| |
In lugnet.events.brickswest, David Laswell wrote:
> First of all, Dave, I'd like to apoligize to you if you felt I was jumping
> down your throat personally. I read LUGNET from the main News page, I got sick
> of seeing people complaining about the situation without actually trying to do
> anything about it, and your post was simply the most convenient one to reply to.
No problem. I figured that was the case considering I had three posts in a row.
> The proposed replacement was being called BrickFest PDX, which is
> apparently an extension of the east coast BrickFest trademark (which also can't
> be used without the owners' permission, but I have no idea who they are). I
> don't recall ever hearing a direct statement that "BricksWest" was moving,
> though I heard quite a bit of outrage from people who seem to think they did.
Exactly my point. A BrickFest event put on the west coast on the same weekend we
were anticipating a BW event without any previous mention and entirely shrouded
in secrecy until Larry kindly posted about it two days ago. It's the hidden,
behind the scenes stuff that I was personally upset about.
I've now put my plans to go to NW BrickCon on hold due to this announcement.
It's not fair to the southwestern US fans or to the organizers of the NW
BrickCon and until I hear more about it, I will be opposed to such an obvious
flexing of muscle by the BrickFest comittee. Please understand that I have
nothing against BrickFest, it's organizers, or anyone affiliated with it, but
the timing of this announcement and the way it was announced is what has me
deeply bothered. Heck, if I could have afforded it, I would have been at
Brickfest myself, but that just wasn't in the cards for 2003.
> Now we know that the reason is because they can
> get 6000 square feet of _FREE_ convention space. If you really think about it,
> that's a big deal when you're trying to get a new convention off the ground on
> such short notice, even if the location won't be entirely optimal next year.
Agreed! It's great to see that such space is available and greatly appreciated
as well. Now, if we can figure out why everything had to be so secretive,
organized without LUG or LTC support, and on the one weekend that was already
reserved for an event in So Cal, I'll gladly pipe down.
> The only thing that ensures a lack of fan participation is fans refusing to
> participate. Larry is also from Michigan, and he sounds more enthusiastic about
> participating in the Portland event than anyone from California right now.
I'll agree with you on this point as well. I'd love to attend this convention in
Portland...in April or May when I've recovered from everything done in February.
I fully believe there is a need for multiple conventions on a national level and
in a variety of locations, BUT to place a convention 1000 miles north of the
logical location for a winter event makes no sense whatsoever.
Also, there was a point in this thread where I mentioned to Dan Jassim that it's
the very atmosphere of the event that makes the event a success. To have young
builders approach and ask how you did that...to have hundreds of fans of the
brick admire your handiwork...there's just no feeling quite like it and I don't
see how such an atmosphere can be replicated in Portland. That's what made BW
such an important event, not the building sessions or the programs...just the
fans. I wish I could put it in words and I know the only person who can truly
understand what I'm trying to say is Eric Sophie, but I had to try anyway.
> And
> if, after all is said and done, it comes down to a choice between travelling to
> Portland or travelling to D.C. to go to the nearest major brick convention,
> which makes more sense to you?
Going to D.C. because there's more to do than just attend the convention. I've
spent a summer in Portland. It's a nice city and I'll never knock it's
inhabitants, but compared to So Cal, there's just not much to do. Also, I must
again point out the weekend chosen: February 14th. This doesn't mean much for
most single folk, but for those of us with NLSOs, it's a definite point of
contention.
>
> > Fine. That's exactly what I've been trying to garner support for, but you
> > butting in when you've got no intention of joining the effort aren't helping
> > matters any. I believe the term 'put up or shut up' comes into play here, PD.
>
> I did "put up". I saw people complaining that something was being forcibly
> taken away from them when it wasn't. I didn't see anyone openly trying to do
> anything about the situation (other than complain). From where I was standing,
> it looked like you guys needed a push to get you out of the denial stage (both
> for the probable end of BricksWest, and for the possibility of Portland being
> the new event location) and moving on to more productive discussion. I voiced
> my opinion on how the situation was being dealt with by the community, I pointed
> out a few inaccuracies in how the situation was being viewed, and then I tossed
> out some unbiased thoughts on the proposed new event based on what we'd been
> told. Perhaps it wasn't as gentle of a push as it could/should have been, but
> it got your attention at least. And short of moving out west there's not much
> more "put up" I can get from here.
I can't fault that point of view. What you need to realize is that we were
reacting not from misinformation, but from a lack of credible information. I
doubt Mark's, Adrian's, and my reactions would have been so strong had we not
read about this in a single sentence blurb in one of Larry's fantastic updates.
The timing was bad, the way it was presented was less than optimal, and the
severe lack of information leading up to the anouncement is what got the
reaction it got.
You need to realize that the So Cal LUGs and LTCs have had pretty good
communication with each other until recently. I see this as an opportunity to
solidify the lines of communication between the groups and I, for one, am
willing to extend this idea of group communications to all the LUGs and LTCs in
the American Southwest (yeah, BAYLUG, you were included in that statement). It's
always the breakdown in communication that causes the problems and this has
clearly been the case in what happened this weekend.
> > Personally, I think Adrian's idea of placing a new con in Aneheim is the best
> > I've heard so far. While we might not have the type of fan we're looking for
> > attending the con, we at least have access to plenty of space, Lego, and
> > hotels.
> >
> > So far, that's the best 'plan' I've heard - far better than something
> > haphazard going up in Portland.
>
> That's what I'd been thinking, until I read Larry's post where he mentioned
> the bit about free convention space. Even without having to pay for the hall,
> getting a new convention going from scratch on such short notice is going to
> require a lot of hard work and probably a significant amount of cash as well.
> If you still want it to be in California, someone is going to have to drop some
> serious cash on event space.
Yeah, I'm working on the logistic of that. LUGOLA is meeting September 6th and
that will undoubtedly be a Major topic of discussion. There's quite a lot of
work to be done and quite a lot of bases to cover before the 6th, so I expect
this will be the last I say on this issue pending further Portland
announcements.
-Dave
LUGOLA Cheerleader ;)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
67 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
