Cons in the 21st Century

[sartorias]

A post by Cheryl Morgan on dragging Worldcons into the new century not only got me thinking, but others as well. Stephanie Clarkson started a Ning to address the issue.

Comments

[asakiyume]

This is a great question. I was just thinking about it this morning, in fact, so it's also a cool coincidence that you should bring it up

[sartorias]

So all things being equal, you'd rather be there in person? I feel that way myself, but the issue for me is how much the definition of "all things being equal" has changed.

[asakiyume]

So right about "all things being equal."

But yes, all things being equal, I'd rather be present in person.

[ckd]

I suspect there's a case of the difference between "some" and "none" being bigger than the difference between "some" and "all

[arantzain]

I've never had the money or the urge to go to a con, until FlyCon --which I enjoyed, although I found the time too short because it takes longer to type than it does to talk and so I felt like I got less from an hour long panel than I otherwise would have done. But that was still a lot!

I sort of would like to see cons become simultaneous online/real-time events, with computers everywhere and webcasts of panels and things. The cons could charge a fee for the privilege, just like you would (although less than a ticket) and it might help bring people like me in as business, people who otherwise couldn't go.

[sartorias]

Yes, the typing and pressing refresh is a big deal.

Chery Morgan has a fix for the refresh--she links on her site to a program that refreshes automatically, but it has to be imbedded in an existing site.

There is also twitter, which for the most part I find repellent, because my brain simply doesn't process numbers unless I stop and look hard at them (no payoff) or ignore them (then there is the irritation of having to mentally edit them out) for very little content.

But there are some who are experts at twitter, I guess, who can reduce a long, rambling point made by a panelist into something succinct.

[arantzain]

I'll be honest: I look at twitter and I just boggle. It is not my bag. But I definitely know fellow fans for whom it is a great tool, and I don't want to harsh on them.

Also I think there is a big difference between surreptitiously text-messaging and taking notes; it telegraphs in your body language, in your expression, in the way you're using the device. It's something I see all the time in college and I wonder if others see too? It makes a difference in what I think of the individual's behavior, too.

[sartorias]

yep--I see it as the same as passing notes. If people are going to do it, they'll do it anyway. In eighth grade, a friend and I memorized the Sign alphabet, just so we wouldn't get caught passing notes.

[breathingbooks]

I'm your strong introvert who prefers online conversations and so *would* be shifted from any vague desire to attend in person by an online option. I did consider attending the Denver one because the topic interested me and the narrower focus meant I'd automatically have more in common with the participants and thus find it easier to talk to strangers (shy and all that). With the bigger ones, I suspect I'd get lost interest-wise and fall through the social cracks when I'd not have that problem online. So if you include online stuff as part of the con, then yes, my young person self might be lured into participating via technology *g

[sartorias]

Flycon really was kind of like LJ except that the links led to other sites, including the chats or IRCs, which are done in realtime. That is, the screen flows constantly as people add comments, unlike LJ, where each comment is threaded beneath the one it responds to.

[asakiyume]

I was going to say initially--and breathingbooks's comment prompts me to say now--that I really like the LJ thing you and others sometimes do at convention times, posting the topics for conversation. I find that level of discussion is very satisfying. What you were saying about all things being equal: I think that having this possibility right here on LJ, whenever anyone should post something interesting, helps take a certain edge off desire for more interaction.

But, the chat room does have the possibility for realtime conversation, and that was a plus.

I do also think--again, getting at breathingbooks's remark about shyness--that it's easier to talk in a chatroom than in person.

... and yet, even being somewhat shy, I still do think, in the end, I appreciate seeing real people. It's exciting.

[sartorias]

Yes! The bittercon spinoff discussions are a totally unorganized but viable form of online con participation. If Worldcon were to organize those, think how awesome!

[thistleingrey]

Scheduling, geography, and money have never lined up enough for me to go to an SF con in person, and I've been wanting, then meaning to go (but not going) since I was about thirteen. Hey, maybe I'll make it to World Fantasy Con this year....

(I think of the Harry Potter cons I've attended as being a different beast, just as tabletop/LARP gaming cons are

[sartorias]

Yes, and yes. This does open up several new lines of thought.

[thistleingrey]

I meant to say--I think that that yearning is important. Quick and easy access is sometimes a workaround, and though I understand Cheryl's post to be about leveraging an extant mode of interaction and ensuring that (in context of SF cons) it's meaningful rather than marginalized, I wonder whether concom recognition that people will tweet/blog/etc. during an event would be icing or really part of the cake. There's already so much to do when planning any sort of convention/conference.

[nekonexus]

(off the top of my head while I should be working

[sartorias]

In Cheryl's original post, she touches on many of these same issues. She also mentions some of the available tech, which I found encouraging.

[nekonexus]

Cool, I'll have to go look. Hadn't a chance to read it yet.