![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
gwendolyngraceY'all know how often I post to this thing. But this has just been the utter end.
Okay, so long story short. We brought on someone to be the site liaison. She brought on her boyfriend, but of course, the only person who knew this little factoid was way more distracted with a family situation, and who realized it would all go psycho so fast?
So this apparently insecure chick shares our files and message archives with her boy-toy, and he goes and posts about how we're planning this "purely" academic symposium and how it's too expensive when we don't know what else is going to happen and how there's no point in going to the trouble and expense of a symposium when we can sit home and discuss this stuff online. And for some odd reason, he has this weird idea that only certified, everyone-in-the-world-agrees-this-person-is-a-God experts are supposed to be given audience!
And suddenly, I'm hearing from within and without that we're perceived as the very thing we set out to avoid being?
WHAT THE FUCK?
How and when did that happen?
*WHY ARE PEOPLE SO STUPID?*
Okay, so the CFP is the only document out there yet. But like Penny says--how can people not understand that in order to have the fandom stuff, *they* have to create it?
AAAaAAAAaAAAARGH!
For the gods' sake! We haven't even opened registration yet--we need to secure sponsors before we can go promising things that may not happen.
What is is about people that they'd rather condemn before they commend?
Please, people. If you know anyone who's at all interested in Nimbus - 2003, and *especially* if they've said they don't want to go because it'll be dusty--PLEASE, remind them that the fandom tracks will be as interesting or as boring as *they* make it--because if they don't submit proposals on what interests them, there won't *be* any fandom panels.
Argh.
Not to mention the Quidditch, the Quest, and everything else we hope will be a blast. I'm still holding out hope for the movies at AMC, and just, well, *everything.*
Criminetly. I'm just baffled.
Gwen
Okay, so long story short. We brought on someone to be the site liaison. She brought on her boyfriend, but of course, the only person who knew this little factoid was way more distracted with a family situation, and who realized it would all go psycho so fast?
So this apparently insecure chick shares our files and message archives with her boy-toy, and he goes and posts about how we're planning this "purely" academic symposium and how it's too expensive when we don't know what else is going to happen and how there's no point in going to the trouble and expense of a symposium when we can sit home and discuss this stuff online. And for some odd reason, he has this weird idea that only certified, everyone-in-the-world-agrees-this-person-is-a-God experts are supposed to be given audience!
And suddenly, I'm hearing from within and without that we're perceived as the very thing we set out to avoid being?
WHAT THE FUCK?
How and when did that happen?
*WHY ARE PEOPLE SO STUPID?*
Okay, so the CFP is the only document out there yet. But like Penny says--how can people not understand that in order to have the fandom stuff, *they* have to create it?
AAAaAAAAaAAAARGH!
For the gods' sake! We haven't even opened registration yet--we need to secure sponsors before we can go promising things that may not happen.
What is is about people that they'd rather condemn before they commend?
Please, people. If you know anyone who's at all interested in Nimbus - 2003, and *especially* if they've said they don't want to go because it'll be dusty--PLEASE, remind them that the fandom tracks will be as interesting or as boring as *they* make it--because if they don't submit proposals on what interests them, there won't *be* any fandom panels.
Argh.
Not to mention the Quidditch, the Quest, and everything else we hope will be a blast. I'm still holding out hope for the movies at AMC, and just, well, *everything.*
Criminetly. I'm just baffled.
Gwen
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2002-09-22 06:09 pm (UTC)Morons. *hug* Don't know if I'll make it or not, but it'll be strictly a financial decision in my case. Four months out of work will do that -- *pffft* -- but at least that changes tomorrow morning!
Kristen s:)
no subject
Date: 2002-09-22 08:44 pm (UTC)*schnugs*
no subject
Date: 2002-10-04 08:55 am (UTC)ER, yikes! no wonder you asked if I was psycho...
I just added you as a "friend." I journal often.
On here and FA I am ari stottle.
cheers,
katie
Professionalism
Date: 2002-10-10 02:40 pm (UTC)If you feel attacked by someone asking questions, coordinating a symposium is really not for you. Keeping your eye on the goal - having suficient attendance to cover your expenses at least - means that when someone asks a question, no matter how stupid you think it is, how often you've heard the same thing, or how clear you think you've made the information; you answer the question non-defensively with a smile. Remember, your customers care about themselves, their experience, their money - their questions, even their criticisms aren't personal toward you.
Your goal is to answer your customers questions, not scream at them for asking. If they are asking, they are interested. If they are asking in a public forum, other curious customers are listening. When you think you're battling a troll and your friends agree with you, you have no idea if other potential attendees heard your bad language or tirade and will turn away from the conference.
Building bridges and keeping a cool head will atract more people to your conference than being offended that people don't hang on your every word.
I'm posting this here, since it's the most private area available and it's information that you can take or leave. Even if this message pisses you off, taking this advice will help you reach your goal.
Good luck on the symposium
Re: Professionalism
Date: 2002-10-10 05:33 pm (UTC)Secondly, I wasn't at all upset by the fact of the questions. I was upset by a number of other things:
1. The person asking the questions was a recent addition to the membership of more than one of our *own* teams, and he chose to air his questions in a public forum and in an alarmist manner.
2. The person asking the questions was basing his questions on privy information that he had no right to broadcast to the public. Even had he and his cohort not left the team in a huff, they would have been fired in a short span of time for their breach of confidence.
3. Despite repeated attempts to address his questions in a reasonable manner, he became increasingly belligerent, repeating his points without any regard to the answers we supplied, supporting his arguments with false information, baseless accusations, and increasing hyperbole.
4. He caused a disruption that took multiple days to resolve, diverting other members of the team from other valuable work they were trying to do in order to ensure that his concerns would have no validation.
5. The backlash, again from within the team, seemed to indicate that the three months of work we'd already put into the symposium had been to no good--the intended audience, for whatever reason, believed the symposium was not actually aimed at them, nor would it include the things they wanted--when in fact that could not be further from the truth. In short, I was frustrated also by the tendency of college-aged people to Not Get It--in fact, to Not Read the CFP and to Not Understand that the programming will be what they make it--and that if it doesn't include things of interest to them, they have no one to blame but themselves. As I said on the planning list at the time, I absolutely cannot run every single session on every topic myself. Can't do it.
I'd also note that while the LJ is far from a truly private venue, it is still a different prospect to vent here than it would have been to vent in the same forum or direct comments to the individual in question. Those reactions would have been unprofessional, I certainly agree.
And in retrospect, now that my initial reaction to the embroglio is passed, I will say that the discussion on the planning team list did bring to light some marketing opportunities and corrections that we could make--and are making. For example, tonight's chat on fandom culture programming is an excellent opportunity to talk with the fans, especially younger fans, and let them know how to make the symposium all they'd want and more.
Gwen