kevin_standlee | Conventions: Members Versus Customers

Current Mood: thoughtful

Entry tags:

conventions

Conventions: Members Versus Customers

The post-Eastercon discussions going on in

eastercon and elsewhere include the question of those people who attend conventions viewing themselves solely as "paying customers." I suggested we may need to start printing a fine-print contract on membership materials, the way sporting events and concerts do on their tickets, such as:

THIS IS NOT A TICKET. You are a member of this convention. This event is being organized entirely by volunteers who are working without compensation and who had to pay for their own memberships and travel expenses. While the organizers will make a reasonable effort to present this event in the way it is described in its written materials, they cannot guarantee that all things will happen as planned. By purchasing this membership you explicitly acknowledge that all functions are subject to change or cancellation with or without notice for any reason whatsoever.

This is only a rough first effort, but I think you get the idea. It is a little sad that I can say that I'm quite serious that we may really need to do this or face threats of litigation for "false advertising" and "breech of contract" with attendees.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Lord, yes, I can sympathize.

This is a big problem I've observed in the groups organizing events for alternate communities (like smOdyssey's FolsomFringe).

I've come to loathe what I refer to as "consumer kinksters" because they just plain refuse to understand what "volunteer-run" event means.

I think this is a very good idea. It reminds the old timers what it is all about and educates the newer folks that we all pay our way and do our share.

Great first draft!!

I think this may have something to do with the decline of volunteerism in general. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that an increasing number of people have not been acculturated to expect themselves or others to volunteer time, effort, and resources without compensation. Having no expectation of doing any volunteer work themselves, they don't understand anyone else doing volunteer work, and treat everything as they would a ticket to a show, which is a different kind of relationship.

Within the SF community, "gate show" events like Creation et al have encouraged this kind of thinking, and it spreads to people who might find volunteer-run events like ours and assume that they're run on the same model as a gate show. Of course, while in some ways the events are superficially similar, at their philosophical core that are vastly different.

That doesn't mean I go into a convention on which I'm working not wanting to do the best I possibly can. If anything, I probably work harder on it than I do at my paid job, much as I like my work. It just means that I would like to expect that people take this into account when offering criticism and also be more willing to help volunteer themselves. For example, instead of coming into a room that isn't set up yet and complaining about it, saying, "Whoops, the chairs aren't in place yet. Can I help move them where they need to be?"

I think something like this, but not in fine print, would be useful for most of our conventions. There are a lot of folks who come to our conventions for the first time who just don't know that we're volunteers. (You probably also had people convinced you were getting huge freebies and perks for chairing a Worldcon. I would have settled for one lackey!)

My suggestion would be for a more positive message: "Welcome to the membership of BlipCon 23! We're the committee for BlipCon -- an all-volunteer group who want to share our love of SF&F and its people with you. We hope you enjoy what we've put together this weekend, and it would be great if you'd like to volunteer to help us make this a really great gathering of fans..."

Then include some seg that tells them what their membership gets them -- plus (cribbing from your note above) the comment that "There will be a lot of different kinds of programming at the convention. Despite our planning, we cannot guarantee that all things will happen..."

I think when we put stuff into a kind of modified legal language, we lose...so if we can serve the same purpose by using warm, welcoming words that provide a sense of inclusion, we win quite a lot.

I have to agree with both of you. The large 'n regular fan-run cons (like WorldCon and EasterCon) should push such a notice to the front of the literature, especially the membership receipt.

What I find truly astonishing are the number of fans NOT attending their first WorldCon who complain about schedule changes. I suppose it's an easy way to spot the folks who haven't ever volunteered...

You probably also had people convinced you were getting huge freebies and perks for chairing a Worldcon.

Yep. And a sense that full disclosure is good prompts me to say that I did get (a) a good hotel room location (top floor, flanking the boardroom); (b) a slightly-reduced room rate ($99 as I recall; we had about 20 such "organizer" hotel room rates available, which we parceled out as equitably as we though we could); and (c) a couple of thank-you baskets from the hotel and from the San Jose CVB. (If it hadn't been for those baskets of fruit, crackers, and dry sausage, there would have been at least two nights of ConJose during which I wouldn't have had dinner.)

I think something like this, but not in fine print, would be useful for most of our conventions.

I see your point, and agree with most of what you say.

I think when we put stuff into a kind of modified legal language, we lose...

You're right, but for some of the people with whom we're dealing, that's the only thing that will get through to them when they start demanding their "rights" and "entitlements."

When I get home tonight, I'll post the disclaimer from the back of my most recent Burning Man ticket. There's a lot of stuff that won't likely be useful (the death & dismemberment clause, for one), but it'll at least give you an idea of what else is out there.

I'd love to see the No Spectators mindset catch on in fandom.

You're right, Kevin, the Gate Shows have contributed to this phenomenon. Oddly, the long running amazingly competent volunteers that have been doing it for 20 years may also, unwittingly have contributed to the problem -- in that if I go and see the same faces year after year (and my other exposures are Gate Shows), I'm likely to assume (enter Tony Randall here please) that those "Regulars" are paid like the folks at Creation Cons, et al.

So something like what Deb wrote up front -- and the small print legalese at the back for those who have that issue. That way we invite those that are willing to be invited and CYA the con for those who just want to complain.

Tho I'm sorely tempted to put a sign that says something like:
THIS IS NOT A GATE SHOW. WE DON'T PAY OUR LACKEYS. PLEASE VOLUNTEER BEFORE COMPLAINING.

Not that I would -- it's just a really tempting idea...

On the other hand, making sure Volunteer Sign Up is more obvious is alos a good thing. Put up a Sigh Up at Reg (and make it really visible), put one up in Hospitality, put one up in the Green Room (a good chunk of the "pros" came up the hard way and know the drill) -- Put one up in Gaming -- you get my drift -- the more chances folks have to sign up (or at least see flyers for where to go to sign up), the more folks realize it's part and parcel of what we do as a fan run con.

And again, you're focusing on the complaints instead of looking at the broader picture. This is clearly a marketing problem, not a legal problem. Whether you call someone a "member", a "customer", or even a "volunteer", there is a contract that occurs at the time of registration. That contract carries almost no legal obligations, and yet if a convention fails to meet the expectation of its (let's call them) members, people will stop coming. That's the real danger the committee needs to consider. In that event, the convention leadership either needs to rethink what they are doing, or else they should step aside and let someone else run things.

I have found it much more productive to discuss people's concerns, instead of leaping to reductio ad absurdem versions of their argument. It is much, much easier to find consensus and mutual understanding if you don't assume that agreement is a necessary result of the discussion. It doesn't help the conversation to accept an unreasonable premise as a starting point for the discussion, even if one might intend to "disprove" their premise with logic of some kind. Listening to the complaint is reasonable; taking legal steps in response is counterproductive, because it avoids dealing with the complaint for what it is.

So the way to deal with "paying customers" is just to explain what the convention is about, and if they don't like that, no one is forcing them to attend. Many conventions have disclaimers like "Guest appearances subject to professional commitments."

I think injecting a ticket-like standard contract form into the registration process is dubious and would introduce unpredictable legal liabilities, even if this contract form explicitly stated "This is not a ticket." (I.e. if you sell someone a ticket-like object, anything written on that contract is only relevant and binding if the organization hosting the event can prove that the other party has been explicitly made aware of unusual terms printed on the contract.) Conversely, anybody who thinks they can get a court to imply a lot of terms into an unwritten contract that the other party hasn't agreed to doesn't have a clear idea of how the law actually works, so their putative lawsuit isn't much of a concern. (I'm not a lawyer, but if I were convention chair, I wouldn't be worrying about such lawsuits.) Dealing with the complaint as a legal issue seems to be a strategy for avoiding any consideration of policy change, and that seems like bad management.

Ah, memories of the conservative who threw a snit fit after WisCon 28.

I -like- the disclaimer - but it _should_ be printed in 18-point type ON the outside of the packet every convention member is given.

[it's make a good staff Tshirt statement, too.]

You're right, but for some of the people with whom we're dealing, that's the only thing that will get through to them when they start demanding their "rights" and "entitlements."

That's sadly true. I tire of hearing what people's "rights" are, especially when I've burned myself up making sure that it's a good convention.

On the other hand, we're much better off dealing with the cranky ones piecemeal and making our public statements those that will serve the greater good (and the greater numbers).

Our problem, sometimes, is we got so damned tired and frustrated that we just want to chuck up our arms and say, "Fine, ya bastids, eat flaming laser death...er...nasty contractual language."

Dealing with the complaint as a legal issue seems to be a strategy for avoiding any consideration of policy change, and that seems like bad management.

No, I don't believe it is bad management at any level. It is, instead, a response to the ways in which convention attendees have treated with convention organizing committees.

The problem has been that we don't scream "lawsuit" first. Our attendees do. And we must consider questions of legal action, even if it is to decide that we don't wish to deal with things in a lawyerly fashion.

Kevin wasn't really suggesting "taking legal steps" so much as figuring out how to provide fair warning at the outset to new members. I think his point is important, and we don't do enough educating of those who have never been to a convention. (If we did do so, I wouldn't have had someone tell me, at one convention, that he would "have [my] job for this." Woooo. I is so scared. Bite me, monkey boy. I is tenured.)

The other point in Kevin's original post, about the ticket-like thingy, has an important use -- making people read it. People don't read. If something is more than a paragraph, they won't read it carefully. So we need to figure out how to put some basic points together, do so tersely, make them prominent, and still keep an inviting feeling about our conventions.

And damn, if that isn't a hard task.

When a conrunner behind a desk who knows me personally says to me, "May I help you?" rather than greeting me by name, it's conrunner language time, and as a volunteer I feel treated like useful meat instead of as an equal co-worker. I did some low-level volunteer work at ConJose and left feeling disrespected and unappreciated. (Especially when, without telling me, ops sent regular staff to do the same job I'd clearly signed up for.) That's your real problem.

"May I help you" is conrunner language? Sorry, but in my world, that's standard practice. If someone comes to my office door and I'm distracted, that's the kind of question I ask. Yes, even of my close colleagues -- because my mother taught me to be courteous in my speech. I backslide, of course, rather frequently, with those I know well.

There are times where mis-communication between areas or people, poor communication skills by supervisor-types, and lack of personal knowledge of someone puts off one of our volunteers. I'm sorry that happened to you -- anyone who's worked very hard at planning a Worldcon hates to hear that a volunteer was made to feel like that.

I'd love to see the No Spectators mindset catch on in fandom.

:-) Yes...and involve even the most shy, at some level. Wish I knew how.

The wording is a bit distant, but like many social (and business) rituals, it's a controlled neutral statement, and a way to manage stress.

Lord knows nobody ever gets stressed out over stuff going at conventions.

Oh, that's funny...

I have to assume
a) they never met

krag_carbine there
b) their brand of conservatism isn't compatible with

krag_carbine if they did

Anime Los Angeles (

hazelchaz's baby) had a paragraph on the first page of the program book about the nature of volunteer-run conventions.

Some people still didn't get it, like the guy working an artist's table who didn't understand why he had to have a membership to get into the space where he expected to be working.

No.

Really, no.

Everything else is stressful. Having a canned, neutral greeting helps you avoid dumping your stress on an unsuspecting bystander.

My "What can I do for you?" (my standard greeting follow-up at work, regardless of how well I know the person asking) is just a cheerier version. That way only my immediate co-workers have to deal with me being snarky and pissed-off because work-related phone calls kept interrupting my sleep.

bovil, I usually say, "What can I do for you?" and mean it approximately the same way as "May I help you?"

Eggsackly the way I feel about it. There are times when exhaustion hits...and stress...and annoyance...and, and, and. Were it not for my early training in courtesy, I'd snarl like hell at people.

Possibly people like you and I come from another planet. If so, that's where I'd rather be.

(And the reason I don't say "Can I help you?" [which might be less formal] is because of Sister Mary Leona's ruler.)

What I find truly astonishing are the number of fans NOT attending their first WorldCon who complain about schedule changes. I suppose it's an easy way to spot the folks who haven't ever volunteered...

I don't know that it's even a volunteering thing. I've worked at a lot of conventions, and even run program...so scheduling isn't mysterious or anything.

But you should have been a mouse in my handbag last week at NEMICE (New England Meetings Industry Convention & Exposition) when the one panel I'd really wanted to see (on catastrophe management) was cancelled...an hour before it started. That's always the big problem with one-person panels, of course...when there's a catastrophe, you can't easily manage it. *snicker*

Do you really say "May I help you?" to your colleagues in your office?

Why yes, especially if I'm in the middle of something. I smile when I say it, but it's also shorthand for "got something going on, so make it quick." My colleagues are pretty fast on the uptake...we're a department of communication, so that kind of coding is understood easily.

That is true. I am a frequent contributor at cons even Science Fiction cons like Balticon. I am going to be a panelist at Balticon this year (they call them Program Participants) and I am honored. I believe they even recognize them at Opening Ceremonies.

I have been a staffer, attendee and Volunteer for different types of conventions. The cons that seem most like shows to me are Comic Book Conventions. Nobody volunteers to help those events and that disappoints me. It leads to be a mostly one panel room and the show floor events. They leave me the least satisfied as a fanac.

The attitude is in today's generation of fans. I am only 28 and I see many younger fans who would volunteer to help events. I actively have to get people to help run the on-site aspect of Registration for the con I head from dragging friends I meet at other cons.

You never know what you miss of the true fun of a convention until you volunteer and spend until 12 AM trying to stuff 3,500 Registration Bags after working an 8 hour day.

One other thing, I may seem unknown to you all I am the one who had all of the questions about WSFS, Worldcon and 2008 Worldcon bids.

It is polite. But it's the politeness of strangers.

Just out of curiosity, do you consider "What can I do for you?" to be equally distant? When my co-workers call me on the phone, that's what I ask them, and I don't consider it particularly distant.

Switch places with me. You're now the one behind the desk, and you know me personally. I've come to the front of the queue. There are twenty or thirty people behind me, and I'm about the five-hundredth person you've had to deal with today. What do you do? Do you shoot the breeze with me or do you process me through the queue as fast as you can?

Now on the other hand, you have a point about some things. I attended a convention that had a strict must-show-government-photo-ID policy. (I find such policies obnoxious, BTW, but that's a slightly different story.) As it happened, the person who processed me at registration did not know me, and I showed my passport without comment. One of the other registration lines had someone I did know personally, and who has, for instance, attended SFSFC Board of Directors meetings and whom I've known for many years. Talking with him and someone else (I didn't know the other person), I said, "Too bad you weren't doing my line; I wouldn't have needed to dig out my passport."

His companion said, "Oh, he should have demanded it no matter what; it's much safer to be consistent about these things."

That's just silly; personally identifying someone because you've known him/her for years is better security than government-issued photo ID.

I tell this story so you don't think I'm advocating keeping people at a distance all the time.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 1 of 3

Conventions: Members Versus Customers

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

members are customers

No Spectators

no subject

no subject

Re: members are customers

no subject

no subject

no subject

Re: No Spectators

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject