pieces were cut on-grain, against-grain or on
the bias in period garments.

I’d like to see a paragraph or two (with supporting pictures, if
possible) about period construction techniques; i.e. what sort of
stitching and tailoring techniques were used.

In some cases, supporting documentation about sumptuary laws (if such
existed) help explain the nature of a period garment.

In some cases, supporting documentation about international trade at
the time can help explain the nature of a period garment.

What would you like to see in historical recreation documentation?

>


andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen
http://www.bovil.com/
“It’s not pink; it’s peach-colored. Pink is tacky.” –Manfred Pfirsich
Marie Rommel

 

Group: runacc Message: 531 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

Byron Connell wrote:

> Marty —
> I agree with you. The documentation should be the basis for
> decisions, not
> what a judge believes he or she is expert on. I know of some “expert”
> opinions about uniforms that bear little relation to either the
> official
> uniform requirements or the reality of uniforms as actually worn .

There are things to watch for in documentation.

The most important thing is proper identification of source material.
While one may not know much about a particular period or culture, it’s
often easy to identify dubious sources.

Primary sources, of course, are preferred. Judy Mitchell’s exhaustive
research of actual garments in Scandanavia is the prime example, but
not within reach of everybody. Art from within period is another easy
one (assuming that realistic art was period), and anybody with access
to a library can find exhibit and collection catalogs from museums
around the world.

Secondary sources are trickier. While some of us know how to identify
dubious secondary sources, in most cases that’s within particular
areas. I’m always suspicious of Victorian sources used to document
previous periods.

The question, though, is how to judge this.

If as a judge, I believe that source material isn’t reliable, do I
still judge the costume based on the docs and hold my concerns for
documentation judging? This is an important question when judging a
historical recreation.


andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen – http://www.bovil.com/
San Jose, CA – ’72 R75/5 ’86 R100 (mine) – ’92 K75sa ’03 R1150R
(Kevin’s)
“It’s not pink, it’s peach-colored. Pink is tacky.”
–Manfred Pfirsich Marie Rommel

2nd most important safety device on my bike: the one beneath my right
hand
Most important safety device on my bike: the one inside my helmet

 

Group: runacc Message: 532 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

Byron Connell wrote:

> Marty —
> I agree with you. The documentation should be the basis for
> decisions, not
> what a judge believes he or she is expert on. I know of some “expert”
> opinions about uniforms that bear little relation to either the
> official
> uniform requirements or the reality of uniforms as actually worn .

There are things to watch for in documentation.

The most important thing is proper identification of source material.
While one may not know much about a particular period or culture, it’s
often easy to identify dubious sources.

Primary sources, of course, are preferred. Judy Mitchell’s exhaustive
research of actual garments in Scandanavia is the prime example, but
not within reach of everybody. Art from within period is another easy
one (assuming that realistic art was period), and anybody with access
to a library can find exhibit and collection catalogs from museums
around the world.

Secondary sources are trickier. While some of us know how to identify
dubious secondary sources, in most cases that’s within particular
areas. I’m always suspicious of Victorian sources used to document
previous periods.

The question, though, is how to judge this.

If as a judge, I believe that source material isn’t reliable, do I
still judge the costume based on the docs and hold my concerns for
documentation judging? This is an important question when judging a
historical recreation.


Andy Trembley, Bull-in-Drag
The Bovine Illuminati (It’s the Cows, Inc.)
http://www.bovil.com/
Moo!

 

Group: runacc Message: 533 From: martingear Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

Andrew T Trembley wrote:

><snip>
>

The question, though, is how to judge this.

>If as a judge, I believe that source material isn’t reliable, do I
>still judge the costume based on the docs and hold my concerns for
>documentation judging? This is an important question when judging a
>historical recreation.
>

I’m going to preface this by saying that the following is strictly my
opinion, and other Historic MD’s are under no obligation to even
consider it in any other light. (No flames please!)

Unless the judges have, in their opinions, a good reason to believe that
the documentation was faked, Yes! Everyone has not been taught how to
do proper research and if the costumer believes that the research was
accurate and the garment is constructed in accord with the research
presented, then the garment should be judged strictly against the
documentation. This is why I favor strongly a separate judging and
award for documentation in the historic masquerade. (And why we gave
Dany a documentation award in the F&S-F masquerade.)

In the two most egregious examples of bad judging that spring to mind,
both entries were extremely well documented citing multiple reputable
sources and at least one of them went to primary source materials (I
can’t remember if the other did or not… it was 19 years ago but we
could ask Jacqui Ward) In both cases, the judges involved “knew”
something that wasn’t so, and the costumers suffered as a result. This
is why if I ever were to run a historic masquerade again (ghod forbid) I
would insist on the above.

YMMV –

Marty

PS – I too would like to see the things that Andy asked for in
documentation, but were we to get all that regularly, we should look
into becoming a degree granting university.

 

Group: runacc Message: 534 From: Byron Connell Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: [ICG-D] Ninjas? re: CC22 Review

Bruce —

Do you know whether they were referring to ninjas back stage or to green
room crew? The green room was short staffed for both the SF&F and
Historical masquerades (especially the latter), for which everyone has my
apology. Some persons I thought I had recruited for Saturday night never
showed up. The size of the Historical took me by surprise, on the other
hand; I had not worked to recruit additional green room staff for it. Not
only were there no mothers’ helpers for either green room but we actually
were short of den moms for both of them. I didn’t even have a check-in
clerk for the Historical; I did the job myself. Fortunately, virtually
everybody in that masquerade arrived promptly, so I didn’t have to worry
about the possibly of scratching entries.

Byron

—– Original Message —–
From: “Bruce & Nora Mai” <casamai@sbcglobal.net>
To: <ICG-D@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: [ICG-D] Ninjas? re: CC22 Review

> I’ll have to leave that to those who made the comment. I’m just relaying
> said message.
>
> Bruce
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: <ACatelli@manafortbrothers.com>
> To: <ICG-D@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:37 AM
> Subject: [ICG-D] Ninjas? re: CC22 Review
>
>
> >
> > > From: “Bruce & Nora Mai” <casamai@sbcglobal.net>
> > >
> > > As usual, the SLUTs on the “Short Bus” put
> > > together our annual (or at least when we can get to a CC) review of
the
> > > convention while on our way back home. I preface this review by
saying
> > that
> > > I’m the mouthpiece — the review reflects the aggregate opinions of
> those
> > > present at the time, along with a few other folks at the end of the
> > convention.
> > >
> > > There could have been more ninjas, but this was just indicative of the
> > lightly
> > > attended convention.
> >
> > How so, more ninjas?
> >
> > No, seriously, I was head ninja (such a surprise to regular CC
> > attendees-not).
> >
> > The only place I thought I could’ve put ninjas that I didn’t was in back
> of
> > stage so no one fell off the back, since curtains don’t do much to
prevent
> > falls.
> >
> >
> > Six-seven ninjas on a crew seemed fine to me.
> >
> >
> > and, of course, in the ever-popular evaluation–no one fell off, so they
> > were good shows.
> > : )
> >
> > Ann in CT

 

Group: runacc Message: 535 From: Byron Connell Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

I agree with Marty, especially about the idea that costumers might not have
the research skills to ferret out poor, not to mention totally bogus,
sources. For Napoleonic era uniforms, there are the highly accurate
contemporary drawings and paintings of Charles Hamilton Smith (for the
British) and Carle Vernet (for the French). But there also are “authentic”
contemporary depictions by artists (especially in France) who had a ready
market and vivid imaginations but who had never seen any of the troops they
were depicting!

Joe Costumer may not be able to separate these “sources” from Hamilton Smith
and Vernet. After all, they’re all contemporaries. Consequently, he would
wind up reproducing a garment that never existed, except in the artist’s
contemporary depiction. In that case, the documentation would provide
evidence of the faithfulness of the costume to the work of art and that’s
what the entry should be judged on, IMHO.

Byron

—– Original Message —–
From: “martingear” <MartinGear@comcast.net>
To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: [runacc] CC22 review

> Andrew T Trembley wrote:
>
> ><snip>
> >
> The question, though, is how to judge this.
>
> >If as a judge, I believe that source material isn’t reliable, do I
> >still judge the costume based on the docs and hold my concerns for
> >documentation judging? This is an important question when judging a
> >historical recreation.
> >
>
> I’m going to preface this by saying that the following is strictly my
> opinion, and other Historic MD’s are under no obligation to even
> consider it in any other light. (No flames please!)
>
> Unless the judges have, in their opinions, a good reason to believe that
> the documentation was faked, Yes! Everyone has not been taught how to
> do proper research and if the costumer believes that the research was
> accurate and the garment is constructed in accord with the research
> presented, then the garment should be judged strictly against the
> documentation. This is why I favor strongly a separate judging and
> award for documentation in the historic masquerade. (And why we gave
> Dany a documentation award in the F&S-F masquerade.)
>
> In the two most egregious examples of bad judging that spring to mind,
> both entries were extremely well documented citing multiple reputable
> sources and at least one of them went to primary source materials (I
> can’t remember if the other did or not… it was 19 years ago but we
> could ask Jacqui Ward) In both cases, the judges involved “knew”
> something that wasn’t so, and the costumers suffered as a result. This
> is why if I ever were to run a historic masquerade again (ghod forbid) I
> would insist on the above.
>
> YMMV –
>
> Marty
>
> PS – I too would like to see the things that Andy asked for in
> documentation, but were we to get all that regularly, we should look
> into becoming a degree granting university.

 

Group: runacc Message: 536 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

On Apr 15, 2004, at 5:31 PM, Byron Connell wrote:

> I agree with Marty, especially about the idea that costumers might not
> have
> the research skills to ferret out poor, not to mention totally bogus,
> sources. For Napoleonic era uniforms, there are the highly accurate
> contemporary drawings and paintings of Charles Hamilton Smith (for the
> British) and Carle Vernet (for the French). But there also are
> “authentic”
> contemporary depictions by artists (especially in France) who had a
> ready
> market and vivid imaginations but who had never seen any of the troops
> they
> were depicting!

That’s actually a risk with any visual representation that isn’t a
photograph of an actual period garment with very clear provenance. Many
renaissance nobles appeared in portraits “wearing” clothes created by
the artist that never existed other than as oil paint.

I don’t have an argument with people basing designs on bogus period
sources; the source itself is legitimately historical even if the
garment it describes never existed. I doubt I’d ding somebody in that
case. I’d actually probably give extra credit to somebody who
identified that a real historical source had bogus content and entered
something based on it as a recreation of a historical fantasy.

I’m more concerned (and I know this is nitpicking) with bogus
out-of-period sources, such as discredited pop anthropologists.


andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen – http://www.bovil.com/
San Jose, CA – ’72 R75/5 ’86 R100 (mine) – ’92 K75sa ’03 R1150R
(Kevin’s)
“It’s not pink, it’s peach-colored. Pink is tacky.”
–Manfred Pfirsich Marie Rommel

2nd most important safety device on my bike: the one beneath my right
hand
Most important safety device on my bike: the one inside my helmet

 

Group: runacc Message: 537 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

At 05:55 PM 4/15/2004 -0700, you wrote:

>I’d actually probably give extra credit to somebody who
>identified that a real historical source had bogus content and entered
>something based on it as a recreation of a historical fantasy.

Kayta Martz always wanted to make some of the Victorian fancy dress ball /
theatrical representations of Queen Elizabeth, Tudor Ladies, etc. that bore
NO resemblance to the actual period garments they were representing (1890
in underpinnings and silhouette vs. 1500’s). Actually kind of an
interesting idea, and could be documented from several sources.

–Karen

 

Group: runacc Message: 538 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

On Apr 15, 2004, at 6:12 PM, Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

> At 05:55 PM 4/15/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>> I’d actually probably give extra credit to somebody who
>> identified that a real historical source had bogus content and entered
>> something based on it as a recreation of a historical fantasy.
>
> Kayta Martz always wanted to make some of the Victorian fancy dress
> ball /
> theatrical representations of Queen Elizabeth, Tudor Ladies, etc. that
> bore
> NO resemblance to the actual period garments they were representing
> (1890
> in underpinnings and silhouette vs. 1500’s). Actually kind of an
> interesting idea, and could be documented from several sources.

Deb Salisbury at CC17 did a Victorian Fancy Dress Ball Harem Girl.
Totally wrong harem girl (complete with bustle) but perfect victorian
interpretation.


andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen – http://www.bovil.com/
San Jose, CA – ’72 R75/5 ’86 R100 (mine) – ’92 K75sa ’03 R1150R
(Kevin’s)
“It’s not pink, it’s peach-colored. Pink is tacky.”
–Manfred Pfirsich Marie Rommel

2nd most important safety device on my bike: the one beneath my right
hand
Most important safety device on my bike: the one inside my helmet

 

Group: runacc Message: 539 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Hotel Contracts
We have a CC25 committee meeting coming up this Saturday, and one of the
things we’ll be discussing with them is the hotel contract. I have the
hotel’s version (4 pages) and Marty’s epic <g>. I’d like to run the
proposal past Marty and others here who have had hotel experience and get
pointers. One of my main questions is: how do I work the CC contract
smoothly into the mix at this point, since we haven’t signed anything yet,
but have their proposal in hand? If possible, I’d like to get feedback
before tomorrow Saturday evening.

Bruce

 

Group: runacc Message: 540 From: Bruce & Nora Mai Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: [ICG-D] Ninjas? re: CC22 Review

I’ll have to ask. I think backstage, particularly.

Bruce

—– Original Message —–
From: “Byron Connell” <bconnel1@nycap.rr.com>
To: <ICG-D@yahoogroups.com>; <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:19 PM
Subject: [runacc] Re: [ICG-D] Ninjas? re: CC22 Review

> Bruce —
>
> Do you know whether they were referring to ninjas back stage or to green
> room crew? The green room was short staffed for both the SF&F and
> Historical masquerades (especially the latter), for which everyone has my
> apology. Some persons I thought I had recruited for Saturday night never
> showed up. The size of the Historical took me by surprise, on the other
> hand; I had not worked to recruit additional green room staff for it. Not
> only were there no mothers’ helpers for either green room but we actually
> were short of den moms for both of them. I didn’t even have a check-in
> clerk for the Historical; I did the job myself. Fortunately, virtually
> everybody in that masquerade arrived promptly, so I didn’t have to worry
> about the possibly of scratching entries.
>
> Byron
>
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: “Bruce & Nora Mai” <casamai@sbcglobal.net>
> To: <ICG-D@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 6:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [ICG-D] Ninjas? re: CC22 Review
>
>
> > I’ll have to leave that to those who made the comment. I’m just
relaying
> > said message.
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> > —– Original Message —–
> > From: <ACatelli@manafortbrothers.com>
> > To: <ICG-D@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:37 AM
> > Subject: [ICG-D] Ninjas? re: CC22 Review
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > From: “Bruce & Nora Mai” <casamai@sbcglobal.net>
> > > >
> > > > As usual, the SLUTs on the “Short Bus” put
> > > > together our annual (or at least when we can get to a CC) review of
> the
> > > > convention while on our way back home. I preface this review by
> saying
> > > that
> > > > I’m the mouthpiece — the review reflects the aggregate opinions of
> > those
> > > > present at the time, along with a few other folks at the end of the
> > > convention.
> > > >
> > > > There could have been more ninjas, but this was just indicative of
the
> > > lightly
> > > > attended convention.
> > >
> > > How so, more ninjas?
> > >
> > > No, seriously, I was head ninja (such a surprise to regular CC
> > > attendees-not).
> > >
> > > The only place I thought I could’ve put ninjas that I didn’t was in
back
> > of
> > > stage so no one fell off the back, since curtains don’t do much to
> prevent
> > > falls.
> > >
> > >
> > > Six-seven ninjas on a crew seemed fine to me.
> > >
> > >
> > > and, of course, in the ever-popular evaluation–no one fell off, so
they
> > > were good shows.
> > > : )
> > >
> > > Ann in CT
>
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

 

Group: runacc Message: 541 From: Andrew T Trembley Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: Hotel Contracts

On Apr 15, 2004, at 7:19 PM, Bruce & Nora Mai wrote:

> One of my main questions is: how do I work the CC contract
> smoothly into the mix at this point, since we haven’t signed anything
> yet,
> but have their proposal in hand? If possible, I’d like to get feedback
> before tomorrow Saturday evening.

Magic words:

“This is our national organization’s model contract.”


andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen
http://www.irlm.org/ – mailto:webmaster@irlm.org
“Anybody who takes this seriously deserves to”
— Donna Barr

 

Group: runacc Message: 542 From: David Doering Date: 4/15/2004
Subject: Re: Hotel Contracts

>
>On Apr 15, 2004, at 7:19 PM, Bruce & Nora Mai wrote:
> > One of my main questions is: how do I work the CC contract
> > smoothly into the mix at this point, since we haven’t signed anything
> > yet,
> > but have their proposal in hand? If possible, I’d like to get feedback
> > before tomorrow Saturday evening.

I also received Marty’s disc at Atlanta, long after we had started our
contract negotiations with the Marriott. Our sales manager had no problem
looking at our model contract when we said the magic words “this is the
national organization’s model contract which we want to work from. Would
you look it over to see if it meets our needs?”

I actually think our sales manager was grateful to get a well-written
document. The stuff she had to work from looked like a butcher job from a
dozen different kinds of events and quite different styles of writing. She
seemed actually embarrassed when I pointed out how one of her
“cut-and-paste” contract provisions _prohibited_ us from showing the hotel
_map_ to anyone!

Dave Doering
Chair
CC23: Utah
www.cc23.org
REMEMBER: April 24th is the last day for the $65 rate!

 

Group: runacc Message: 543 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/16/2004
Subject: Re: CC22 review

We just had this discussion a couple of days ago with a local costumer
who hasn’t competed in the Historical before. There was confusion over
what made an interpretation different from a reproduction (a discussion
that’s cropped up from time to time over the history of the con).

The way I learned it, the only primary source is the garment itself.
Anything not actually a garment or piece of costume is an artistic
representation. Even a photo can be deceptive, or misrepresent “history.”

Seeing the way the rules are worded for the Historical Masquerades over
time, it’s clear that the subject is wide open to interpretation, at the
whim of the masquerade director. I don’t know that this is a bad thing,
but it sure makes it hard to determine consistent guidelines for
directors to use when creating the rules.

When judges then have to interpret the rules, it can get even more
confusing.

As I recall (fuzzy though my memory might be) at the CC during which the
judges first decided to split the awards into documentation, workmanship
and presentation, they simply chose to ignore the rules of the
masquerade, opting to award as they saw fit.

Which leads me to think that it’s most important for the director to
select judges who can be trusted to understand and interpret the rules
as set forth, since that’s what the entrants expect to comply with.

How detailed should we be with providing guidance on the subject?

(Trying to draw the conversation back to producing a public document…)

Betsy

Andrew T Trembley wrote:

> Primary sources, of course, are preferred. Judy Mitchell’s exhaustive
> research of actual garments in Scandanavia is the prime example, but
> not within reach of everybody. Art from within period is another easy
> one (assuming that realistic art was period), and anybody with access
> to a library can find exhibit and collection catalogs from museums
> around the world.



Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large

************************************************************************
http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 544 From: martingear Date: 4/16/2004
Subject: Re: Hotel Contracts

Bruce –
I’d be happy to read what the hotel has given you and give you my
comments. Andy and David have pretty much given you the magic words.
Telling the hotel that this is a national organization’s model contract
tells the hotel that someone has dealt with hotels before and has gotten
that agreement accepted. (True!) If the hotel balks then suggest that
you start with the national contract and “tweak it” where necessary
incorporating their concerns, but imply that you expect that the
necessary changes will be minor. The contract is actually written
fairly for both parties, and it does cover many of things that most
hotels don’t even think about, but are very important to Costume Cons.
If the hotel refuses absolutely to start with your contract then be
afraid, very afraid. The fact that they have given you a proposal and
you are now bringing in your own contract can be explained by telling
the hotel that you have just returned from CC-22 where you won the bid
and were given the model contract by the national organization. (O.K.,
so you got it from me… pretend this once that I represent the national
organization 🙂 )

Marty

Bruce & Nora Mai wrote:

>We have a CC25 committee meeting coming up this Saturday, and one of the
>things we’ll be discussing with them is the hotel contract. I have the
>hotel’s version (4 pages) and Marty’s epic <g>. I’d like to run the
>proposal past Marty and others here who have had hotel experience and get
>pointers. One of my main questions is: how do I work the CC contract
>smoothly into the mix at this point, since we haven’t signed anything yet,
>but have their proposal in hand? If possible, I’d like to get feedback
>before tomorrow Saturday evening.
>
>Bruce
>
>
>
>
>View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

 

Group: runacc Message: 545 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers
Future concoms should give some thought to handling dealers the way some
East Coast S/F and clown conventions are doing it lately: hotel rooms are
blocked into a “Dealer’s Row” on the same floor as, and preferably near,
the con suite. Dealers deal out of their hotel rooms, so they can set their
own hours (and maybe a dealer such as AlterYears would be able to get a
suite in order to maximize their space). Charge is a nominal fee over the
price of the hotel room so the con gets its cut.

Most of these conventions have a regular dealer’s room as well, but I can
see advantages to going 100% to the Dealer’s Row format–it frees up
breakout rooms or ballroom space for other con programming. Since space is
usually at a premium at CC, this could be a Very Good Thing.
(Also solves the eternal problem of finding a space large enough for
AlterYears.)

Ricky and I did the “Dealer’s Row” thing at Arisia and LunaCon this year,
and it was very successful, especially considering we were frequently
closed because we were on programming, in competitions, etc. It also gives
conventioneers something else to do late at night besides hanging out in
the con suite (sort of spreads the party around).

Just a thought, as we’re all thinking about hotel contracts and trying to
get enough space, etc.

–Karen

 

Group: runacc Message: 546 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers

And one further consideration in favor of this arrangement:

Security becomes the problem of the dealers, not the conference.

In a shared Dealer Room area, someone has to be sure that nothing walks
overnight. You can plant someone in the room overnight for security, or
hire someone to watch the space. I know we had some issues at CCXV, and
I think there were also some problems with locks on the doors at CC22.

I’d be interested in hearing what Devra Langsam might have to say about
such an arrangement, since Poison Pen Press is more or less a fixture at
CCs.

Cheers,

Betsy
Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

> Future concoms should give some thought to handling dealers the way some
> East Coast S/F and clown conventions are doing it lately: hotel rooms are
> blocked into a “Dealer’s Row” on the same floor as, and preferably near,
> the con suite. Dealers deal out of their hotel rooms, so they can set their
> own hours (and maybe a dealer such as AlterYears would be able to get a
> suite in order to maximize their space). Charge is a nominal fee over the
> price of the hotel room so the con gets its cut.
>
> Most of these conventions have a regular dealer’s room as well, but I can
> see advantages to going 100% to the Dealer’s Row format–it frees up
> breakout rooms or ballroom space for other con programming. Since space is
> usually at a premium at CC, this could be a Very Good Thing.
> (Also solves the eternal problem of finding a space large enough for
> AlterYears.)
>
> Ricky and I did the “Dealer’s Row” thing at Arisia and LunaCon this year,
> and it was very successful, especially considering we were frequently
> closed because we were on programming, in competitions, etc. It also gives
> conventioneers something else to do late at night besides hanging out in
> the con suite (sort of spreads the party around).
>
> Just a thought, as we’re all thinking about hotel contracts and trying to
> get enough space, etc.
>
> –Karen
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>



Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large

************************************************************************
http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 547 From: henryosier@cs.com Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers
I was working a one-time con in Chicago that did it Dealers like that. I
thought it was pretty neat. It was kind of weird going through them to get to my
hotel room, though. Especially since it was an Adult SF con!
Henry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 

Group: runacc Message: 548 From: Ricky & Karen Dick Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers

As a costume / corset dealer, I LOVE it. With a room with a bathroom,
people can try on stuff and not leave the dealer’s domain. (I still
recommend having more than one set of eyes to watch the room at any given
time.) I also like being able to set our own hours.

I don’t know Devra all that well–anybody else have a closer relationship
where they could possibly ask?

–Karen

At 08:57 AM 4/17/2004 -0400, you wrote:

>And one further consideration in favor of this arrangement:
>
>Security becomes the problem of the dealers, not the conference.
>
>In a shared Dealer Room area, someone has to be sure that nothing walks
>overnight. You can plant someone in the room overnight for security, or
>hire someone to watch the space. I know we had some issues at CCXV, and
>I think there were also some problems with locks on the doors at CC22.
>
>I’d be interested in hearing what Devra Langsam might have to say about
>such an arrangement, since Poison Pen Press is more or less a fixture at
>CCs.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Betsy
>Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:
> > Future concoms should give some thought to handling dealers the way some
> > East Coast S/F and clown conventions are doing it lately: hotel rooms are
> > blocked into a “Dealer’s Row” on the same floor as, and preferably near,
> > the con suite. Dealers deal out of their hotel rooms, so they can set
> their
> > own hours (and maybe a dealer such as AlterYears would be able to get a
> > suite in order to maximize their space). Charge is a nominal fee over the
> > price of the hotel room so the con gets its cut.
> >
> > Most of these conventions have a regular dealer’s room as well, but I can
> > see advantages to going 100% to the Dealer’s Row format–it frees up
> > breakout rooms or ballroom space for other con programming. Since space is
> > usually at a premium at CC, this could be a Very Good Thing.
> > (Also solves the eternal problem of finding a space large enough for
> > AlterYears.)
> >
> > Ricky and I did the “Dealer’s Row” thing at Arisia and LunaCon this year,
> > and it was very successful, especially considering we were frequently
> > closed because we were on programming, in competitions, etc. It also gives
> > conventioneers something else to do late at night besides hanging out in
> > the con suite (sort of spreads the party around).
> >
> > Just a thought, as we’re all thinking about hotel contracts and trying to
> > get enough space, etc.
> >
> > –Karen
> >
> >
> >
> > View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>–
>–
>Betsy R. Delaney
>Web Mistress at large
>
>************************************************************************
> http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
> http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
> http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
>************************************************************************
>
>
>View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

 

Group: runacc Message: 549 From: Betsy Delaney Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers

She’ll be at Balticon, and I’ve agreed to be there for Marty, so I can
try to remember and ask her then.

-b

Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

> I don’t know Devra all that well–anybody else have a closer relationship
> where they could possibly ask?
>
> –Karen



Betsy R. Delaney
Web Mistress at large

************************************************************************
http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

 

Group: runacc Message: 550 From: martingear Date: 4/17/2004
Subject: Re: Dealers

While I think that the concept of a “Dealers’ Row” is wonderful. (Love
it at Arisia) some hotels will not approve. I ran into that at the
Baltimore Marriott when we were looking at the possibility of moving
Balticon there several year ago. I don’t want to throw cold water on
the idea, just giving everyone a heads up.

^M^

Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

>As a costume / corset dealer, I LOVE it. With a room with a bathroom,
>people can try on stuff and not leave the dealer’s domain. (I still
>recommend having more than one set of eyes to watch the room at any given
>time.) I also like being able to set our own hours.
>
>I don’t know Devra all that well–anybody else have a closer relationship
>where they could possibly ask?
>
>–Karen
>
>At 08:57 AM 4/17/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>>And one further consideration in favor of this arrangement:
>>
>>Security becomes the problem of the dealers, not the conference.
>>
>>In a shared Dealer Room area, someone has to be sure that nothing walks
>>overnight. You can plant someone in the room overnight for security, or
>>hire someone to watch the space. I know we had some issues at CCXV, and
>>I think there were also some problems with locks on the doors at CC22.
>>
>>I’d be interested in hearing what Devra Langsam might have to say about
>>such an arrangement, since Poison Pen Press is more or less a fixture at
>>CCs.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Betsy
>>Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Future concoms should give some thought to handling dealers the way some
>>>East Coast S/F and clown conventions are doing it lately: hotel rooms are
>>>blocked into a “Dealer’s Row” on the same floor as, and preferably near,
>>>the con suite. Dealers deal out of their hotel rooms, so they can set
>>>
>>>
>>their
>>
>>
>>>own hours (and maybe a dealer such as AlterYears would be able to get a
>>>suite in order to maximize their space). Charge is a nominal fee over the
>>>price of the hotel room so the con gets its cut.
>>>
>>>Most of these conventions have a regular dealer’s room as well, but I can
>>>see advantages to going 100% to the Dealer’s Row format–it frees up
>>>breakout rooms or ballroom space for other con programming. Since space is
>>>usually at a premium at CC, this could be a Very Good Thing.
>>>(Also solves the eternal problem of finding a space large enough for
>>>AlterYears.)
>>>
>>>Ricky and I did the “Dealer’s Row” thing at Arisia and LunaCon this year,
>>>and it was very successful, especially considering we were frequently
>>>closed because we were on programming, in competitions, etc. It also gives
>>>conventioneers something else to do late at night besides hanging out in
>>>the con suite (sort of spreads the party around).
>>>
>>>Just a thought, as we’re all thinking about hotel contracts and trying to
>>>get enough space, etc.
>>>
>>>–Karen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>–
>>–
>>Betsy R. Delaney
>>Web Mistress at large
>>
>>************************************************************************
>> http://www.WebInvent.com/ * http://www.hawkeswood.com/
>> http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
>> http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
>>************************************************************************
>>
>>
>>View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 

 

Leave a Reply