netmouse | 2008 worldcon site selection

2008 worldcon site selection

I am torn about what site to vote for for the 2008 worldcon. I know quite a few people working on the Chicago Bid, and I'm sure they can run a terrific con, though I've never been to a Chicago worldcon. But, frankly, I'm leaning toward voting for Denver.

Here's why:

Denver's a great city. I like the area, and I don't get out there enough
I go to Chicago all the time. And frankly, I'm not all that crazy about it (though it has my favorite skyline in all the world and, yes, they do have good hot dogs.)
Chicago has had a lot of worldcons (this would be their seventh) - I feel for fairness and for the impression we give non-Americans, we should vary where the con is held more than we do.
I like Kent Bloom (chair of the bid). I met him at a smofcon and he seemed both nice and ept. I like people working on the Chicago (and columbus) bids too, but I see them fairly often. I haven't seen Kent in years.
It seems like the bid committee has negotiated a good deal for their hotel and facilities, at least according to their reports
I like the idea of having the convention earlier in August, so as to be before school starts and not conflict with dragoncon. (not that I go to dragoncon, but hey)

The Chicago bid web page is more slick. The group has also given themselves more time to bid, and accordingly put more time into it, and they have a theme. But I'm still leaning toward voting for Denver. Anyone want to try to talk me out of it?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

For purely selfish financial reasons, I'm hoping for Chicago. A 4-hour drive is a lot cheaper than plane tickets, especially if I decide to bring the family along.

I agree with you on the fairness and variety point. But I'm just cheap :-)

Anywhere-but-Chicago?

They've had some slick bids -- doesn't mean they'll run a slick con. There is a certain amount of con-running fatigue that can happen when you do those worldcon things too often.

I'm inclined towards Denver, too.

The race I'm most interested in, though, is Montreal vs KC. Cause, it would be real cool to have a Worldcon a 2-hour drive away. But, I'm unlikely to make it to the vote for this one, as Japan is just too far, and too expensive, for me.

You don't have to go Japan to vote for the 2009 worldcon. You need to have a supporting membership in the convention, and to pay the voting fee (which will automatically turn into a supporting membership for whichever convention wins), but you can vote by mail or maybe online.

Yeah, I know. foms has been pushing me to do so for a while. But, it is such a bother.

Which is why I'm pretty sure KC is going to win. Most people who don't go to Japan aren't going to bother to vote, and the hardcore worldcon regulars who go to Japan are all firmly behind KC, I think.

As someone involved in the Chicago bid, I'm not going to try to convince you one way or t'other. I'm sure both Denver and Chicago will put on good bids. For me, the difference is that if Denver wins, I won't have to do as much work, although I've had a lot of fun creating very different ads for practically every program book we've taken out ad space in.

You've done an excellent job with those ads -- the dual-language ad you placed in Nippon's Progress Report was utterly inspired. Brilliant!

Thanks. That's my favorite one, but also the scariest since I had no way to confirm the translation, although it was done by a professional translator with no fannish credentials.

In terms of the greatest good for the greatest number of fans I am supporting Chicago.

Its easier for more people to get to, esp. those who may be going to their first convention or worldcon. Chicago is easy driving distance for much of the Midwest while Denver is rather isolated. It depends on who you want to see at the con, all your old friends who can afford to fly in, or a bunch of new faces amazed at their first worldcon?

Sentiment, Chicago was my first worldcon.

I like Chicago but have not been there since I think the 2001 Windycon.

Chicago has a good cadre of conrunners and supports three cons a year locally.

Good restaurants within walking distance of the hotel.

Chicago has a good cadre of conrunners and supports three cons a year locally.

Actually four. Capricon, 2BeContinued, Duckon, and Windycon.

I keep thinking of 2BeContinued still being in South Bend.

One of the big disadvantages I see for Denver is that their location is very spread out. The main hotel is 3 1/2 blocks from the convention center - unless they're very short blocks, that's worse than San Jose. And the hotel only has 1200 rooms, so they're going to end up using a bunch of different hotels. Contrast that with Chicago where the Worldcon will be essentially under one roof. I like the Columbus location, but don't think they are capable of pulling off a Worldcon.

Note: I'm involved in the Chicago bid (although not as much as I'd have liked to be), but the opinions stated above are my own.

So "Convention in a Box" is a factor, being weather proof except for going out to dinner.

Worse than Con Jose is not good, unless the route is lined with things like restaurants.

Dispersed can work OK, if the weather helps, which it did in San Francisco and San Antonio and did not so much in Winnipeg.
Confrancisco had a lot of hotels but this did give some cheap room options for people. I am not sure Denver can do the same.

Worse than Con Jose is not good...

This just shows to me how big a factor staying indoors is. The Fairmont and the San Jose McEnery Convention Center were about as far apart as the main hotel and the part of the convention center we were using at Philadelphia -- but you stayed indoors walking between them, so people thought it was shorter.

For that matter, the front door of the Fairmont and the front door of the McEnery were about the same distance apart as the distance from the Dealers Room to the Moat House at Glasgow last year.

For some reason, going outside makes the distances seem longer to most people I've talked to. Heck, at Glasgow, the walk was shorter if you went outside between the buildings, rather than taking the somewhat convoluted trail between them, but I bet there were a lot of people who stayed inside because in their minds it was a shorter distance.

Well outdoors in San Jose was not a problem because of the weather, the sidewalks were a little crowed, sometimes.

Perceived distance is a factor, if the route is lined with restaurants where fans can eat then it makes it look shorter than if its lined with closed office buildings.
Also if it is a straight line as opposed to a route with turns.

Nope, not talking you out of it! I think Denver would be fine; it's more central for the US as a whole and would give the out-of-the-country people a chance to see something other than a coast. August in Denver is likely to be more pleasant weather-wise than August in Chicago, not to mention the fact that it's beautiful out there.

Except Chicago is indoors and you do not have to emerge to go to restaurants until later in the day when it is cooler.

For what it's worth, the only way I'll ever go to a Worldcon is if it's less than 400 miles away. Which pretty much leaves Chicago and Toronto. Granted, this is a strictly selfish criteria.

Matt, I bet if you went to one Worldcon (hopefully Chicago in 2008) you would find yourself totally hooked. My first Worldcon was Chicon 2000 and I've been to all but one since. Worldcons are really, really cool.

Tammy did we get the same treatment from the hotel as Geri did in 2000?

How could we have had so much fun and her not?

Good question. We didn't get hit with any extra cleaning charges or anything like that. I don't know if I our party was as ambitious as Geri's though.

We did have a ton of fun. I think the only reason I was able to host parties three nights in a row at my very first Worldcon is because it was my first Worldcon and thus I had NO IDEA what I was getting into.

Sadly, if Chicago wins I'll almost certainly be working on the con, and so probably won't have the energy to run ClubFusion again. Okay - maybe one night. :-)

Well, I presume you got the party host information, though that was from the convention rather than the hotel. Remember the fire paranoia, and the "hotel has no in-room coffeemakers and doesn't allow anyone to bring them in" warnings? Marci called the hotel to report the common coffee machine on our floor still hadn't been serviced Friday afternoon, hours after her first call reporting the problem,

"We'll take care of it. Would it help if we also brought you a coffee maker for your suite?"

"Yes, thank you."

And when the hotel guy showed up, coffee maker in hand, and asked where we wanted it. We said wherever the hotel preferred, that we knew there were fire safety concerns. "Okay; I'll just put it where it usually goes."

So much for the hotel's claim that they never provided or allowed in-room coffee makers due to Chicago's fire safety laws.

The written party host information had other difficulties in both tone and content. But, again, that was more at the committee's hands than the hotel's. It set the tone, though, one soon borne out by the hotel's attitude and sensibilities. Time blurs the various indignities I suffered at the VIP check-in desk the hotel was running for suite reservations when I arrived, but the Hyatt staff spent 3-4 times as long as I've spent checking into any other party suite, treating me like scum the whole time.

I didn't get hit with any of the bogus cleaning or damage charges. ConJose did following the single party they hosted. The charge was for alleged cigarette burn damage. From a non-smoking party. I understand other parties were also hit with $200-300 charges with early on, and that the problem went away as soon as more party hosts started leaving enormous tips.

To be specific, because tipping sensibilities vary, I started out leaving $35-40/day for cleaning the parlor where we'd already cleared all the trash and tidied the room. We tipped separately for the sleeping rooms, which were used much more lightly. I was advised to raise my daily parlor tip to the $50-60 range after the convention's hotel folks saw what the hotel did to several party hosts Thursday and Friday nights. IIRC, I know of one large party with multiple suites that was leaving $75/parlor/day even though they, too, were doing much of their own cleaning before the maids came in. (Though I don't think they were down scrubbing the floors. And, yes, it was over the top for me to do so -- the dirt could be easily removed with the normal cleaning tools the maids had. I just didn't have the financial resources to deal with hundreds of dollars in extra cleaning charges, and I learned on site that the hotel had a propensity for charging them.)

The hotel's hostile attitude toward party hosts that I encountered wasn't just one thing, or two, or three. It was a repeating pattern that kept limiting what I could do, what I could serve my guests, and one that came with a constant, discomforting awareness that I was at the hotel's mercy in a hotel that was capricious in its mercy at best.

I had *enormous* fun with the parties themselves in spite of the hotel's surly intimidation techniques and flaked out service. The State Fair party remains a lovely combination of memory, myth, and fannish lore. I'm glad to hear that you guys weren't affected by the hotel's hostility. I hope the Chicago Hyatt truly has changed as much as I understand they say they have. But I'll have to see it for myself, and see it hold up over time, before I'll ever consider hosting a party in that hotel again.

Who, fans, ever let anything go? Of course not. I am quite sure that if Chicago wins, there will be plenty of people willing to host parties in the Hyatt. Neither my budget or Minn-stf's stretches to the extravagance of a convention-long party suite these days, anyway, so in many ways my party-host antipathy toward the hotel is mostly a moot point. Yeah, if Chicago wins the site selection vote and I'm able to attend the convention itself, I'm sure I could find parties to help with if I were so inclined. But there will be other ways to help, too. That's true of every Worldcon, regardless of where it is.

Glad we missed all that drama. My experience was to do your own thing, be clean and to interact with the hotel minamally. We did not try to cook anything which helped I guess. We also did alot of our own clean up left a tip and were never bothered. We looked poor so maybe they did not think us worth the effort. By this I mean we had people sleeping in the parlour. Also we did not talk to other parties much so we never got into the escalating tip movement. The main interaction we had was to take some beer from Torcon.

See my response to Alex below. I'm hooked on Disney World too, and you don't see me going there either.

Are you very sensitive to time zone changes? Airfare isn't always expensive. Los Angeles is usually cheap to get to, and it's across the street from Disneyland. You should come this year. :)

Spoken like a wealthy person. I am comfortable paying $45 for admission and $90 to split two hotel nights with somebody. That comes to $135 for the whole convention. I go ahead and budget a total of $200 (to deal with the unexpected), per each convention. I find the cost of a Worldcon membership to be savagely offensive to me. It's rumored that Torcon is actually giving away a *&^#% surplus of all that ill-gotten cash. A plane fare on top of that is out of the question. It's the kind of money I spend on a vacation once every ten years or so. It's a testament to how wonderful a Worldcon probably is that I would be willing to attend a regionally-local one at all.

All worldcons give away their excess cash, that is how Torcon got some of its surplus, from previous worldcons.

Chicon V gave everyone a $10 rebate.

However you are right, more people will attend if they can drive as opposed to flying. A car is a sunk cost while a plane ticket is an extra expense.
Midwest fans used to drive to west coast worldcons, although there were fewer cons in general back then.

I haven't even decided whether to vote or not.

The primary reason that I would vote for Chicago is that the committee bidding is not the same one that ran prior Chicons. This team is significantly younger and more energetic than the folks who ran Chicon 2000.

The primary reason that I would vote for Denver is that it's been a long time since there was a Worldcon in that part of the country, and they can probably do a reasonable job.

The primary reason I would not vote for Chicago is that friends of mine would try to drag me into helping out on it.

The primary reason I would not vote for Denver is that their hotel is located a long way from their convention space. Bleah - I hate that. They are also in a bunch of hotels, which means that there would be a secondary attempt to get into the same hotel as my friends - which often doesn't work. Bleah again.

Columbus is a nice town, but not up to a Worldcon. IMO. Yeah, I feel that way about Ann Arbor, too! The whole state of Michigan, for that matter. :-)

I guess I've talked myself into voting for Chicago. :-)

I certainly don't want to try to talk you out of it, for I haven't yet decided myself which site I'm going to vote in first place and which in second. But I thank you for raising the question -- it had been awhile since I'd looked at any of the bids' websites or otherwise evaluated where they stand now. And watching a bid's development is one of the ways I consider what kind of Worldcon they're likely to run.

Here's my current mix of thoughts on the matter:

Each website has its strengths and weaknesses. Even though Columbus has pretty much stopped running bid tables or parties most anywhere you'd expect to see a Worldcon bid in the last 12-18 months before the election, their website does a much more obvious job that Chicago's of addressing the question of just what a Worldcon is and linking to information about how site selection works. I found one link to Worldcon page from the Chicago site, and nothing that tells me voting is this year. Denver's site is the best of all in that regard. The site is bare bones, but the FAQ is excellent -- clear, to the point, useful.

Chicago's website is great at linking to regional and local conventions, and especially at building enthusiasm and credibility with their party reports.

To my eye, each of the websites does a reasonably good job of reflecting its bid's sensibilities, strengths, and weaknesses. Both Denver and Chicago say which conventions they'll be at between now and the vote, and where they've been. I note that Columbus doesn't have such a list; that's telling, given the bid to date. Denver is deliberately running a short, low-cost race. I think it would be to the overall benefit of future Worldcons if they were successful with this strategy, and I'd measure success on this not just by winning, but also by ending up with a close vote count.

From the time he came on as bid chair, Dave McCarty has stressed that this Chicago bid is drawing from across the many conventions in the Chicago area, using the Worldcon bid to help strengthen the local conrunning scene and continue building closer relationships between the folks working on the different conventions. The site's list of local and regional conventions is another reflection of that. But then, instead of maximizing the value of that approach, the main reasons Chicago claims voters should chose it is that they've held more Worldcons than anyplace else, that they're good at it, and that they enjoy it. The first is fact, the second claim is at odds with the common wisdom and my experience that Chicago Worldcons have been getting steadily worse since Chicon IV in 1982. Telling voters that you enjoy running Worldcons is fine and good; it's excellent, even. Resting on the laurels of having run the most Worldcons, and boasting about how good you are at it, is a vote-killing strategy to my eyes. If a bid it really all that good, it lets other people praise how good it is. And it uses its "Why" space to talk about its real strengths; it builds on past success rather than resting on it, and it tells us what's new and exciting this time around, especially when those new and exciting factors address key weaknesses in previous Chicago Worldcons. The Chicago bid a good mix of con-running experience and youthful energy. It doesn't reinforce the walls between the different fannish groups there; it helps tear them down. And it's not just drawing from Chicago; it has folks with national visibility and experience heavily involved. Folks like Don and Jill Eastlake Especially Jill. :-)

Denver is the only bid to list not just the bid committee but also the bid membership. While the list is shorter and older than I'd expect, it's an excellent mix of usual suspects -- and I trust the judgment of most of those -- and names that are new to me. That seems a good sign.

I have mentioned in the past that the Chicago bid site should list the membership. We've had problems with past webmasters. I will ask that this be dealt with.

I guess perceptions differ. To most of the locals I've talked to, the trend is positive; '82 had a concom at war with itself, '91 had some major problems, and 2000 worked well except for a couple of areas. It could be just that email makes internal problems more visible to a wider audience. It looks like all the local groups are getting along better now than they ever have in the past.

Dave's got tons of youthful energy. Jill and Don have more experience between them than most bids do collectively. Helen's command of detail is impressive. And we have a couple ex-Worldcon chairs and assorted division and department heads in various roles. I want to get some bios up on the web site (I've just been really busy up until last weekend for the past, gosh, ten years I guess).

I don't do political stuff well; I leave the job of persuading people to others. I didn't join the Chicago bid to compete against anybody, I just joined because I respect a lot of the people there. The bid tried to comply with tradition with the old rules, and when it looked like the rules might change, the bid chose a different year so that votes on the no-zone proposal and the 2004 site selection would not have to take future bids into account. When I heard about a possible Chicago bid at Windycon in 1981, I told Dina, "Any time Chicago wants to go for it, I'll be there to help." I'm not sure how many parties we're doing for Easter; Dave and Helen are off to Britain; Marah and I are heading for Norwescon; others are doing other cons. We're going to do at least six parties on Memorial Day weekend; Don and Jill are coming down here to Balticon and I'm heading out to help (I believe) KT at ConQuest. I know Chicago has a lot of momentum, we're going to have a lot of people and a lot of money going into LA, for what that's worth.

I'm a partisan so I'm not going to give an objective opinion. I am going to interpret your comments as useful feedback.

There's much, much more to a bid than its website, of course. And that's where things get even more mixed for me. Dave McCarty and crew have done an utterly excellent job of giving the Chicago bid real legs in the last 18 months. That goes a long way toward making me willing to go to another Chicago Worldcon much though I'll hold firm to my vow to not host a party in the Chicago Hyatt, a vow I made following the experience of running a Minneapolis in '73 suite there in 2000. Never before or since have I had the misfortune of hosting a party in such a party-hostile hotel environment. And that's saying a lot, especially given that I ran the hospitality division at ConJose and had more than the typical party-host experience with the San Jose Fairmont in the process. Much as I treasure the memory of winning Kurt Baty's and Scott Bobo's "Best Party of the Worldcon" award at Chicon 2000, I still haven't been able to forget the sheer awfulness of scrubbing the tile entry to the suite each day before going to bed a couple of hours past dawn. Why was I on my knees scrubbing the floor? So the suite wouldn't look dirty when the maid arrived. I cleaned much of the damned suite myself *and* left extortion payoff tips to avoid the multi-hundred dollar cleaning and damage bills other parties were getting hit with. And, yes, I'm still bitter.

I'm very pleased the Chicago bid seriously considered other properties; I'm sorry none of them worked out.

My major concern about the Denver bid is its relationship with the local fan base, which is weak at best. Counter-balancing that is my belief that Kent, Mary, and crew would run a solid Worldcon, and especially that lots and lots of very talented folks would gladly contribute their helping hands, legs, bodies, and lives for the duration. Add to that the fact that I believe Kent and Mary plan to run the kind of Worldcon that has a good chance of not eating those talented folks alive.

At this point, I think both Chicago and Denver would continue doing a good job of linking into The Permanent Floating Worldcon Committee while also welcoming and using new folks reasonably well. Columbus completely loses out on this point, and for me it's an important one.

Eighteen months ago, Chicago didn't have a chance of my vote. I'm still leaning in Denver's direction, but the fact I've gone from certain to undecided, the fact that I have to think about it at all, is a strong tribute to all of the good Dave's done with the Chicago bid.

Okay, so summarizing and short bullet points just aren't my strength. :-) That's how this response ended up split into two parts -- the entire thing exceeds LJ's reply limit.

Hope there's been some interesting food for thought within.

Its funny Geri but Tammy, Kim Kofmel and I were throwing 3 parties in the same hotel that weekend and dodged that bullet.

Mind you as Tammy points out we threw more modest parties, at least we tried, being down the hall from Torcon gave us alot of business.

...we threw more modest parties, at least we tried...

Oh, I know that one well. The Minneapolis in '73 suite was between the elevators and the Boston bid parties. We'd never before been on the main party path, or had that many people flow through in a night.

I'm very glad your mileage varied.

I was one of the people who showered Kent Bloom with $20 bills in the lobby of the Chicago SMOFCon when in an unguarded moment he spoke of bidding for Denver, and I have a friend of the bid membership in Denver. I have tremendous respect for Kent, who I consider someone who has thought through many of the aspects of Worldcon running more thoroughly than most. He has considerable person experience working with Worldcons, and I believe he can recruit an excellent committee.

(Among his long list of credits: Kent ran the Events division at ConAdian; I was WSFS division manager and deputy chair. Last year in Glasgow he was the event producer (area/department head) for Opening/Closing Ceremonies, which meant he reported to me, and if that doesn't show the patience of a saint, I don't know what does.)

But Chicago has a massive location advantage, and will draw from a larger population base, and has a "one roof" Worldcon, which is always an advantage. And I believe that if Chicago wins, they will put together a good Worldcon too.

Poor Columbus: While I'm sympathetic to them, and they did manage to file a bid, as far as I'm concerned they've defaulted on this election.

I know I'll be voting Denver and Chicago 1 and 2 in this election; I just haven't decided which order it will be.

Hang on a minute. You are on the Hollister Bid Committee!

Oh, bother. I meant "I'm voing Denver and Chicago 2 and 3..." of course. Whoops.

Good, now to insert some subliminal messages in this post so that everyone else reading this votes for Hollister too.

You have led me to think about the word "ept." Apparently "inept" is, etymologically, a trivial variation on "inapt," and so the opposite would be "apt." However, a more appropriate, and still related, opposite would be "adept" (for those occasions when you feel compelled to use a word that's in the dictionary).

The root of "inept" and "apt" is latin for "to fasten," while the root of "adept" is latin for "to grasp." So both of them have a connotation of having a hold on things, having it together, being able to find your ass with both your hands, etc.

I like Kent Bloom (chair of the bid). I met him at a smofcon and he seemed both nice and ept.

Best thing Kent Bloom did for Torcon was to not respond to Tammy's email offering to run the con suite. She did a great job for Program Ops.

Thanks, Alex! And I probably got more good press for pulling that one off than if I'd run the best consuite ever...

You two deserved a special award for that performance.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

2008 worldcon site selection

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Whew!

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Part 1 of 2: Comparing the websites

Re: Part 1 of 2: Comparing the websites

Part 2 of 2: The bids themselves

Re: Part 2 of 2: The bids themselves

Re: Part 2 of 2: The bids themselves

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject