Day-um!

Well, I hope those responsible for this are happy with themselves. Adults acting like schoolkids, thinking there were no consequences to their behavior. It's a shame for the artists who wanted/needed to make some income from the convention and it's a shame for all the people who would have gone just to have a good time.

Of course there is blame to go around for lots of people/groups, but still this is unfortunate. It smears the whole fandom with the stain of a few people.

Do we have IDs on the responsible parties? It seems to me a fandomwide blacklist is in order, at the very least...

Or at least a blacklist barring them from every other con in the fandom.

That's my general idea, yes.

Good idea, I second it wholeheartedly.

Beware those who sign "John Doe", "Jane Doe", "Mr. and Mrs. John Smith", "Mr. and Mr. Smith", or "Lord Greystoke" on the hotel register...

Which is one reason both cons and hotels insist on gummint issued photo IDs these days...

I don't know. I assume that if the culprits were known, the RF organizers would have turned them over to the hotel (for civil action) and/or the police (for vandalism). Having to explain to the judge how you're a diaper fur and trashed a hotel would be far worse than a fandom-wide ban, I would imagine. The cost of restitution would sting a bit too, I imagine.

As for who it was... that's a better question for the RF organizers.

Just so. Someone may wish to open enquiries along those lines...

My guess is that they already have. I heard there was a considerable amount of damage and cleanup to be done by the hotel (hence the kicking-out of RF). I would imagine the hotel wasn't all that charitable about it and there is/was a search-for-the-guilty.

One would hope so.

Yeah. You and me both. Shame of it is that the people who get hurt most are all the people who had nothing to do with it - all the people who just wanted to go to the con and have a good time, and all the artists hoping to go to a popular con and make some money and get some good commissions. Sigh.

Indeed.

That sounds great on the surface until the first lawsuit is filed for discrimination, bankrupting that con and forcing it out of business... and that's if they win.

No, you can't have a list like that. It is an easy way to get sued.

So when do the hotels get sued for discrimination, etc. etc.?

No. Enough is enough.

"We reserve the right to refuse service"

And done.

something like that does exist in german fandom, though inofficially, but you know those names you never want to see on your guest list. and most of those are to unsocial to be able to afford a con, anyway.

A blacklist exists for cons here, but you have to be really, really bad to get on it.

The problem I had with the con is that they had similar problems the previous year, and they had enough bodies to put volunteers at just about every elevator and stairwell in the hotel to check badges and such. But they couldn't spare a single person to go watch the hottub (where there were many problems). Even after there were problems, they *still* didn't put anyone to watch the hottub. So, while most of the blame falls on the perpetrators, I also put some blame on the con staff for not better anticipating trouble. Also, let's just say there is a certain "type" of people that caused the majority of the trouble the previous year, but the organizers made little/no effort to control them the next year.

Not blaming the con staff completely, but still I think the events could do a better job of controlling the situation. And if they don't want things like this happening, they need to be more strict with handing out bans, honestly.

here you qualify for a blacklist with really bad behaviour. like destroying someone's stuff at a furry party. or threatening people at a forum (which is also a crime in germany). or make sure you can't be trusted. or refusing to learn social skills and hygiene, and people complain too much about you repeatedly.
after all, here a con is a private party, and if you're not invited you're out. and the orga has the right to ban people, too.

if the previous troublemakers proved to be unable to learn and behave they should have been banned, no matter how much they threaten them with lawsuits. I think not even in america you can sue someone into inviting you to their bday party?

Yeah. I don't know why the con organizers don't run the cons here more like a business and less like amateur-night. Maybe because of furry drama, or the threat of furry drama? I don't know. I do know that if it were anything other than a furry con, people doing a fraction of what's tolerated would get them thrown out and banned-for-life from many other events. Why we (the furry fandom) doesn't operate the same way... I don't know. But the end result is cons getting thrown out and the whole fandom getting a bad reputation. Sigh.

Possibly because furry con organizers are not professionals and little to no experience or knowledge of event management. Operating in ignorance without knowing what they need to know. There is a *lot* of restrictions of what can or cannot do for a 'public' event. Just calling it a private event doesn't except events from some pretty important requirements.

I can give panels or clinics on this as I have the experience running a con and dealing with the public in agency interaction. The things I've seen some security do at cons makes me wonder why they haven't been sued or some 'security' arrested for assault. It is like when someone gets a title, they seem to believe they have super powers of authority and forget they are no more important than any other convention attendee. But I digress. Ignorance is no excuse for how a convention is run.

Well, I've helped organize conferences in the business world, and I would disagree that the capabilities of the organizers are very limited. I won't disagree with your points about the organizers being inexperienced, disorganized and unprofessional. A con is still a private event in that attendees do not have any inherent right to be at the event. The organizers could easily work with hotel staff to have individuals removed from the con (and possibly the hotel as well) based on behavior. And from what I read, the behavior that got the con banned from the hotel is something that, had the hotel known about it in a timely manner, the individuals responsible would have been ejected from the hotel at the least, or detained until the police arrived at the most.

It is unfortunate that the con organizers, while having the best of intentions, are unable to professionally manage an event. I know what happens when you give people a little bit of authority and little to no training, so I agree with you on the security side of things. It's just ... a sad state of affairs. I think the days of being able to rely on the majority of attendees being professional, responsible adults ... is over and not coming back. Meaning if a con is not professionally planned and run, it's not going to end well. I just hope this isn't a harbinger of things to come for other cons.

What you are suggesting is that the con itself should be mounting patrols through all halls, checking ID's of everyone one site before they go to their hotel room. Imagine that family that just flew in and got a hotel room there because they had reserved a room before this con ever was set for the site. You really expect that family to accept being accosted by convention staffers at the front doors demanding to know their business there, then more at the elevators wanting to know what they are doing, where is their con badge, force that family to go register and pay the convention to just go to their room. Not to mention when that family does get to their hotel room, more convention staff will be at their door, monitoring what they are doing, asking a lot of personal questions, and be knocking on their door at 2 AM to say that the convention will be listening at their door and watching the window with binoculars to ensure these hotel guests aren't going to do something that might affect the convention.

Really.

I mean, that's what you're calling for. A police state where the convention runs the hotel instead of the hotel.

I'm sorry, but it's ridiculous. The con cannot and should not be monitoring hotel spaces that they are not in control of. Things that happen in hotel rooms are not the responsibility of the convention. The convention cannot take action on those things. Sure, if they hear a lot of noise from a room, they can complain to the front desk. But they can't go around policing the property. Any lawyer would LOVE to represent that hotel guest that is subjected to such treatment. Harassment charges with the police against the hotel and the convention will get a convention kicked out quick and see that the venue is sued.

No. Your understanding of the hotel / organization relationship and restrictions is greatly flawed. Enough that you could easily get a convention shut down and sued as a result. It's a misunderstanding that can be corrected though if you want to get more involved in organizing such events. Try a public event for a city. They are always looking for volunteers and is a great way to get more involved and learn how such things are handled.

No, you're intentionally twisting what I've said to try and fit into something you can argue against.

The RF staff had enough volunteer help to have people posted at every stairwell into the convention center. And people at the entrances to all the major rooms. And people in the rooms. And people standing around talking. Fine. The last few years they have had problems in the pool/hottub area. What I'm saying is that they could have posted someone out there with directions to call hotel security if they see anything. Like people in the hottub with diapers. Or vandalizing the hottub. Or swimming in the pool nude. All of which happened and the hotel didn't catch it. Yes, shame on the hotel staff, but RF is the group that ultimately paid the price.

Same thing with the room damage. I heard it was diaper furs. I can believe that because the stench was overwhelming in places in the halls. While the hotel should have noticed and done something about it, the con should also have made it better understood that kind of behavior is not acceptable.

I have dealt with business conventions so my understanding of how they work is pretty good. Hotels can eject people for cause, and the police can easily be involved when there is criminal activity. When you have adults smearing shit all over their hotel room, you tell me that 1) the hotel wouldn't eject them and 2) that the police wouldn't get involved for vandalism.

The con staff cannot put door checkers or guards at hotel open areas like elevators, pools, hot tubs, etc. Thone are open public areas to all hotel guests and the con has *no* authority to police those areas. The only way they could do so would be to pay the hotel for 100% of all hotel property in Ludington restaurants and bars, along with projected incom ed from those areas for the time the event had custody. Could they do it? I don't know of any hotel that would agree to that, but if the con were to give the hotel another $20-30,000 then could probably do that. Granted, your registration to attend would be around $300 per person, but it could be done. It just isn't realistic.

No, hotels have security. Cons have no power outside of the event space they have rented. Any hotel finding out con security was policing whom could use the pool of hot tub, or checking badges at elevators would find their con kicked out on the spot, the contract breached and likely sued.

Well, RF did exactly what you're saying they can't. They put monitors at most of the starwells and elevators to the main con area. They use volunteers so there is little/no cost to the con and yes, they do rent out the entire convention building so you have to have a con badge to get into the building. Oddly enough they didn't have people in the places they had trouble. The purpose of a staffer isn't to actively prevent trouble, it's to passively prevent/detect trouble and notify someone if/when trouble starts. Now, I'm not saying that the con staff should be clairvoyant, but since the two previous years they had problems with vandalism in the pool/hottub... a reasonable person would say "maybe we should have someone monitoring the pool/hottub area, so they can notify the hotel if something bad starts to happen". You know, like someone trying to go into the hottub in a diaper. Not even kidding on that one. What I am saying is that they had staffers in stupid places, and yet didn't spare someone for the places they keep having trouble. That's just bad planning.

Hotels have security, yes. Maybe one or two people - if that. The hotel wouldn't mind one bit if the con wanted to have a volunteer sitting at the hottub, calling hotel security at the first sign of trouble. Given the supposed amount of damage, no hotel is going to say "no, you can't have a person sit there and watch for vandalism and tell us". That's just ridiculous. I mean, it's a good question why the hotel didn't have better security cameras in place but that doesn't excuse the behavior.

I'm not sure why you think the hotel and the con are unable to do anything to keep guests in-line. Trust me, they aren't. Year before last, the hotel simply closed the hottub the last day or two because of problems. This last year they closed the pool at night, I think because of skinny-dippers in the late hours. Did it inconvenience the non-con going guests? Sure. Did the hotel seem to care? Nope - because they probably calculated it was the lesser of two evils.

Despite popular opinion, the hotel is not a public space, where the hotel owner has to give free access to anyone off the street. The hotel can refund your money and ask you to leave, and if you don't - they can have you removed for trespassing. The hotel doesn't need a whole lot of reason to do that, and trust me - many people at the con were walking reasons. The hotel can (and should have) cracked down more heavily on trouble rather than letting it get to the point where the whole con is no longer invited back.

The real problem is that if the hotel has to run it's business like a prison camp, they are going to ask themselves if the effort is worth the profit. Given the rumors of the amount of damage this last con, and the hotel not allowing RF to come back (ever?) - they obviously did a calculation and said the profit they made wasn't worth it in light of the damage they sustained. Probably with a side calculation for the potential risks of underage sex, drinking, illegal drugs, etc. No business wants to be associated with any of that.

I seriously doubt the convention rented the entire facility. No hotel does that as it really restricts access and business. They have a bar on site and having to check every person that enters the property for a badge would restrict business and cause them to be in violation of discrimination. No, I do not believe for a minute the hotel was restricted to the convention itself.

" Given the supposed amount of damage, no hotel is going to say "no, you can't have a person sit there and watch for vandalism and tell us". That's just ridiculous." Ah, you've never dealt with hotels for liability then. Any convention staff member sitting at the hotel and monitoring what is going on becomes the hotel's representative and other hotel guests would hold the hotel, not the con, liable for anything that happens as a result. They could simply say that the person is stalking them. Complaints to corporate could result in the convention being kicked out. Lawsuits start. No, there's a reason why hotels employ security. They do not and will not use volunteers as you suggested. It's a legal liability nightmare. How can the hotel trust that the con staff have been trained to be security? To know what you can and cannot do in such a position? Can they trust those unknown people to do the right thing?

I appreciate you're trying to apply common sense to this, but hotels don't use common sense. They deal with liabilities and risks. You can't bring your own meat to a steak house and expect them to cook it for you. That's what you're suggesting. It just isn't going to happen. And if the hotel learns the con is doing this on their own, then that is a convention that will find itself no longer welcome.

Who knows, maybe if what you say is true that happened, that might explain why they lost the hotel.

I've run conventions before. I've deal with the contracts. I know the liabilities. I've worked this from the police side and public. There are some serious restrictions in place. I understand that you don't fully know how these things are organized- many people do not. You're working from assumptions and information that is simply incorrect. That's going to cause a lot of misunderstandings. If you want to learn more, get involved in the behind the scenes levels. Read over and negotiate the contracts. Work with the police and go through security training. I was quite surprised at what can and cannot be done by staff at an event. There is a lot of restrictions in place that limit what you can do.

End of subject.

Shit x.x I was planning on going and was happy thinking it was in my home town

So the Spokane venue fell through as well? Stick a fork in it, it's done. Time for a rename.

They reaped what they sewed. They wanted a hipster no holds barred convention, they got one. Problem is no hotel anywhere wants to host a no holds bar convention.

Yep.

Needs to become a new con, with new organizers and some serious policy changes.

Sad for our fellow furries who did nothing wrong. But maybe it can be taken as an object lesson so that it need not be repeated.

-Badger-

And this children is why I cringed a little inside when, while pre-registering at Anthrocon 2015, I heard two older gentlemen commented something along the lines of "now begins three days of letting your furry side run free." No, just no...

"Letting your furry side run free", and "Going apeshit" are two different things.

Most furries I know, letting it run free simply means relaxing and enjoying the atmosphere if a furry con.

What happened at RF was apparently The Apeshit Apocalypse.....

Oh, I take your meaning- I Been around since the fandom was born... So I've seen it all.
I'm also starting to see furry cons posting rules requiring bathing and behavior standards, so things are improving on some fronts.

-Badger-

lol yea, I heard whispers of what happened at RF last year, but I was never given any details, is there a site that says what happened or do you know?

Be warned that this is mostly an anti-furry site.


https://forums.vivisector.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=6i2u6i99kra1dlp759vp1ttp24&board=3.0


I have them bookmarked because information you cannot get any other way pops up here.

-

fair enough, thanks sir! plus I love reading how people see furries, it makes me laugh sometimes

*clicks link* Oh gawd there's pictures... I should not have clicked the link. Oh well, the price of curiosity.

Thanks for the link, that place is amusing.

Indeed. You know I don't always agree (if ever lately) with what  rabbi-tom says but I think here he said it best, "the fandom needs to grow up."

The fandom needs to get over itself and realize that some specific and common sense rules are needed to get along with the non fannish world that runs hotels and event sites.

You can be too tolerant, and people with agendas or fetishes who do not care about the fandom will exploit that trust without hesitation or concern for the consequences.

Thats what happened to RF, and people need to remember it or it will happen again.

Just sayin', you know?



-Badger-

Suggesting even a little restraint or public decorum at a furry con has been cause for massive drama in the past. I remember ranting on a forum back around 2005 (when it was still ConfiFur) about seeing attendees wearing collars and leashes out in public, and I got some pretty hysterical responses, the whole "fursecution" schtick. Well, now we're seeing some real consequences for people acting like idiots at the cons. Maybe organizers at other cons will get a lot better about self-policing.

Some cons are being more strict about public behavior already.

BLFC has instituted a hygiene rule, and I hope that catches on....

FC put up a rule years ago to ban adult diapers in public places, and theres a variety of rules about public behavior at other furry cons.

Theres always a few whiners, but if they don't like it, they don't have to come to the con.

-Badger-

That is encouraging.

german cons are declared private parties, invitation only. this means if you have no conbadge, and are not registered, you will be asked to leave right away. if you are part of the fandom, and this happens again, or you are a known troublemaker, chances are high people will learn your name and deliberately ignore your future registration requests.
it also means, not only the hosting facility, but also the con orga has the right to expel you and call the police to pick you up.
rules are public, and rather strict. every fetish costume has to stay in a room. especially something like Rapido's inflatable frog... (aside that, the wearer is said to be rather unhygienic, too) and it usually works out like that. because noone wants to be sent to their room to get out of their precious gear again.
the rest is common sense. as you say, don't like it, then stay home. and most of those actually do.


In have heard terrible stories from little furry parties held at someone's appartment. things like abusing the roomie's stuff who is not a furry, and is away, and it was forbidden to do so, etc. or someone's parents, while beign open and curious do not approve to be flirted at by some stranger boy who apparently doesn't know the meaning of the word "no". things had been stolen or destroyed... such names are handled under the table here. because an open blacklist is discriminating here, too. but a private, non-public list? such a thing does not exist, period. doesn't mean such individuals will be invited again ever.

Guess the RainFurrest concom and attendees are, dare I say it, burned furs?

Hahhahahaha!! Oh my yes. My thoughts exactly.

What was old is new again, right? Maybe this will spark a resurgence in that idea.

Just hopefully better organized this time.

One can hope, certes.

Point of fact. Conifur and Rainfurrest have *nothing* to do with each other. I was the con chair for the last Conifur and we ended it because we were burning out and not find anyone we could trust to take it over.

Rainfurrest started up later independently from Conifur. Different staff entirely.

None of the things that RF had problems with ever happened at Conifur. We had very mature and responsible attendees that were fantastic.

Conifer was a fine con and I enjoyed it a lot. That one thing I saw was the worst thing I'd seen and it wasn't that bad. I've never been to a Rainfurrest but clearly things have gone downhill.

If ever there was a case for the Nelson "HAH HAH!" this is it.

*giggles*

That's my favorite word dear.

Bunners

How about you? Gonna come to rmfc or BLFC Davidka? Make a little money?

BLFC rejected my dealer app. If I had gotten in I probably would've shared a table with Dave. As I've pointed out, I seem to have been blacklisted among all the juried dealer's rooms, and for the small cons I can't afford to make the trip out of state.

This is really disappointing especially when I already have the days off.

I'm sad to see this happen but it's not to surprising with what happened the year before. Over the last couple of years it seemed things got worse from the year before. If we don't police ourselves and deal with them when they happen it just snowballs.

Then you have people just acting stupid and no one stopping them... if it sounds like a back idea, it likely is when you are at a con!

The likelihood of another furry com happening in the Seattle area is questionable at best because of what has happened the last few years here.

Give it about 3 years or so and the hotels will be ready for it. Their memories seem to be about long between management changes.

That's really sad that such a successful and enjoyable con fell so quickly. I suggested to someone that maybe they can consider a one day Rainfurrest event, like a Rainfurrest lite. It wouldn't be a big convention ordeal, but at least something to keep it from being forgotten, and to make it up to the locals. The real question though is how to prevent this from happening in the future? It could happen to any con..

part of it is having a good reputation and working hard with a hotel so they know a few bad apples isnt representative of the entire convention attendees.

The real question though is how to prevent this from happening in the future? It could happen to any con..


Said it before and I'll say it again: Ban alcohol. That will automatically get rid of the people who's sole purpose is to get drunk and party, and those are the ones causing the problems. If the hotel wants to keep selling booze at the bar, fine. They card and not many people have the money to get drunk at a hotel bar.

Or ban people under 21. Either solution would be equal parts toxic and effective.

The con can only ban alcohol from convention space- dealer room, artist alley, panel rooms, dance areas, etc. They cannot ban it in the lobby, hallways, or any event space not paid for by the con. This means the con also has no authority over room parties. They can't knock on the door and tell partiers to keep it down. They have no more authority over what happens in a hotel room, pool or hot tub than any other hotel guest does. And that is a problem because the con will be blamed for what happens, but has no authority to do anything more than to tell the front desk and let the hotel handle it.

Tricky situation there. I don't think alcohol should be in any event space, period.

would setting up a big marquee tent or two, and doing the event in a field festival style is out of the question for such an event?

seems like it could work out cheaper for a lot of people rather than paying for hotel rooms.

It works well for less than three hundred. More and you start hrtting the logistical nightmare of sanitation and safety (read: insurance and manditory police presence).

Police Wong be required, but you are spot on about sanitation (trash and portable toilets), public gathering permits, insurance (it costs $2-10k to insure an event depending on size, hazards, location). You need to deal with parking, event equipment, rentals, power, and more. You need to use the services of an event management group. I know because I do this as a sideline for city and private events.

LOL Stupid kids.

This whole thing was almost like the ConFURence debacles coming full circle, wasn't it?

Wow...even the Spokane location dried up? Darn...i was looking forward to the con coming to me for a change...:( Well, that's what happens when people can't control themselves with their partying, I guess. This is why we can't have nice things.

At least I hadn't signed up for it yet. XD;

I can hardly say I read this with surprise. The venues have their own images to consider. Suppose one is seeking to host a large, multi-corporation convention in a few months A minority of a sub-sector of society already seen as dubious commits a travesty of bad behavior. How is the hotel going to look to their corporate clients? Nope, nope, nope, nope!

Yea, it's entirely fair to point out that 2015 was also the worst run the Hilton has ever been.

That is how things work. Hotels do talk to each other for references, past history, room nights sold, catering and restaurants sales, etc. There is a LOT of factors involved.

it actually happened between a few hotels in germany that housed eurofurence in the close past. Suhl was the first to find out that we mean it when we say, "stock up the bar to the max, they drink like parched!". first evening the bar was dry... second evening, the drink caterers downtown were dry... third evening they started to drag beer in from next big town.
Madgeburd actually spoke to the Suhl hotel staff about Eurofurence, even though both hotels are not part of the same chain. and Berlin went and loaned staff from Suhl and Magdeburg to handle us.

competition is good for business. doesn't mean they have to hate each other.

I'm not surprised. I WAS surprised when they announced they were allowed to sign a new contract for 2016...

so rainfurrest is at it's end. sorry to hear that, though.

Problem is, that the new generation of con attendees view the cons as one big party, a furry version of Spring Break. Get drunk, get stoned, get laid (or at least attempt to) Damn the torpedos, full speed ahead. Dance and fursuit our asses off.

Face it Roz, its no longer the days of Confurence where we generally behaved ourselves and 2 or 3 people got drunk and stupid. CF8 started the stupidity at cons and certain individuals made it fashionable to get rowdy/drunk at the cons.

The fandom sadly needs a few major wake up calls like this to get into their thick skulls that its no longer fashionable or tolerated to act out like spoiled brats. It needs to grow up.

And don't forget public displays of things worse than drinking. I was at the last RF, and the late-night rave turned into a drug party. And I'm not talking about weed (which is legal in WA), but stuff much worse. Like you said, the fandom needs to grow up - you can't mix furry and real-life, real-life will win and cons just won't be tolerated by any professional venues. Which would be a sad thing. I think con organizers need to take a long, hard look at what happened to RF and decide that they need to clean up their act, and their con, and not just talk about enforcement and kicking people out - but actually doing it.