Eurofurence Information > Feedback
EF24 Feedback (Many points)
Cheetah:
--- Quote from: Hai on 03.09.2018, 08:57:07 ---What is very realistic though is to motivate someone who has a great passion for this kind of thing to join our team and contribute to the script from the _inside_ (it's written online for the team to participate), and if it goes well steer bigger parts of it for the following year. It takes a lot of dedication and time, but we are very welcoming and supportive to newcomers so having another fresh writer or editor learning the trade of our team and turning productive with us is quite possible. :)
--- End quote ---
And that means, team members can make suggestions and help editing / streamlining the dialogues, etc.
--- Quote ---Regarding sponsors I keep seeing a common misconception here which is not so easy to figure out from our PR:
Sponsors don't help the convention afford better and bigger things! The budget is mostly fixed before the convention is made - after all, we need planning safety.
--- End quote ---
I have to clarify this a bit: Sponsors definitely DO help the convention to afford bigger and better things. And the budget is in fact quite dynamic, planning safety is
attained by starting out with a conservative estimation based on the previous year, and adapting that upwards when actual cash starts flowing in. But of course hai is right
in that all attendance fees end up in the same bucket, there is no differentiation between the different types. Sponsors and Supersponsors simply contribute more
to everything. And that, of course, keeps the base fee down - because logically, if we wanted to achieve the same without sponsors, the base fee would need to be higher.
However, calling it "the sole purpose" is a bit of an oversimplification. In the end, every penny collected has the purpose of delivering bang for the buck.
Cheetah:
--- Quote from: Kulze on 03.09.2018, 02:44:16 ---Water availability:
That's actually quite a hefty problem at Estrel, as a single bottle of water from their hotel costs 8€, which is... well... sorry to use the term, but that price is simply appalling. There ought to be a simple way to receive clean, fresh and simple tap-water, nothing fancy or out of the norm, just fluid to live by, that's true.
--- End quote ---
I don't know what's the hangup about free water in germany, either. And I've grown up here. It's one of those cultural quirks that we just have to deal with. If I went to hotel management and asked them to give people something to drink without charging for it, I'd get that questioning stare that a manager gives you if you just talked to them in a foreign language they don't understand.
Here's what I do: I carry a water bottle with me, that I keep refilling with tap water. Tap water in germany has higher quality criteria than bottled water, it's essentially free, and available to even non-hotel guests in every washroom.
--- Quote ---Feedback session:
I frankly wasn't there, missed the timespot, so I can't speak much about it. What I suggest is a separate panel if time allows for it, with some of the people in higher positions being there to receive the feedback related to their posts. It would make it easier to get the lines sorted out if it becomes a common thing, as well as better the con with out-of-the-box thinking.
--- End quote ---
We used to do that in the past, but we stopped - because it's really difficult to get everyone in a director position into one room at the same time, and in a mentally enough relaxed state to be open for a flood of unfiltered input like that :) We have our own little customer satisfaction team now, who run the feedback panel and the feedback survey, and help us with filtering the actual information from the avalanche of feedback we get so that we have something constructive to work with.
--- Quote ---Main bar:
I mainly got my things there, this year they were quicker then before. Not perfect, sometimes they worked literally at snails pace, focusing on shifting around things rather then actually selling stuff, but that's the common thing we got used to. It's not bad, it's not perfect, but it's fine for the mass of people. They need to work on a better system to get the most wanted things out swiftly though.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, the second bar under the breakfast area is usually better and faster. We're relaying all complaints we get on site immediately to the manager. Unfortunately, feedback we give them after the con is almost worthless, because it's impossible for them to reconstruct the circumstances.
--- Quote ---Just Cheetah needs to allow other ideas then his own to be done. One good way to achieve this would be a little price-event, drafts are sent in after the topic for the next con is revealed and the best draft wins a little price... and becomes next years paw-pet-show. It would keep the quality of the show up sky-high, as well as solve those problems with clear overworking and time limitations for thinking up new stories over and over again.
--- End quote ---
Actually, thinking up new stories over and over again makes you better at this :)
One of the reasons this show works is that we have the luxury of writing a story around the physical and timely constraints that are in our way, and create roles that exactly match the abilities of the actors in the team. We have to crank out a complete script that works within 5 months of weekend sessions, and then develop the play within 4 rehearsals. It takes a lot of experience to make that work.
If someone sent me a draft of sky-high quality, I would totally consider working on it.
But there's no guarantee a contributed script would be any better than what we do. Also, working with submitted scripts is a lot ... and I mean A LOT more difficult than it sounds. Also for the contributor. They'd have to be prepared to be rejected, and their work to be revised and rewritten, for example. Or live with the fact that a completely well written story could be unfavorable to the volunteers who'll have to play it for whatever reason.
People tend to jump on such an opportunity with a lot of unrealistic expectations, which is why I wouldn't want to make a contest that makes any promises in advance, for example.
Yeah, it's complicated :)
Cifer:
--- Quote from: Kulze on 03.09.2018, 02:44:16 ---As a few of those things which shouldn't happen but have:
The main character not progressing emotionally during the play.
Side characters are the actual main characters.
The 'villain' side is abstracted and not properly worked out.
Changes in characters from one scene to another are sometimes not explained at all.
--- End quote ---
Just for balance's sake: I enjoy supporting protagonists. And I like the idea of abstract villains - not every threat has a single face with a twirlable mustache. In the end, we know the relevant details of ERG: they've got a strong, but fading amount of influence on the government, they're not above sending hit-squads and bombs, they want their bomb back. But in the end, this wasn't a story about them, it was about our dearest snow kitty and the relationship with her family. Spending time on building a proper villain would have made the show even longer, but it would not have helped the central conflict.
Rishary:
Since I don't want to clog this thread with repeated replies to the same arguments (about early access) I will no longer respond to stuff that I have already countered previously. (I am active here regularly, if you feel your argument is being ignored by me but I did not cover it previously in this thread, give me a poke).
Short summary of my responses (details are somewhere in this thread)
"You can still get contested items after early access/outside of the con/talk to the artist" - If so, then this perk isn't appealing anymore and would definitely not cause someone to supersponsor.
"It's just like other perks / it's as fair or unfair as other perks" - This is a false analogy because people getting the other perks doesn't directly screw me out of contested items. Who gets said items shouldn't be decided by who is willing to pay an extra fee. Reward people who sponsor, don't screw the ones that don't.
"The con needs sponsors or else the normal fee will go up" - This is a strawman argument because I never asked to remove sponsorship nor can anyone assert that removing the perk will reduce sponsorship levels in a significant way.
"It's a good thing because it's a free thing to give to sponsors" - Irrelevant, if it's unfair to others then it shouldn't be given even if it's free. You can also make a supersponsor exclusive elevator for free, that doesn't mean it's a good idea.
"We want to give sponsors a chill free non busy time to browse the den" - Fantastic idea, do it on Friday/Saturday.
"If you can afford commissions you can afford the extra fee" - Not only this isn't always true (200 euro is a lot more than 40), even if I can afford it doesn't mean I'm willing to pay 200 euro for said commission, especially if this money doesn't reach my favorite artist who I am chasing.
"You are just jealous" - This is an insulting ad hominem. Not only I can indeed afford it, I can also get a friend with super sponsor to do it for me. Even if I was jealous, this doesn't weaken my other arguments (Attack the arguments, not who is presenting them or why he is doing so).
"Dealer den and queue would be too cluttered at opening, becoming a safety hazard" - The only legit argument, if this was the reason, why was I given the other reasons before?
Dhary Montecore:
As you summarized your stand neatly and as you said, you're ignoring anything you believe you answered already this thread may as well be locked now. I think everyone understood your point of view by now and it will be considered
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version