I had a feeling this might happen. I can't say I'm a fan of the FC "selection" process.

  flinters is out, too. It's almost sounding like they decided to go for "new blood". I'm starting to wonder who they let in.

There's plenty of 'old blood'. Pirates Row is intact, for example. We don't know what the criteria is and will never be told.

That last part has the potential to be the most disturbing. People will end up speculating based on the results.

It's fair though. If they did tell you, then there would be a lot of unhappy people trying to justify this or that person, but why not themselves. I think I would have preferred a simpler "ACCEPTED/DECLINED" answer than a score. There is a very close friend of mine that scored a zero and that was very emotionally devastating. I'm not sure FC will ever be able to gain their trust or respect after being shot down in flames so thoroughly.

You're right -- Accepted/Declined(/Standby) would be a better response in this case. Artists and merchants aren't being graded for graduation.

Yeah, nothing like being told in no uncertain terms absolutely nobody likes you and you're considered a worthless piece of shit. I'm sure this will make them beloved among all.

Yeah. I got a 0 too. At this point I'm planning on never going back. Which is saying a lot. The con is only a 20 minute drive from where I live. Its essentially free to go.

They gave you a score? Damn, how does one score a 0 on anything. That's like being told you draw with your left foot when you're right handed.

I'm that talented at... not being talented? I guess?

Well, I think you're talented. That's why I watch you. You bring something different to my inbox that others aren't. That's sort of the point of a dealer's room.

A score system... WTF?

I talked to them (the Pirates) once about how their core group always end up together at cons. As it was explained to me at the time, they're not usually submitting as individual artists. They send their applications in as a group requesting multiple tables, much like companies like Bad Dragon and SofaWolf do. I don't know if that's changed, since it was years ago one of them told me that, but it might explain why they still got in when others in the old guard didn't.

I guess being a package deal would take some of the risk out of it. If even one of the artists is super-popular, then all the others will get in regardless. It's certainly a strategy to consider if you know someone who's popular enough that hitching your wagon to them is a guaranteed table.

Pirates Row has slowly broken up over the years as not all the members can attend each event. You'll find them in small pockets, but no longer the long line. It's not what it used to be. Very few people today would even know the reference.

Unfortunately, selection processes like this cut some of the members out of the group, and that has already caused problems with lack of trust for FC. I'm not sure the con can repair the damage at this point. They are definitely getting a 'dealer hostile' reputation of late, and I really dislike that. They have a chance to fix things in 2017. Let's see what happens then.

What the hell, there's a Jury thing now?

Uck, how gross.

Time for that con to fold. If they think they are so elite that they can turn away some of the best artists in the furry community they are too elite for anyone to attend.

That is indeed a delicate issue. Further Confusion has a dance to do and they may find themselves no longer as important as they once were. There are multiple cons that are up and coming that could take their place.

Biggest Little Furry Con, for example, has a dealer space that is about 2X what FC currently has and has a large attendance that has doubled each year it been around. With a hotel that has room rates between $80 and $100 a night, it becomes very affordable. It's close enough to FC that people would drive to BLFC readily.

FC has to be very careful that they don't isolate themselves. Another con like BLFC could easily replace them.

A couple years ago, I ran across a web site which listed Fur Cons. At that time, they listed over 70 active cons around the world, which was a drastic increase over the count from even five years, prior.

FC is a grand dad to the Furry scene and so easily be overpowered by a newer entry. With that enormous convention facility, I feel that if FC could gain the funds, they could easily run off the volleyball teenager crowd and make a powerful dealer's den. Be a big hurdle to clear...

The system uses a scoring system of 7 judges. Each dealer applicant answers a questionnaire online for their submission. This is given to each of the seven judges to look through independently and assign a score value to each application. Those applications are gathered and totaled up. You can get up to a score of 7. Each judge is anonymous. That's how it was explained on their web page and in emails. There is no appeal, and no explanation to the judging criteria- which is probably a good idea since it might lead people trying to game the system.

I only got 3/7 and also was declined. I have been to every FC since the beginning in 1999, so I will miss out as well. It's too far to go to if I'm not a dealer. Just not financially feasible. I'll do a homecon event on  tigerdile instead and make up the difference in sales there. I'll still miss seeing people there.

As for Steve Gallacci, I'm afraid that due to new rule changes, you are no longer allowed to share your table with anyone else. The only exception to this is if the second person is already chosen for the Marketplace/Artist Alley which won't take applications until August. If they are on the list for the Marketplace, then the convention can consider allowing them at your table on a case by case basis. No more sharing tables with friends anymore unless they are already confirmed as a Marketplace vendor.

I don't agree with their new system, but that is their choice. My choice is to not go to the con at all for 2016. I might apply for 2017.

I believe I read that table sharing can be done with merchants/creators who are on standby. I could be wrong, I only looked once.

Standby is included, yes, but it's limited. For dealers, it's only 15 standby slots, and less for the Marketplace. Either way, it eliminates people from sharing tables intentionally from the start.

Even if the new dealer's room rules mandated that people sharing a table would be marched outside and shot in the head, I didn't get a table so it doesn't matter what the rules were on sharing.

I imagine it's the same as every other jury selection-- people vote for their friends or artists they want to score points with. Politics is not my strong point (to put it mildly), so this leaves everyone but the super-popular artists screwed.

Fuck everything about that jury process. It makes me ashamed to be a furry in 2015.

I hope that next year the higher ups pull their collective heads out of their asses. I'm absolutely infuriated right now.

It's a shame this doesn't give many unknown furry artists and veteran furry artists better chances getting spot of their own. Judgement is always the worse and hard on many artists. Art is art, it shouldn't be judged by selection. Understandable that furry fandom have been growing a lot with new artists and trying to have best of the best in their image of what furry con should be. Still, selection shouldn't happen and feels too much like competition in my own opinion.

Impressive that Steve Gallacci himself didn't get a spot for the FC 2016. I do think he's talented artist who have done great things for the fandom for years since the 80's.

To be fair, I was only coat-tailing on Roz's application so was not being considered myself. However, any "judged" selection is not going to be popular- nor is it going to be honest or fair- Especially in fandom, where everything is intensely personal and subjective. It will be "interesting" to see the winning trend.

Any bets on what's hot and what's not? Will it be level of on-line presence? Costume-centric? socio-political (in any flavor/subject)? pop culture/media connection (or not)? family friendly or NSFW(or worse)?

I'm sorry, when your con can't give the fucking Grandfather of what we call "furry fandom" a damn table, that's not only fucked up, it's being absolutely clueless about the history of your genre. That's like not giving Gene Roddenberry a table at a science fiction convention.

I am usually in with The Pirates, but I only scored a '3' this time around. I am on the standby list. I will go regardless. I will apply for a Marketplace slot when the time comes.
I have been attending FC for several years now, and always enjoyed it and sold very well. I have no idea why I only got a '3', but there is nothing I can do about it.

I was in Artists Ally (aka The Ghetto, aka Outer Siberia) one year. The ONLY reason I did any business at all was that the dealer's room AC crapped out for a whole day and they were forced to open one of the emergency exits right next to my table. That traffic saved the con from being a complete disaster. Otherwise, good luck...

You guys really call yourselves the Pirates?

Yeah, that was a nickname from a while back. Terrie's husband Glen used to bring a big pirate flag and set it up near some of the gals' tables. He would jokingly say 'Arrrrr! Ye still be having some unspent money in yer pockets....we'll be relieving you of that right here!'
So the Pirates became a thing that still holds out today. The membership fluctuates a bit over the cons.

Roz, Sorry to hear about that.

Hugs

Bunners

"This year did introduced a friendly competitive element to the selection process. We used 7 secret shoppers picked at random, and each had a limited number points to spend at 170+ virtual tables. With nearly 3 times as many applicants as spaces available, the scores weren't that high. many 1's and 2's, and many more that did not get a table. Data from previous years sales or attendance records were not given to the secret shoppers to reduce any bias. Their purchases were based on the same personal whims any real furry shopper would have."

This was the extra information given when they were e-mailed about the selection process.

You guys should all feel amazing. I got a 0/7.

Apparently not one could spend even one fake money point on me. But then- we didn't get any actual say on displaying our wares in this imaginary shopping test. My FA is different by far then what sits on my merch table. Things like price points and artist availability weren't included.

The worst part of this is I could have handled a no. Being I'm not even worth imaginary money at all... Ouch. Just... Damn. My feels. I cried for like an hour.

Do you have a source for this?

It sounds like it was directly from an email sent by the convention to people who asked about the selection process.

If that's true, then it's even more asinine than I could have imagined.. The type of art that 7 people like or dislike determines what thousands of con goers have to pick from. So now the people rejected face the double whammy of having no friends to vouch for them, AND being told in no uncertain terms their art and products suck so much no one wants them. And this is better than a random draw how?

That was directly from an email from the people in charge of the dealers den.

Here is a second reply from a different person.

"I understand and sympathize, any situation in which we face rejection is going to hurt. Art is personal, and we take it as such. In the efforts of being totally open and transparent, we posted all the results instead of sugar coating anything. I wish there was something I could say to make it better, but there really isn't.

The 7 secret shoppers were given no forewarning or bias, and did not know the other shoppers identities. Every artist was given the same application criteria, and presented themselves equally. We did this as the best random sample possible to apply some form of a grade to all the 170+ applicants, and give everyone the same opportunity to apply for muchly limited table space.

As to 'why not me', that is a question I don't think anyone can really answer. The world is a random place, and art appreciation is just as random unto it's beholder. "


Sigh. How was anyone given a fair shot to display their wares as a virtual table? How do they take into consideration things like cost, artist friendliness, if people had spots open for sketchbooks, speed of artist.

Fair, unbiased, random... They keep saying these words, but I do not think it means what they think it means.

And my response to said E-mail. Which sums up what I'm feeling pretty clearly:

There is sugar-coating.

There is saying No.

Then there is being outright mean under the guise of being 'transparent'. The selection process is in fact very opaque. The only transparency now offered is a highly biased judgement that you're repeating to people in the effort to make it seem fair.

I'm no mathematician but were these 7 people selected randomly and without bias? Are these 7 people actually representative of the furry population? Are they are all accurate in their choices? Seeing as you have people that can barely break three figures beating out people who make four figures while claiming that its based on what people actually would want to spend money on, I would suggest that the entire thing is flawed. If you want fair and unbiased, go to a random drawing, otherwise just come out and say that the selection will be done by a small group of people who are extremely biased. Be open about the fact that you are culling the fat of people you don't like or don't want in your dealers room for whatever personal, professional or random reason it is.

And for the record, it is not "transparent" to tell people that they suck, but leave out why they suck, who decided they suck and leave out the fact that there would be brand new criteria/judging methods until it was too late.

As was my original e-mail, which was not to ask for an explanation of why I wasn't selected, or a pat on the head, I'm again putting forth a suggestion. Just tell people no, I thought I was upset in my own little world but you've all stirred up a minor shit storm on the internet that's ending with long term attendees boycotting, kvetching and piles of hurt feelings (Not what the furry fandom likes to promote, is it?), which could have been avoided with a little tact on your part.

I figure this e-mail should get me black-listed, but somehow I get the feeling that that has already happened.

Since I don't suppose any of the applicants presented a formatted portfolio or site link for the panel to review before their choice(?), it all goes down to the applicants name recognition to the panel. So it is totally a biased popularity contest.
I suspect that the decision makers don't want to do a honest lottery because it might jeopardize their favorites/friends.

So, the fandom, or at least some cons and blocks, has gone full circle from the haven for outcasts to the bastion of the in-crowds.

They had one space on the application form for a weblink to your wares. I added a couple of other links in another part of the application, but I have about a dozen books and comics scattered throughout the FurPlanet site, so i could only link to one or two. For people who did not have a dedicated site to all their stuff in one place, they were screwed. And for those who have wares unique to cons, or didn't have their FC stuff ready and online, they were screwed too. So was anyone who just does con sketches.

This is becoming more common on dealer application forms. I think it may be needed to make a dedicated page/site that advertises what you do. You can't simply list your FA/Weasyl/Inkbunny/DA site and hope that they will dig through it. We'll need to make up a dedicated advertising page that highlights what you do, promoted with numbers like submissions, books, number of watchers, sample art, and more. Tailor it to fit the con you are applying for.

Applying for a dealer table is more like a job application at this point.

Yeah, I guess we ARE applying for a job these days.

Interesting they keep saying "Artist". Sofawolf, Jarlidium Press, and FurPlanet are not artists. They are publishers. They don't produce the art itself, so that's a failure right there in the selection criteria. Same goes for costumers or anyone that produces merchandise instead of art. This shows a bias towards art over other products.

It's a curious situation and no good solution for it.

Lastly, where did they post the results openly as stated? I'm looking at the FC website and it has nothing about the results. Is it in some hard to find location? Can they provide a link?

It's all opinion-based, and I as well, got a 0/7 gold to me in an email. A form letter of rejection. What riles me, is that this is NOT a gallery. NOT an exhibit. And NOT a showing. This is BUSINESS. And they are screwing it over. I was completely shocked to hear you guys didn't get it. Me? I'm one of a pair, just starting out and trying to make a name still. Struggling, even. YOU? I look UP to you guys. Seeing you not get in, just...wow. Something ain't right in the city of San Jose.

I've been a bit slow lately, so only now realize that your post quotes the process for the selection. If that is for real, then it is stunningly stupid. So much so that it may be just as well that I can't go. The lunatics have very much taken over the asylum.

Stupid is charitable; this strikes me as stunningly stupid -- the kind of inept, convoluted stupidity that is characteristic of some furries (especially California furries).

And, yet, there is method in their... stupidity. My first thought was that this "jury," completely unaccountable and rife with potential for bias and fraud, might run afoul of California statues regarding registered non-profit organizations, such as the one that runs FC. But this "secret shopper" model probably provides enough legal distance between the organizers and the process to keep the state happy. Whether the majority of con-goers will also be happy with this system remains to be seen.

Even this method is fraught with potential for bias. Someone has to process the votes and could interfere at that point

> friendly competitive element

Except a juried selection is not actual competition. If they want competition between dealers, charging money for dealer's den space (or raising the cost if they already do) makes a lot more sense. Plus that selection method is so dumb it's an insult to mathematics, and becomes even more inconsistent if people can apply as groups. A random draft would probably yield better results.

They have demonstrated it is a popularity contest only based on the whims of seven people only.

FC 2015 was the least pleasant of all the FCs which I have attended - and I attended them all. It has the feel now of something which caters less to the creative side of anthropomorphic fandom, and means to emphasize the dance/performance/party socializing side of the fandom at the expense of the rest.

For the last month or so, I have been contemplating whether or not I really felt like going next year.

This has just about decided me against.

********

"We used 7 secret shoppers picked at random, and each had a limited number points to spend at 170+ virtual tables."

Hell, they make it sound like a board game. What constitutes a "virtual table"? What did these "Secret Shoppers" actually see to decide what to "spend"? How do they judge "virtual commissions" and "virtual sketchbooks"?

So basically, FC has turned into a real life version of Second Life? (Or at least a large furry club there). Not a place for comics or art, really, any more. The influence of the online world has moved the fandom on, that, and fursuiting.

I'm not sure how much of the online world is represented but yes, it's kind of turned into a venue for fursuits... and lost the comics and art focus (and writing focus) IMHO.

I'm still surprized theres not a fursuit con yet, just fursuiters and fursuit makers/dealers and their fans.

There doesn't need to be. Most large cons have become fursuit cons by attrition.

A number of the furry cons are catering more heavily to the very visible fursuiters. I may have to switch back to comic book conventions (which means changing what I'm offering...again.)

I toyed trying to deal at Phoenix Comic Con, cause its gaining a huge rep for rapid growth and attendance, til talking with a friend last night about it. Artists Alley space is $350 for 3.5 feet and daily tear down. I shudder to think costs for a regular table.

I still shudder at when SDCC 2000 jacked up the rates for a table from $600 to $900. I'm told today the tables we once used at V6V7 are no more and crap location booths start at $1500.

Nope. Not doing mega-comic cons. SDCC cured me of that. I can't afford to spend $5k just to show up and be ignored.

Yeah, when I lived in Tucson, it was cheaper to just drive, flying in , shipping product to San Diego and back, hotel seriously ate into the profits. Adding that final year in 2000 when we were wrongfully moved without prior notification still steams me. Glen and I were literally #1 and #2 to buy tables for SDCC 2000 in 1999, no excuses for the table screw up by the con.

Goal of any con at minimum is to break even , and profit is always the best.

That actually would make more sense, since for some reason many think they ARE the furry fandom and the media at large think they are the furry fandom. Many are already getting special consideration over a regular non-suiting con goer as it is, so might as well make it official and just create one.

This is true of most furry cons. They have become a social and costuming event primarily. I honestly believe they could eliminate the dealer's room entirely and just have a large artist alley and fans would not be upset. They want their art badges, show off their costumes, and go to parties. Buying comic books, art prints, or merchandise is falling away. Comic book conventions are where the merchandise sells and that may be where we need to go back to for sales.

People that want original art now can easily get it online through their favorite website, both traditional and more and more with instant gratification digital work. Streaming sites like Picarto and Tigerdile have become homes for those wanting instant art, and that's not a bad thing, just an indication of how times are changing. For the artist, streaming art sites are hugely profitable and excellent for making those connections with customers in a personal yet professional manner.

Some cons like Midwest Fur Fest have had artist alley areas that were as large or larger than the dealer's room. That seriously hurt sales for the dealers. The original idea of an artist alley was as an overflow for temporary / one day merchants that couldn't get a space in the dealer's room. Now it has become the default for new artists that don't want to step up to the professional level of dealer in the main space. They aren't ready yet, or don't want to make that investment, but it is a good way to get your feet wet and then move on to the dealers room itself later.

Now? There isn't much point in having a dealers room.

You do have some good points. I will have to start focusing more on the art shows. I'm not crazy about schlumping in, setting up art, setting up the dealers' table... and tearing all that down.

I am reluctant to stream. My time schedule can be very wonky, and I don't really want a camera on my face nor am I crazy about the sound of my voice. But with Duncan and Mallory upcoming (the new comic) I may just have to get over that.

Art shows are a completely dead end that I wouldn't recommend bothering with.

God, you are right....ravs, dancing, drinking, debauchery.

Things changed a lot when Karl Maurer left. He made that dealers room work great and was on top of things.

Times change. We can see the results.

Karl ran a good ship when he ran the dealers room. He got fed up and quit? Or asked to step down?

Retired is more like it. He wanted to for several years, but could never find anyone competent enough to replace him and had to stick around. Eventually he just told them that was it, last year, and let it happen. There has been a lot of staffing issues. I can't tell if the rumors I've heard have any merit, but it doesn't sound like a happy place to be staff.

Same here -- but I'm flabbergasted that you didn't get in. I don't really have an "online portfolio" of things that I bring to cons, nor was I expecting to have to create one.

At this point, 2016 will be my last FC for awhile... so I'm trying to find some new cons.

Face it Roz...you suck as an artist, Gallacci sucks, Flinters sucks, Calli sucks, I suck as an artist.

I was hitting the FC website weekly since January trying to get the dealers room info, nothing, by late april early may I was wondering what I missed and didn't check for 10 days. I found out they accepted applications one hour after they closed and felt like crap....again.

And judging what I am seeing here and on other journals, im glad I missed the outcome of being told to my face that I suck as an artist by a group of super secret super serial "fans".

I've been at every FC since 99 except 2014 and this year I had to pass on my table cause I was notified I had space 5 weeks before the con and airfare was astronomical by then.

I am looking at attending smaller cons again, theres a ton of them now and often have better dates or are closer. Plus if they suck overall attendance-wise, I can look elsewhere.

Like you and Steve, I need these cons to pay my bills, I can't afford to attend a con for fun.

BTW, you think 'Said Artist' will still attend FC and try and scam space as usual?

He can try, but I have a feeling this con committee has no sense of history or accommodation. They will probably chase him off, and/or have SJPD pick him up if he makes a scene. I do not think even the artist's alley will have any overflow space.

And has that ever stopped him before? Nooooo. Hell, he still scams space or attempts to at SDCC still.

And I doubt SJPD could catch him, he's like grabbing an eel.

ComiCon has gotten REALLY strict. There's no way he could squat at a table for more than 10 or 15 minutes. They won't even let you sit there to rest your feet for more than a few minutes. What he does do is commandeer the CaliFur table in the fan area.

Tables at FC are so prized now I really doubt he could successfully grab one, even by making a pest of himself. The old dealers room leads that he could annoy into giving him a table are gone, and The new people running it have no time or patience for his shenanigans.

I recommend BLFC for sheer fun of attending and the excellent way the staff runs the convention. Huge space, lots of expansion for more dealers and an attendance that has doubled each year since they started. If the trend continues, this Reno con will pass FC within two years, faster if FC continues with their current trend of turning people away.

Might be worth jumping to then, just never hear when tables become available, and No...I am NOT signing up for Twitter or Facebook for that luxury.

I don't do Facebook- security risks are too high for privacy. Twitter though- it's a tool to reach out to artists. It might be worthwhile for you to have an account and only watch those convention accounts for announcements. I believe you can set it to send you an email for new messages as well.

I've been hearing good things about it. Probably our plan in the future. Besides last time I was in Reno I won $800 on a slot machine....

Whoever can draw the biggest dick or tits probably will be a shoo-in for a jury bribe... "best/worst in show" memories in mind.

My icon is quite appropriate right now. I'm absolutely livid.

I didn't make it in the Dealers myself this year (Ratgirl Productions). Been doing conventions since 2010 so pretty bummed since I decided this year against applying to marketplace style tables anymore. I just don't want to build up and break down every single day anymore.

I wish you all the best, and by the way I am the head of a new kind of convention, so message me if you would like information about it. We are aiming for a Santa Clara, CA venue location, but can't say more than that publicly yet.

You are a perfect example of new blood that a convention should be approaching. Marketplace / artist alley space is excellent for getting your feet wet as a merchant and when you're ready, take that next step to becoming a professional dealer in the dealers room itself. Unfortunately, this type of selection process pretty much guarantees you have no chance of getting in.

There are different ways to approach selection processes. The one currently in place has some limitations that exclude people like you from participating.

Can you clarify on "people like me"? I have been in business for over 5 years and have been in dealers room before (once at FC I was upgraded from marketplace at con, and many times at other furry cons, as well as a couple anime cons). I do appreciate the kind words, but just a heads up I am not new at selling at cons. Sorry if any of this sounds defensive, just a little confused is all.

I'm not familiar with the name or works, so assumed you were relatively new. I've been at this for coming up on 20 years and the genre has expanded hugely since those early days.

Well at any rate it is nice to meet you. And again I do appreciate the kind words toward my work. If you have been to any San Francisco bay area/Norcal conventions, or have attended Califur, in the last 5 years you may have seen me and just not have known it.

I agree that "furry" itself has gotten way larger than even the last decade, and looking back on its history it's nice to see it develop as it has over time. Here's to hoping for the best at FC for all who are selling.

Hey, I'm in Mountain View, you guys looking for volunteers yet? ;D

Please do note me, I can fill you in on what we are looking for. :)

Aw, c@rp Roz. Way to torpedo a career, people. I have to wonder how shirt-tail these cons are (I haven't been to one in 35 years). Do thy hold them in tiny venues? Are they so popular that it's shoulder-to-shoulder, SRO and they can only have 300 artists displaying? Are they run by snotty snobs who play favorites, cliqueish favorites games like the little old ladies who run the Historical Society?

'S'a darned shame.

I have been asked why I don't attend any of the west coast cons even though I live in Seattle. This is a perfect example of why. Compared to other cons, I find them poorly run and/or too accommodating to fetishes and/or drama magnets.

Hell, did Steve even get a dealer table?

He hasn't been there the past couple of years, so I doubt it. He would usually just show up and try to get any table where the dealer didn't show, but he won't be able to get away with that this year.

Steve was there recently -- though I can't recall if it was 2015 or 2014.

It was 2014, I know for sure he wasn't there this year.

If people think the older artists have become irrelevant, he's become irrelevant x50, because he refuses to do any business online at all, and has only a few few aging fans who still commission him. At least the rest of us have tried to embrace new technology for expanding business.

In 2014 when he was there, he was hanging outside the dealer's den after hours late night and I was there with another artist whom had never been to the con before. We were using the space to do homework sketches before turning in. Around the corner, Steve could be heard trying to hawk his stuff to anyone near, slurring his words in his drunken state, while making very ... ah... opinionated comments about many different ethnic and religious groups he did not feel should exist.

She asked how he was allowed to even be at the con.

"Yeah, well you have heard the stories about him. Nothing better than meeting him yourself to prove or disprove them accordingly," is what I told her.

He certainly does leave an impression.

Can I post a link to this journal, on my OWN journal, since a lot more is said here, that I had trouble articulating myself?

This is why the dealers den needs to move to a larger room. They have these HUGE rooms at the convention center, that could have taken everybody.
But for some reason, they refuse to do that.

I would suggest BLFC to everyone, their dealers den has lots of room.

I've always heard FC described as a "party con" rather than a shopping/art con. So hearing about the downgrade in artist space isn't that surprising to me.
Just knowing somewhat the mentality of California Furries, the parties and social aspect is indeed more of a draw than a bunch of tables selling sketches and t-shirts. People all over the west and southwest beg/borrow/YCH/auction/emergency-commission the money to get themselves there just so they can drink and hang out with mutual friends.
I've never yet heard anyone say they went to FC for the dealers.

I usually go to FC for the dealers.

Had to miss the last one, but from reports I've seen here and there, the con has gone seriously downhill.

I may have to think seriously about making my con list without FC.


-Badger-

I stopped attending FWA cause it was one big massive hangover year after year. Sadly I am seeing this trend increasing at the bigger cons. Lets get drunk and rav ourselves into a stupor con.

Most furry cons have turned into raves and bacchanals, but there's still enough people interested in art and wares to make going there as a dealer worthwhile. If there weren't, dealers wouldn't be there.

That's true, but despite being driving distance and being a four figure convention, we folks at Tails and Tactics made a unanimous decision to stop attending because that's how miserable the convention was. The SOLE highlight became making money (and while we do enjoy producing T&T it really isn't about getting rich) and hanging out with Uncle Kage.

The fact is the con staff were largely unpleasant and the positions are so mercurial that actual department heads would change mid convention.

There's so many reasons to not attend FC. It's sad, the first year I went, I had a great time there.

And this party-centric atmosphere several cons have... well... degenerated into is why I stopped going. Still have my FCU sweatshirt somewhere, used to staff, but haven't for a few years now... then tapered off going at all. BLFC being so much improved AND more convenient to fly into over FC turned into the nail in the coffin for me there. I'm in my 30's, I'm not going to cons to get blitzed out of my mind. I'm going to see friends, buy art, and relax away from my normal day-to-day drudgery.

I really do hope I'm right that BLFC is the 'tip of the iceberg' of a new iteration of 'furry' cons, versus what the older ones are being forced to be. Ones held by venues that want us and are a good value, not just wherever we can scrounge a hotel contract from with a ton of effort.

After reading this and the comments over on EbonyLeopard's post, I'm glad that I've never attended FC, nor will I ever. It's apparently going the way of Confurence, and good riddance.

Wait a minute folks! While the new process for the dealers room at FC is vile, my personal general convention experience there has always been pretty good- so some of the sour grapes rants now coming up may be getting overblown or unwarrented. The con isn't everything for everyone, true, but don't let the conversation become a hate-on.

FC was always an entertaining con, but if the new con com are going to be dicks, then they may have shot themselves in the foot. I can think of a few SciFi cons that were great unil the committee that took over literally killed the fun with stupid decisions like this.

Now those cons are ghosts of their former selves or even gone.

Frankly I think the fandom should boycott FC for pulling this sort of crappolla

(reposted from Steve's thread...)


https://www.nonprofitrisk.org/libra.....t_Status.shtml

"Inurement: The concept of inurement states that no part of an organization’s net earnings may inure to the benefit of a private shareholder or individual who, because of the person’s relationship to the organization, has an opportunity to control or influence its activities."

Does deciding who can and cannot benefit from doing business at Further Confusion constitute an act of inurement?

I mean, you know, if Further Confusion is still a non-profit organization...

Hello everyone,

My name is Dax. I was chair of FC last year, and am marketing lead this year. I'm speaking in official capacity on this thread (not personal). I know there's been a lot of anger about the judging system recently, and though we're subject to a lot of constraints we aren't fond of here, we're very sorry for the strife these decisions have caused. We're preparing a statement to be posted in the next couple days, answering some common questions and misconceptions that have erupted since the selection emails went out.

I've scanned this thread for questions to add, but if there are any common or specific questions to address there, please let me know as a reply or note.

Thanks,

Dax

Unfortunately there's not anything that could be said to smooth this over. There's no way to prove the jurors weren't acting on friendships and personal biases. There's no way to show this wasn't done as a quick way to get rid of dealers the con didn't like.

I guess the only real question is why it was felt necessary to humiliate people by telling them they got a zero score. That seems nothing other than sheer malice. As much as a clusterfuck as the RainFurrest selection was, at least they didn't feel compelled to humiliate people as they rejected them.

(for those wondering, I didn't get a zero. I got 2 points. But many people I know got a zero, people who make good money at the con.)

We definitely screwed up with the number of votes. We published the process details before we opened up for submissions, and expected people to see it for what we saw it to be: Some insight into the process. The score is no more and no less than a measure of voter consistency. 0 simply meant that the jurors agreed the room was too small to fit this person in, which is a decision each of the 7 had to make 75 separate times out of 173.

Instead, people understandably misread it as a score, as if 0/7 means that 0 people like an artist's art or think it was worthwhile. Our jurors were tasked with creating a balanced room that appeals to everyone: If they were perfectly consistent, then 98 of our applicants would get 7s and the remaining 75 would get 0s, even if every single applicant was outstanding and even if the 99th applicant exactly as good as the 98th. Our jurors weren't perfectly consistent, though, which is why there were a lot of 7s, a lot of 0s, and only a few in the middle.

Any reasonable selection process is going to have some degree of subjectivity in it, unless we tried to build out a comprehensive bureaucratic policy about how much of A is worth more than how much of B. The disappointing thing is that dealers who have been a part of FC for a long time suddenly are so ready to assume personal bias instead of differing taste that they take to unprofessional behavior. I hope and wish that someday they'd trust our volunteers to have done the best they could with a flawed system, and help it get improve for next year.

Its the personal Bias of whoever selected the 7 members of the panel. Most likely the actual panel members DID do what they thought was fair.

In legal terms this is called "stacking a jury". This was not a selection process of seven impartial members as the members themselves were not impartially selected.

And if you want to say that they were, the burden of proof is on you. I sincerely doubt you can.

This explanation doesn't make any sense. The score is no more and no less than a measure of voter consistency. What does that even mean?

No mention of the 'secret shopper:' "This year did introduced a friendly competitive element to the selection process. We used 7 secret shoppers picked at random, and each had a limited number points to spend at 170+ virtual tables. With nearly 3 times as many applicants as spaces available, the scores weren't that high. many 1's and 2's, and many more that did not get a table. Data from previous years sales or attendance records were not given to the secret shoppers to reduce any bias. Their purchases were based on the same personal whims any real furry shopper would have."


That certainly sounds like a direct rejection of artists and their work, that they weren't even good enough to spend virtual money on. And if the 7 people were mostly fursuiters, or only interested in gay porn, or only wanted MLP stuff, then that's all the dealer's room would consist of. This is not a balanced room that appeals to everyone:, it's a room that appeals only to those 7 people. (see "Stacking the jury" to get the result wanted.)

There were a dozen better way to have done this. Raise the price, so only the dealers who make really good money (ie. the actual popular ones) can afford to go. Have the real con-goers vote for the dealers. The first-come first-served method has worked for 20+ years. Do a lottery. Reserve a portion of the tables for first-time dealers. Or (God forbid) get a bigger space.

And I guess it is now considered 'unprofessional' to speak up when you and people who know have been played for a fool, declared worthless, and then expected not to say anything about it. You're hitting people in the pocketbook, and they don't take that quietly.

Frankly, the 'first-come, first-served' method still feels like the best one. Why fix what ain't broken? The con is really doing nothing more than trying to reinvent the wheel.

I remember the days at FC when on Sunday afternoons, the dealers renewed for the next year, usually went fine til one year Kevin Duane pitched a royal shitfit in the dealers room cause by then he was too late to apply at the time. I recall Karl reserved X number of tables for those to apply for who were not at the con, and Duane was not in the dealers room when the call went out for reapplying for the following year.

This.

Heh, in a fandom about animals, sometimes survival of the fittest is the fairest way. Is it annoying, sure, but at least you got a table on your own merit (and if you didn't that meant you weren't fast enough to do so, which is also due to your own merit).

Fursuiters selecting artist isn't very reassuring. Maybe fursuiter MAKERS but not so much fursuiter performers.

If you're coming here to take aim at people making"un-professional" comments, I believe you've come to the wrong corner of the web. I don't believe anyone (That was actually rejected and posting in this journal) has behaved in an unprofessional manner. Dealers are sort of their own sub-community having worked next to each other for years. To think that we wouldn't or shouldn't compare notes is silly and rather insulting, as is saying that dealers expressing hurt feelings is "unprofessional." Again, mostly its the releasing of what is seemingly hurtful scores, your grading rubric and the lack of preparing applicants for what would be a new selection process that are the most talked about issues.

I've e-mailed the dealers head, Whitey Fawkes and the con chair about my feelings on the matter. I've encouraged others to do the same, not that anything we have to say is likely to effect change if it does turn out that everyone feels they did awesome and our job is to trust them and suck it up. Voicing our concerns in that manner is the proper and professional thing to do. Whitey, at least, seems open to the idea of improving things in the future. He seems to be doing a pretty good job at 'trying' to do a good job even though some of this nonsense I believe predates him running the room and he seems genuinely apologetic about hurt feelings, even if he wasn't the one necessarily that caused them. Its definitely a better attitude to present professionally than "We're right, your wrong, suck it up and go away."

In the wake of this event, we've received accusations of conspiracy, bribery, and that the only way into the room is to sleep with the con chair. I count those comments as unprofessional, and would even if the con chair weren't my fiancée.

None of this is to say or imply for a single second that the convention is infallible. We made and make a lot of mistakes, especially here. And none of this is to rob the dealers of any right to the hurt they may feel for their rejection. It was a lot of hard news to give today, and we did dealers no favors by the scores (in a misplaced and poorly-understood attempt at transparency). These are big problems, we made them, and we will fix them in next year.

I am lucky to have been selected as 2017 chairman and will be working with dealers early on to aim for a reasonable and accountable system.

"we've received accusations of conspiracy, bribery, and that the only way into the room is to sleep with the con chair. I count those comments as unprofessional, and would even if the con chair weren't my fiancée."

As I said. You're in the wrong corner of the web. I'm sure not every rejected FC dealer is behaving with propriety, but none of that is being said here, in this journal, where you are coming in and insulting professionalism. Please don't jump to conclusions or lambast a group of people for expressing their confusion and disappointment of a flawed system. You're asking us to not think the worst of you based on the poor decisions of some, please do the same in return. I'm keeping my mind open for things to be better in the future, though its too bad that nothing can really be done to salvage this year and of course I know a few others who feel too burned to consider your convention again. A friend who did get a table at your con felt so strongly that the process was wrong that he gave up his table and walked away.

I'm glad you see room for improvement.

Though when you say dealers, do you mean current dealers? Former dealers? Prospective dealers? I'm curious to know who would get consulted and what your basis will be for choosing them for their input.

Thank you.

Our current expectation is that an explicit invitation is sent to all FC2016 applicants, which they may choose to participate in or not. We would also like to include previous dealers and applicants, as well as interested parties in FC2017, but we only have relevant contact information for applicants this year.

The idea is to get some consensus about what constitutes a fair system, and to help us think through cases that may not have occured to us. In the interest of setting expectations, I can't promise a system that 100% of dealers find agreeable, nor that we can commit to a pure popular vote for fear of "tyranny of the majority": We're ultimately responsible for building a room that satisfies as many attendees as possible, constrained by practicality and our staff's availability.

So the future plan is to, rather than open up dealer registration to the public, FC will first send out specific invitations to specific artist they would like to be in their dealer's room. Once that process has been completed and you see who will and won't come, you'll then open up applications to the general public, which will be selected by a panel? So will potential dealers have to submit samples of their wares and skill level to support their case for at able?

No, the idea is to start an all-inclusive web forum or email list this summer among dealer applicants past and present, figure out what is or isn't a fair selection process, and then use that next year. I'm not expecting it to be a simple "pure majority" vote, so no smaller group can be driven out by getting their friends/supporters active in the forum, but hopefully we can get to a point that the rules are agreeable to most dealers and that there aren't obvious improvements to make.

Next year's process will probably still be a public form for dealers to submit online, and we'll still probably only be able to choose 50-75% of applicants, but we'll use the system we all decided on and hopefully that transparency of process will be seen as helpful.

I hear you, but still, that's the most unusual way for a convention to go about selecting dealers I've ever heard. But maybe that's a west coast convention thing.

I understood what you meant, thank you. :)

Sorry, meant that response for ebonyleopard's post above. Have a good ebening!

Alright, that sounds pretty reasonable, so long as staff is actually open to improvements. Its going to be impossible to please everyone, clearly, but it'll be nice to work towards a happy medium. Good luck with the negotiations.

And none of this is to rob the dealers of any right to the hurt they may feel for their rejection.

Hurt and rejection are what happens when you're turned down for a date. This is basically being robbed of a large chunk of my January income, and realizing this was the plan all along. What I'm feeling has nothing to do with 'hurt.' And rather than just being honest and saying you don't want certain long-time dealers there any more, we have to go through this bullshit charade.


It was a lot of hard news to give today, and we did dealers no favors by the scores (in a misplaced and poorly-understood attempt at transparency).

True transparency would've been the identities of these "secret shoppers." Instead it's the dealer's fault for being too stupid to understand the attempt at transparency.

These are big problems, we made them, and we will fix them in next year.

No, you're hoping this will blow over (and it probably will. People have short memories and move on to other things). The current approved dealer list will become entrenched, the rejected dealers from this year won't bother to apply because they know they don't have a chance in hell of getting approved, and that will be that. Killing off the unwanteds is never a clean business, with the predicable cries of outrage, but the long-term benefits once the shit dies down will be worth the hassle, I'm sure.

Face it Roz, Dr Mengele has chosen who goes to the work camps and who gets the gas chamber...it literally feels like that.

Did you really just compare the actions of a fur con to mass genocide?

Yes. FC not picking you to deal at their con is EXACTLY like the murder of 11 million lives during the holocaust.

A tad far for a comparison.

Count them as Unprofessional as you want, your system was the cause of the comments. See, the thing about being an artist is, once you create something, you no longer control the narrative of how people receive the artwork once they have experienced it. Maybe the panel should have more artist on it if it doesn't, because however you decided to create this selection process, it clearly was flawed otherwise no one would be having issues with it. It's not then up to you to say that 'Well if you don't like it, that's your problem" it would be more professional to address the issues you see as misconceptions and explain them. And if the explanation still doesn't stop the issues, then maybe the real problem was the process itself.

Congrads on the chairmanship and all, but you may want to take a look at some of the legs on that chair because you're off to a bit of a rocky start.

Nowhere am I claiming that it's everyone else's problem. We're all humans on staff here, and I may have made a mistake by voicing my frustration with some of my treatment here. I apologize for that.

I'm afraid as the 2017 FC chairman, you're making a very big impression here with the very core group of dealers that frequent most of the larger conventions around.

"In the wake of this event, we've received accusations of conspiracy, bribery, and that the only way into the room is to sleep with the con chair. I count those comments as unprofessional, and would even if the con chair weren't my fiancée."

Please consider your professional conduct when making these comments. They reflect upon not only you but of the organization as well.

As an American I'm going to express my 2nd Amendment rights on a topic whether people like it or not. But then I'm told I can be a bit of a jerk on the internet because I tend to have my own opinions on subjects. :D

I hope you mean your 1st Amendment rights.

Heh, in most parts of our country they seem to blend, but yes, a rather funny typo.

No. Regardless of your protestations, the game was rigged. Even if you think it was "fair", the process would nevertheless guarantee that the "right" people would get in and "those lesser sort" would be cut, per the bias of the judging group, and by extension, the bias of those who chose the process and the judges.

How does one score a 0 on a 7 person panel and not take that personal.

I'm curious about what the artist styles that those were selected had, that gained them the access. Because frankly, that would save a lot of people time and effort to even bother with applying if they can see just what it is you all are deeming worthy and they can decide of their styles are coming close to matching.

There've been a number of 'Fuck You" cons organized in the wake of things like this. Some succeed, some don't. I've been gradually decreasing my con-going, leaving only FC and AC as my two cons, and this year I had eliminated AC, and I'm certainly not planning to start my own Fuck You con at this point in my life.

They got what they wanted, which was to eliminate the older dealers that aren't considered part of the current fandom in one fell swoop, blame it on anonymous 'jurors' who can never be called to account, make vague promises about improving things, and hope that everyone forgets about it by this time next year.

Ironically, FC started out as a "Fuck You" con, of sorts. The con was scheduled for mid-Janujary, which was the "traditional" time for ConFurence (CF had, by that time, switched to April/May), It was obvious that this "new" con hoped to pick up some former CF attendees.

As for embracing capitalism: had the current FC concom done that, this wouldn't be an issue. If demand outstrips supply, then marketing logic dictates you either increase prices (limit demand) or add more tables (increase supply). Apparently, FC wanted a "better" solution but, instead, managed to come up with a pretty terrible alternative.

Unfortunately, furries seem to have more dollars than sense and I doubt this cluster-cuss will have a lasting impact on attendance. But that remains to be seen.

You're not going to AC? Aaw.

I think we've officially hit furry fandom 3.0

No, but I'm thinking a serious history lesson on the wonderful creators of the fandom is sorely needed. There have been some great works created over the years that kept this genre alive from the 70s, through the 80s, and it's explosion in the 90s.

Was so horribly tempted to see how much it would take to rent one of the few free rooms at the convention center the weekend of FC...if there ARE any...just invite all the dealers who didn't get an FC table and set up there...call it DealerCon. Anyone with a badge, buying a badge, have badge in their species name, willing to pin a badge on, or whatever else I can think of involving badges, gets to attend. Wonder what would happen? >.> Mind you, this is all just theoretical. I know there's a TON more involved then that. But i was curious. On a lark, I'm going to apply for a Furry Marketplace Table. Doubt I'll get one of those but it would be interesting to see.