On Mar 27, 9:44 pm, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> weaseled:
> Andre Lieven <andrelie...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> I don't go to cons to eat or sleep; I go to cons to have
> >> interesting conversations.
> > And, those with sleep deprived starvation cases are always so...
> > fulfilling. <sarcasm mode off>
>
> I'm in little danger of starvation.
None the less, most humans know that hunger impairs a whole range
of bodily and mental processes, even before dying of lack of food
rears
it's head.
> At Philcon a year and a half ago, at sunrise the principal speaker,
> Charlie Stross, and I were the only ones still up. We both greatly
> enjoyed our conversation, which lasted for several hours.
" The singular of 'anecdote' is not 'citation'. " I never suggested
nor
said that one should " never " do so, just that as a practical policy,
it flat out *sucks*... Please enjoy your latest Straw Whore in
private.
> >> Even assuming (correctly) that I never buy anything in the art show
> >> and (incorrectly) that I never buy anything in the dealer room,
> >> never pay for part of a sleeping room, and never volunteer, how
> >> would it benefit a con if I stayed home instead of going?
> > These days, just about the last thing any con needs is to be
> > accurately perceived as being a nest of cheapskates, who can't/won't
> > dip into their mac & cheese funds to spend anything at the con,
> > including on a room ( Or, shared ****tion therof. ) and food. Hotels,
> > which cons *need*, in order to be held, are in the business of
> > selling rooms and food, and there are quite a few other clients
> > coming to them whose demographics do spend on those things at their
> > hotel based events.
>
> You evaded my question. If I don't go to the con at all, I obviously
> won't be buying anything in the art show, buying anything in the
> dealer room, paying for part of a sleeping room at the con hotel,
> eating in the hotel restaurant, or volunteering at the con.
IOW, since you do none of those anyway, or, most squatting fen
do none of any of those, the con really gains nothing, in terms of any
aspect of it's relations with the hotel, from them. But, as several
cons
have learned ( Boskone & Iceberg, more than one Balticon, and
Dripclave ), those squatting the con can do the con considerable
harm, both overly and passively.
> So how is
> the con or the hotel better off if I stay home than if I attend but do
> none of those things?
Because you won't, 1) **** up the con's relations with the hotel
( Hotel:
Why are all these scruffy layabouts trying to sleep on our lobby
couches
at 4 AM ? ), and 2) the pro****tion of fen at the con who do patronise
the hotel's room sales, food sales, and the con's vendors, goes UP.
> Anyhow, please note that I almost always volunteer, often pay for part
> of a sleeping room for at least one night, and often buy something in
> the dealer room.
Woah, hold up there, Albert Schweitzer. Don't do us too many favours.
> > Thats a major reason why Worldcon bidding is back to a 2 year
> > forward timeline.
>
> No, it's because other events were on a 5 to 10 year forward timeline,
> so Worldcons gained nothing from the switch from 2 year to a 3 year
> forward timeline.
Hotels are willing to bump for patrons with more $$$. ConFrancisco
found that out... We don't have that kind of $$$, and, at least as
im****tantly, we are SEEN as not being in those $$$ leagues, because
other kinds of conferences DON'T have their members trying to squat
sleep on lobby furniture...
> I know because I was at the Worldcon business
> meeting where this was discussed, and I'm one of those who voted to
> change it back to 2 years.
Bully for you. Betcha you weren't there alone...
> > I rarely choose to do such, for I have a responsibility, both to
> > myself, and to my wife, who doesn't drive well at night, and who
> > doesn't navigate well, at any time, to be fit enough to drive
> > *safely* when it is needed.
>
> Having to never be the least bit sleep deprived while traveling is one
> of many disadvantages of being a motorist.
OTOH, its a price to be able to do a host of Useful Things that non
car trans****ted people cannot do. And, if one is too bushed to stay
awake on a not-all-day trans****t trip, one is not likely to have been
functional enough to be a good conversationalist right before
boarding.
> If I were to fall asleep
> while traveling home, the worst I risk is missing my stop and having
> to double back. (And for what it's worth, that has never happened).
No, but theres not a few folks who, coming off a con, especially a
longer
one like a Worldcon, who, having to catch a fixed time of departure
commercial trans****t the following AM, have missed it due to stored up
fatigue kicking in. Me, thats not happened to, but two reasons are
that,
1) I do get reasonable sleep during the con, and 2) since we're
usually
travelling by car, our departure time is ours to make. Ah, freedom of
choice !
> > If I go through a con getting little to no sleep, then I both will
> > not enjoy the con, being too fatigued and starved to do so, and I
> > will not be an asset for us in the areas that I have mentioned.
>
> I never said how you should go through a con.
No, you did say that a comcon who dared to pick a hotel that wasn't
on a Chinabus/Urban Transit line was catering " only to motorists. "
I still reject that whiny slur at good concoms all over the continent.
> Please don't tell me how I should go through a con.
<Projection>
> > Keith, you are a willfully poor person; ...
>
> I'm neither poor nor wealthy. I live prudently so
> that I won't end up like the woman described in
> http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/03/27/foodbank.family/
> who was earning $70k until last month and now has to resort
> to a food bank to keep from starving.
Once again, you describe functions of " 0 " and " 100 ", never
grasping
that theres 99 other spaces in between of them. Willfully blind
outlier.
> I've never been wealthy, but I've never used a food bank, and have
> never been on welfare, food stamps, unemployment, or disability.
> Nor have I ever failed to pay my bills in full and on time.
Yet, you commonly don't pony up for sleep and food during the con,
which doesn't have to always mean $$$, as I often used to bring
ready to eat food to a con with me.
> > Thats OK, thats your right to be as you choose to be. But, and this
> > is a major point, *once you have made your own choice for yourself,
> > whining about the consequences of your choice is, well, nuts*.
>
> I do not whine at all, especially not about the consequences of
> my choices.
" Is Philcon catering to all fans, or *only to motorists* ? "
Made a liar by your very own words... How GW Bush of you...
> >> I found it easier to sleep at Gitmo than in most Marriotts, as
> >> Gitmo is warmer.
> > As has been well shown here, you are an major outlier. To ASSume
> > that your choices and experiences are at all meaningful for the
> > vast majority of the rest of humanity is narcissistic and willfully
> > thicky of you.
>
> I'm not the only person who prefers warmth to cold.
Non sequitur. Most Marriotts are not " cold " by any reasonable human
measure. Once again, you try to create a false dichotomy where none
actually exists. Thats also known as " telling lies. "
> Note that I
> wasn't the one who was complaining about how cold the Eastercon
> hotel was.
" The singular of 'anecdote' is NOT 'citation'. "
The bulk of that discussion seemed to me to be about the hotel having
failed to provide normal temperatures. Thats usually not by hotel's
policies ( " Hey, Mr. Marriott, I know what'll pack in the customers:
15C sleeping and meeting room temperatures ! " " Franklin, you're
fired
for being a loony ! " ), but by unwanted oopsies.
> > So, when do your waterboarding sessions resume ?
>
> The week I worked at Gitmo (putting it on the Internet) was long
> before there was a prison camp there.
Well, thats what is there now, if you still want that overheated
climate...
> >> Are you unable to express yourself without profanity?
> > <Laughs> " In our century, we've learned not to fear words. "
> > Lt. Uhura, Star Trek, The Savage Curtain.
>
> The heavy use of profanity tends to be a sign that a person isn't very
> good at expressing himself.
Ah, the furious backpedaling kicks off with a bang. Hey, dude, you
started to by claiming that ANY profanity was Bad, now it's just "
heavy
use of " thats Bad.
A few more of your now common flip flops, and you'll be ready to both
endorse gangsta rap, AND run for President. Bill O'Reilly is calling
you...
> I associate a high use of profanity, like
> a high ratio of tattoos to teeth, with prisoners and slum dwellers,
> not with SF fans.
Feel free to add Bill Maher, Dennis Miller and George Carlin into
that list, oh " tolerant one "...
" There are two kinds of people, those who say that there are
two kinds of people, and those who don't. " anon.
> > What, your self absorbed pissy whine about Philcon being " only
> > for motorists " ? Its false, its stupid, its narcissistic, to a
> > Oprahesque degree, and its simply DUMB. Did I mention that its
> > false ?
>
> It was a *question*, not an assertion or a whine.
False. I look down even lower at people who choose to lie to
themselves, than I do to those who only lie to others.
<shrug>
Andre
|
