From: dee@ranger.enet.dec.com ("Donald E. Eastlake 3rd, LJO2/I4, 1-508-486-2358  31-Dec-1992 1315")
Subject: What really happened after Boskone 24 (was Re: Arisia vs. Boskone)
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 10:16:10 PST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA27612; Thu, 31 Dec 92 10:16:21 -0800
X-Received: by enet-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA20997; Thu, 31 Dec 92 10:16:10 -0800
X-Received: from ranger.enet; by decwrl.enet; Thu, 31 Dec 92 10:16:10 PST
X-To: rec.arts.sf.fandom.usenet
X-Apparently-To: rec.arts.sf.fandom.usenet

(Sorry this isn't linked to the earlier messages but my local new server seems 
to have developed a problem where posting appears locally but don't get 
propagated so I'm posting throught the DECWRL gateway via mail.)

>Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom
>From: anderson@allvax.enet.dec.com (Dave Anderson)
>Subject: What really happened after Boskone 24 (was Re: Arisia vs. Boskone)
>Message-ID: <1992Dec30.194328.5873@ryn.mro4.dec.com>
>Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
>Date: 30 DEC 92 13:39:38 EST

>What a lot of people don't seem to realize is that after the 'Boskone from
>Hell' the only alternative to cutting the size of the convention from about
>4500 to about 1500 was to not hold the convention at all!  After the Sheraton
>decided that they didn't want our business an extensive search for a new hotel
>was done, starting in Boston and working outward.  The only hotels we could 
>find that were willing to host the next year's Boskone were in Springfield (MA)
>and in Hartford (CT), and both were much smaller than the Sheraton.  I've never
>seen the Hartford hotel myself, but the Springfield hotels would certainly be
>seriously overcrowded with attendence around 2000 and arguably couldn't really
>hold more than about 1500.  So, regardless of any other considerations, Boskone
>*had to* eliminate about 3000 attendees.

The above is substantially correct and I should have included something like it 
in my first posting.

Boskone 24 membership was 4500 but actual attendence was 4200.  At the time it 
was the laregest regional general SF convention that had even been held (this 
excludes Worldcon and specialized cons like Trek cons).

By the way, I rarely use the phrase "Boskone from Hell".  I enjoyed Boskone 24 
and think that description is misleading.  There seem to be a number of myths 
about it.  The first daily newsletter for Boskone 25 in Springfield said, in 
reference to Boskone 24, "Trufans don't run screaming through the halls at 2am, 
pulling fire alarms, ..."  While there were certainly people running through 
the halls, I didn't hear screaming and the head of security for the Sheraton 
specifically stated there was no evidence that any of the false fire alarms had 
been deliberately set.

>In addition to this problem our new hotels, though interested in our business,
>were rather skittish (based on what they'd heard about the previous Boskone).
>If we'd had any significant problems at Boskone 25 they almost certainly would
>have refused to have us back, and Boskone would have died.  As a result, we had
>to restrict anything that might cause hotel problems.  We were forced to be
>more restrictive than we wanted to be, since excess restrictions would merely
>annoy people (unpleasant for all concerned, but the convention would survive)
>while too little restriction could destroy the convention. 

>Given more time and less stress, the 'infamous letter' could undoubtedly have
>been worded better; but, even in hindsight, it was little if any more
>restrictive than it had to be.  It did tell a lot of people that we were
>dropping them from our mailing list, but can anyone seriously argue that a
>convention that can't afford to have more than about 1500 attendees should send
>mailings to 5000-6000 people?  The letter was, in fact, rather less restrictive
>than has been claimed by some people, and many of those restrictions were
>intended to be temporary and were relaxed the next year.

The restrictions adopted were just one a praticular set of restrictions.  I 
don't see that NESFA "had" to or was "forced" to adopt that particular set.  
Many consider them draconian but they could have been more stringent or less 
stringent.  As is somewhat understandable under the circumstances, with a real 
threat to the existence of Boskone, they turned out to be significantly more 
stringent than was actually necessary.  Some of the restrictions were relaxed 
in following years but some still are in force.  In some cases it was easy for 
NESFA to decide to relax the restriction and in some cases it only happened 
after a big internal fight.

>                                                          It did say that, as
>part of 'downsizing' the convention, we intended to refocus it on those things
>of most interest to the group doing the work of running the convention.  This
>was not because we were 'against' the aspects that were being eliminated, but
>because there was too much to fit comfortably in a smaller convention (and
>because a number of people were getting tired of the additional work caused by
>including areas in which they had no interest -- refocusing Boskone had been
>discussed for a couple of years before this time, but previously inertia had
>won). 

Much of the above is substantially wrong.  Boskone was restricted to exclude 
media, gaming, costuming, etc. as a matter of policy, not due to staffing or 
facility availability.  Many of the more dominant people in NESFA are 
explicitly and vocally anti-media, anti-gaming, and anti-costume at least in 
terms of what they want at a con.  This is certainly their right if that is the 
way they feel.  The restriction of Boskone to SF literature, SF art, science, 
and their fandoms was announced before it was certain what facilities were 
going to be used.  No effort was made to determine if personnel would be 
available for activities outside the restrictions, as they had in previous 
years, or not.  In fact some people who had enjoyed and taken pride in running 
or working on facets of Boskone that were considered particularly attractive to 
people being dropped were effectively told to go away unless, in some cases, 
they were willing to run things within the new restrictions.  It is also true 
that some such people were not active in NESFA activities other than Boskone, 
were not voting members of NESFA, and thus did not have a vote on the final 
decision.

>	Dave (anderson@allvax.enet.dec.com)



>From: rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com (Rich Kolker)
>Subject: Re: What really happened after Boskone 24 (was Re: Arisia vs. Boskone)
>Message-ID: <1992Dec31.150957.2275@nuchat.sccsi.com>
>Organization: South Coast Computing Services, Inc.
>Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 15:09:57 GMT

>I think there's a bit of rose colored glasses viewing going on here.  I
>attended the last big Boskone, including the sessions held discussing
>the changes planned for the following year.  There is no question that
>Boskone had gotten to the point that something needed to change.  However,
>the way that was gone about left very much to be desired.  The attitude
>of the organizers IMHO as represented at the session to discuss the
>topic was adversarial to say the least.

To be fair, you should note that the attitudes of a few of the attendees was
at least as adversarial.  There were people explicitly and vocally demanding 
the NESFA sponsor and put in the work to run a convention for them the way they 
wanted it regardless of what the members of NESFA wanted.

>                                   It came across as: we've been looking
>for an excuse to throw all you Trekkies out of here, and now we've
>found it!  It was a narrow view of SF fandom that was not worthy of the
>committee of one of the major East Coast conventions.  It smacked of,
>"It's my ball, and if you don't play my way, you can go home."

You are certainly entitled to your opinion in these matters but Boskone
is NESFA's ball and it can do with it as it chooses.  NESFA certainly didn't 
mislead anyone and was careful to give people who might have puchased Boskone 
25 memberships before the changes the chance to get a refund.  If people want
something different from Boskone and are willing to make it happen, they are 
free to do so.  That's why there is ARISIA as well as Readercon, The BASH (a 
trekcon by the Boston Star Trek Association) and other SF con and similar 
events in the greater Boson area.

>I came to fandom through the written word, although I attended (and ran)
>more than my share of Star Trek conventions along the way.  I haven't
>attended a Boskone since, and yes, I could have, I was invited.
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>   rich kolker       rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com
>                         < Do Not Write In This Space> 
>--------------------------------------------------------------------

Donald
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom,alt.fandom.cons