![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
My.
So, according to a couple people I'm a hypocrite for locking my entry saying that 2007 should have had an announcement with more fanfare, which Hecate has since assured me is coming soon anyway.
And apparently a number of people are attacking me over the contents of a post they haven't read, since it was in a locked entry.
So, I unlocked it. It is two posts down. My great and grand attack on the fandom in all its unedited glory, complete with Hecate pointing out that my perceptions on the reasoning behind the '07 announcement being so toned down were uninformed.
Hecate told me "You're perfectly allowed to point out things you think should be changed," and I was going to avoid responding to her with a, "that's refreshing, because some people in the fandom jump down your throat if you even suggest that they might not have done something less than perfect," because it is a snarky thing to say. Unfortunately, it being snarky does not make it untrue - I just got jumped on for saying that I didn't think the current staff did their best in raising the curtain on the next con; for trying to show support to Hecate because I know that Pigeon Forge is going to be a tough sell to some people without - deliberately or not - it being made to look like it was being put in the corner.
I'm really sick of being in a place (the gargoyles fandom, not LJ) where I can't even post my opinions without fear of being smacked for them, and of people automatically assuming that anything I say is out of malice or spite because I happen to be friends with a couple of people that those in charge do not like. I'm tired of not even being able to post my thoughts in my own LJ in even a locked post, for fear of it being spread around and misconstrued as a personal assault. I'm still shocked at the double-standard in effect with the running of the Gathering, where one group of people can criticize the running of a convention and yet those same people are not allowed to be criticized when they run one.
Even if the criticism on both sides has fair points.
I haven't said word one in the public forums concerning the con this year, because I think when all is said and done they are doing a fine job running it. Neither I nor any other member of the former 2005 staff have brought up any number of small points that the 2005 staff was hounded over by two members of the 2006 staff (neither of whom were Jen) that they then didn't hold their own convention to the same standard over. These issues are not problems for the 2006 staff, and yet they were publically treated as such during 2005 by a couple people without so much as a private email first to ask what the situation was. THAT is what bothers me- and even then, I never asked for an apology of the treatment myself and my fellow staff received- and I frankly even if I did, I would not expect to receive any.
All conventions have some small hitches in the running- some larger than others- that in the long run don't matter. The convention itself will come off as splendid as it usually does, and most of the fans will enjoy it - all the more so when they don't know the grueling effort that went into organizing everything. Casting spotlights on the more exasperating behind-the-scenes activities in public only serves to make the convention look bad, which is not good for the fandom, especially when these are things that are not really problems. Making the fans fret over a non-existent problem in a convention is petty. Making up things that aren't true to make a convention look bad because you have personal issues with a member of a convention's staff is beyond petty. 2003 the New York Gathering, was held together with shoe strings and duct tape, and the only reason that it didn't bomb was because none of the fandom knew how bad things were behind the scenes. In comparison, 2005 was a sweet peach to staff for, and yet the PR problems that were cultivated around it made it a more difficult sell.
I am, among other things, an aspiring writer. I like it when I get a good critique. I like being able to enrich my own writing when someone says to me, "hey,the structure in that sentence is a little awkward; that metaphor doesn't make any sense". I take account of these errors and make a note to do better next time. Sometimes I have to scrap a whole scene I spent time working on because someone points out a basic flaw in my premise, after spending three days of escalating defensiveness over the scene and trying to explain why my wait is right and Gunjack, you can do it in Bad Guys season one where it fits better, you really don't have to totally re-write those three scenes I worked so hard on for so long, you goober! Then when I've stopped sulking and fuming over him daring to suggest that my way is not the way to go, I take a step back and trying and look at what was being said , even if I was called names during it, to see if Gunjack- er, to see if the other party had a valid point. And sometimes I find myself having to accept that my way was perhaps not the best way, make the changes, and get over it. If you aren't willing to even admit that there may be a better way of doing things, you will never improve, and if you don't share your mistakes with others, they risk repeating them.
( Which reminds me... 'Taina, you might be right about Demona's wings. : P )
Your "friends" are not always right, and your "enemies" are not always wrong- and not everyone who disagrees with you is your enemy. And I think the entire world, let alone the Gargoyles Fandom, could do with a little more people who agree that we should be "perfectly allowed to point out things [we] think should be changed," - and fewer people who feel that if they speak up they'll be spitted without even being asked to clarify what they meant. This world, and this fandom, should tolerate people having differences of opinion, not ostracize the members who disagree with the majority, or those in power.
So I suppose I ought to apologize to Patrick for assuming that his write-up for 2007 was less than glowing with obvious enthusiasm for the locale was because he didn't care enough about it to bother, or because he didn't want to take any attention away from the upcoming 2006 convention; that was a narrow view to take, influenced far too heavy by his attitude during the 2005 con year. I should have remembered that his actions during that time were fueled by personal issues with members of the 2005 con staff, not an arrogance to make sure that LA always outshines every other Gathering.
I still think that Hecate's name ought to have been included in the announcement, and that '07 should have been the first thing mentioned in that update. The rest, making the 2007 location look like a deliciously attractive place that had the 2006 staff themselves raring to attend, was not their job to do. ...But it would have been nice to see, nonetheless, even (especially) for its debut. Hecate, in her response to my previous post, assured me that she has no less than the 2006 staff's full-throated support and help, and it eases my affront to know that it was not a deliberate slight in her direction at all.
One last thing, for anyone who reacted to my "I'm sick of a place" paragraph by thinking "well maybe you should leave, then!" ...you might have a point there, as well.
So, according to a couple people I'm a hypocrite for locking my entry saying that 2007 should have had an announcement with more fanfare, which Hecate has since assured me is coming soon anyway.
And apparently a number of people are attacking me over the contents of a post they haven't read, since it was in a locked entry.
So, I unlocked it. It is two posts down. My great and grand attack on the fandom in all its unedited glory, complete with Hecate pointing out that my perceptions on the reasoning behind the '07 announcement being so toned down were uninformed.
Hecate told me "You're perfectly allowed to point out things you think should be changed," and I was going to avoid responding to her with a, "that's refreshing, because some people in the fandom jump down your throat if you even suggest that they might not have done something less than perfect," because it is a snarky thing to say. Unfortunately, it being snarky does not make it untrue - I just got jumped on for saying that I didn't think the current staff did their best in raising the curtain on the next con; for trying to show support to Hecate because I know that Pigeon Forge is going to be a tough sell to some people without - deliberately or not - it being made to look like it was being put in the corner.
I'm really sick of being in a place (the gargoyles fandom, not LJ) where I can't even post my opinions without fear of being smacked for them, and of people automatically assuming that anything I say is out of malice or spite because I happen to be friends with a couple of people that those in charge do not like. I'm tired of not even being able to post my thoughts in my own LJ in even a locked post, for fear of it being spread around and misconstrued as a personal assault. I'm still shocked at the double-standard in effect with the running of the Gathering, where one group of people can criticize the running of a convention and yet those same people are not allowed to be criticized when they run one.
Even if the criticism on both sides has fair points.
I haven't said word one in the public forums concerning the con this year, because I think when all is said and done they are doing a fine job running it. Neither I nor any other member of the former 2005 staff have brought up any number of small points that the 2005 staff was hounded over by two members of the 2006 staff (neither of whom were Jen) that they then didn't hold their own convention to the same standard over. These issues are not problems for the 2006 staff, and yet they were publically treated as such during 2005 by a couple people without so much as a private email first to ask what the situation was. THAT is what bothers me- and even then, I never asked for an apology of the treatment myself and my fellow staff received- and I frankly even if I did, I would not expect to receive any.
All conventions have some small hitches in the running- some larger than others- that in the long run don't matter. The convention itself will come off as splendid as it usually does, and most of the fans will enjoy it - all the more so when they don't know the grueling effort that went into organizing everything. Casting spotlights on the more exasperating behind-the-scenes activities in public only serves to make the convention look bad, which is not good for the fandom, especially when these are things that are not really problems. Making the fans fret over a non-existent problem in a convention is petty. Making up things that aren't true to make a convention look bad because you have personal issues with a member of a convention's staff is beyond petty. 2003 the New York Gathering, was held together with shoe strings and duct tape, and the only reason that it didn't bomb was because none of the fandom knew how bad things were behind the scenes. In comparison, 2005 was a sweet peach to staff for, and yet the PR problems that were cultivated around it made it a more difficult sell.
I am, among other things, an aspiring writer. I like it when I get a good critique. I like being able to enrich my own writing when someone says to me, "hey,the structure in that sentence is a little awkward; that metaphor doesn't make any sense". I take account of these errors and make a note to do better next time. Sometimes I have to scrap a whole scene I spent time working on because someone points out a basic flaw in my premise, after spending three days of escalating defensiveness over the scene and trying to explain why my wait is right and Gunjack, you can do it in Bad Guys season one where it fits better, you really don't have to totally re-write those three scenes I worked so hard on for so long, you goober! Then when I've stopped sulking and fuming over him daring to suggest that my way is not the way to go, I take a step back and trying and look at what was being said , even if I was called names during it, to see if Gunjack- er, to see if the other party had a valid point. And sometimes I find myself having to accept that my way was perhaps not the best way, make the changes, and get over it. If you aren't willing to even admit that there may be a better way of doing things, you will never improve, and if you don't share your mistakes with others, they risk repeating them.
( Which reminds me... 'Taina, you might be right about Demona's wings. : P )
Your "friends" are not always right, and your "enemies" are not always wrong- and not everyone who disagrees with you is your enemy. And I think the entire world, let alone the Gargoyles Fandom, could do with a little more people who agree that we should be "perfectly allowed to point out things [we] think should be changed," - and fewer people who feel that if they speak up they'll be spitted without even being asked to clarify what they meant. This world, and this fandom, should tolerate people having differences of opinion, not ostracize the members who disagree with the majority, or those in power.
So I suppose I ought to apologize to Patrick for assuming that his write-up for 2007 was less than glowing with obvious enthusiasm for the locale was because he didn't care enough about it to bother, or because he didn't want to take any attention away from the upcoming 2006 convention; that was a narrow view to take, influenced far too heavy by his attitude during the 2005 con year. I should have remembered that his actions during that time were fueled by personal issues with members of the 2005 con staff, not an arrogance to make sure that LA always outshines every other Gathering.
I still think that Hecate's name ought to have been included in the announcement, and that '07 should have been the first thing mentioned in that update. The rest, making the 2007 location look like a deliciously attractive place that had the 2006 staff themselves raring to attend, was not their job to do. ...But it would have been nice to see, nonetheless, even (especially) for its debut. Hecate, in her response to my previous post, assured me that she has no less than the 2006 staff's full-throated support and help, and it eases my affront to know that it was not a deliberate slight in her direction at all.
One last thing, for anyone who reacted to my "I'm sick of a place" paragraph by thinking "well maybe you should leave, then!" ...you might have a point there, as well.
