The Eurofurence Forum

Eurofurence Community => General Discussion => Topic started by: Eurofurence on 09.06.2015, 14:20:15

Title: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Eurofurence on 09.06.2015, 14:20:15
To whom it may concern,

we understand some of our guests feel the clothing and decency rules of our Rules of Conduct (http://www.eurofurence.org/EF21/policies/roc) are impeding their enjoyment of the convention. There have been some speculations about the intent of these rules. We'd like to address some of the aspects, and also correct a few misunderstandings that have apparently gone viral.

Why do theses rules of conduct exist?

While furry conventions may appear to be an entirely own planet to the guest, nothing can exist without interaction with people outside the fandom. At a convention we are guests and a business partner of a hotel. As such, we are expected to avoid anything that may damage the reputation of the hotel. This means that we have to insist on a certain minimal public decorum of our guests. Furry conventions happen at business hotels that under normal conditions expect their guests to at least follow the "business casual" dress code. We've talked to several venues who outright told us that they do not take fan conventions at all as the appearance of the attendees alone would damage their brand image.

It is expected from us that we at least try not to creep out their employees and contractors. In the furry fandom, we are generally very open to unusual behaviour and interests, so it is easy to forget that society at large is way more conservative and secretive about certain aspects. Hence, we need to listen to our hosts and find a solution that is both acceptable to our business partners by keeping the event as open and embracing as possible. Also, remember that we are not alone in the hotel. The lobby is a public area with people from outside coming in all the time, and a number of hotel guests that are not part of the convention being present. We do not want to weird them out, we want to present ourselves as a fun group to hang out with. Because that's what we are, at large.

We are aiming for a harmonic and positive party atmosphere which can only be achieved by establishing a common code of conduct that allow the members of perhaps the most heterogenous fandom in the world, to come together and embrace what unites them - not what divides them. Eurofurence is about the common ground, the interests we all share. Offensive behaviour has no place in such shared space, and the only way to find out with how much you can get away in public is the hard way. Our rules of conduct are the result of 20 years of evolution to achieve the positive, harmonic atmosphere that we have today. Not being able to live every thinkable extreme is the price to pay.

Are there any rules banning specific fetishes or preferences?

No. We will never ask for our attendees' fetishes or preferences. Our rules of conduct do not in any way discriminate against who they are, what they believe in, or what might excite them or not. Our rules only restrict how attendees may dress up and behave in the public space. As long as they do not violate any laws, cause any complaints, or break any rules of the hotel, we do not care what our attendees are doing in the privacy of their hotel room.

Why does the dress code allow this item but not that item?

It is only human to consider one's own special interests being completely harmless but being disturbed by other's at the same time. One of our guidelines is whether an outfit is viewed as offensive and/or sexual in nature by the general public or not. That by itself does not make a very good rule of conduct, though - because as we all know, common sense isn't actually common.

Whenever you have to put very complex circumstances into simple words, there is no way around simplifications and generalisations. When we say "blatant display of fetish gear is not allowed", that is such a simplification, and we're relying on the readers knowledge of social norms to extrapolate the intention of this paragraph.

We then clarify the rule by adding some concrete examples. These examples are not meant so single out any specific group or interest. There is no political agenda behind them. The selection of examples very pragmatically reflects the most frequently asked questions about the legality and/or acceptance of certain items. The list is in random order, and it does not mean that we think that everyone "being into it" is a troublemaker. We know that the vast majority of our guests is not.

We are intentionally not getting more specific that we absolutely have to. Not only would that immediately open up all kinds of loopholes, in fact it is seldomly the presence of single item that is going to cause offense, but the context in which it is displayed.  The difference may be between wearing an item on your keychain or around your neck - or other items you are wearing.

When was the most recent change to the dress code?

The dresscode in its current form was introduced in the year 2010, remaining unchanged until today. Despite recent rumours on twitter, there have not been any additional bans on any specific outfits or items.

I think you have banned a perfectly innocent item! You must change the rules!

The rules for each year are posted when registration opens and can not be changed after the fact - they are part of the agreement both sides enter into when making and accepting a registration. We promised our attendees that everyone will behave accordingly, and you promised us that you will, too. Therefore we will put the topic on the agenda of our annual general meeting. Please write any input you may have to security@eurofurence.org, we will collect your input or queries for clarification and decide if the rules may need adjustment or clarification for next year.

A member of security asked me to remove this item that did not violate any rules!

There is not much we can do months after the convention, however we'd like to point out that we have a simple process for conflict resolution. The RoC state: »If you have any problem with any action taken by a Staff member you may take the matter up with the Chief of Security or the Chairman.« We appreciate complaints being filed as soon as possible after the incident, preferably directly on site.

Where should I direct questions about items or activities not being listed?

As a rule of thumb, If you have a bad feeling about something you want to wear or want to do in public, there is usually something to it, and it is better to err on the safe side. If you have questions regarding acceptable items or clothing, do not hesitate to contact security@eurofurence.org by email for clarification. Please understand that we will not discuss our rules on social media such as Twitter or Facebook anymore, as it has been proven unsuitable for complex matters. You are invited to email security@eurofurence.org or use this forum if you have questions or suggestions. We will, of course, continue to use social media for announcements and occasional fun tweets.

What is your policy concerning badge artwork?

There are no rules specific to badge artwork, only the general "adult materials" clause of the rules of conduct:

"Display of adult materials (such as room signs, flyers, business cards, posters and drawings on public message boards) is not permitted in public areas of the hotel and convention center. The limit for "adult themed" materials is the equivalent of what you can see on the magazine covers at an average German newsstand."

I have been verbally abused by a member of your staff online!

We saw it happen. It should not have happened. It was very unprofessional. We are very sorry, and we promise to do our best to prevent it in the future. We all have learned a lot about social media in the last few days, and the current events will have consequences. We are in the process of rewriting our social media policies, and re-assigning the responsibilities accordingly. We will make sure that there will no personal discussions or even attacks via our official twitter channels again.

THAT BEING SAID ...

This does not mean that our staffers are fair game to YOUR verbal abuse or harassment. We are furry fans like you. We are not your personal punching bags, but human beings, and setting off a five day twitter shitstorm against individuals of our organisation is never an acceptable reaction, and it will immediately invalidate any valid claims you might have had. It is not in order to provoke our staff to the point they start losing their cool, and then expect them to personally apologize to you for it. "I can spit at you, and there is nothing you can do because I'm your customer" is plain antisocial behaviour, and we will stand united behind any staff members approached with this attitude, no matter what they said to you in return.

Of course, antisocial behaviour committed by staff is also never justified, and if you encounter such behaviour, we expect you to launch your complaint in a civil manner to the manager in charge, and NOT pour oil into the fire. There are contact adresses for almost all departments on our homepage. If you would like to complain to any of our team leads, you can directly write to the board of directors. Even if you want to launch a complaint against the chairman himself - the board of directors consists of more than one person, and you will always find someone to talk to:

- Chairman: Sven "Cheetah" Tegethoff -> chairman@eurofurence.org
- Vice Chairman: Richard Nightfox -> vice-chairman@eurofurence.org
- Treasurer and 'Third Chairman': Ingo "Loewi" Schumacher -> payment@eurofurence.org

All other contact adresses can be found on our homepage:

http://www.eurofurence.org/EF21/imprint

With best regards,

The Board of Directors &
The Public Relations Team

Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: o'wolf on 09.06.2015, 14:49:00
*Moderator's hat on*

We'll keep this thread open for discussion and questions about this statement for a while. Please remain civil and refrain from personal attacks.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cifer on 09.06.2015, 15:18:44
Sounds good so far, both with regards to convention-goers and their wishes as well as the fandom's appearance in public. Thank you for your explanations.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: meo on 09.06.2015, 15:47:44
Thanks for this Thread and i think that should end these whole debate.

For me all the rules of conduct could be reduced to some simpler Words, namely "Be excellent to each other". If we all want to be that we can forgive personal bulls*#+ and carry on just what we all are, what ever we are Furfans, Artists, Partygoers...you name it.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Wotan on 09.06.2015, 16:43:31
For me the rules are made from common sense, so I'm agreed with all the rules. Nice job team keep working! :)
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Suicune on 09.06.2015, 18:37:49
I'm wondering why the dresscode stuff has to be pointed out that specifically. I mean how to behave here and there should be part of everyones education. But it seems like that wasn't the case. oO"

Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: SouthPaw on 09.06.2015, 18:48:42
I'm wondering why the dresscode stuff has to be pointed out that specifically. I mean how to behave here and there should be part of everyones education. But it seems like that wasn't the case. oO"

Things get added to CoCs based on experience, much like warnings in product manuals such as "Do not iron clothes whilst wearing" and "Contains nuts" (the latter on a packet of peanuts...yes...really).

In an ideal world, the CoC would just comprise "Rule 1", which boils down to "Don't be a dick" (albeit dressed up in more polite language). Unfortunately, this isn't an ideal world so things have to be spelled out...
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: o'wolf on 09.06.2015, 19:21:06
I'm wondering why the dresscode stuff has to be pointed out that specifically. I mean how to behave here and there should be part of everyones education. But it seems like that wasn't the case. oO"

Talking from a personal point of view here:

There is the saying "behind every rule there is a story". Trust me, there are some stories you don't want to hear. Perhaps surprisingly, the worst are not even related to the folks who brought up the topic on Twitter.

I've seen code of conducts of other (non-furry) fan events. The Eurofurence rules are refreshingly concise and permissive in comparison.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: VickyVixen on 09.06.2015, 20:45:30
Thank you for finally handing out a public statement. If it's not too much of a bother, I'll hand out some constructive criticism.

I can see how there are three parties at work here:
- The people who start with a question: "What is your stance on pacifiers, padding..."
- Angry or confused furries lighting the fire.
- Some guy(s) you put in charge of your twitter account.

Okay, now what exactly bothers me about this story is how bad the communication was at that point, and if it may be lacking in other fields as well.

It might seem a bit far-fetched, but here's why these problems of bad communications occur:
At this point I feel the site, which is your portal towards communicating with furries from all around the globe, is lacking in administrated and thorough communication.
You arrive at the site, and find a big banner with only a small scroll down button. This is your showcase. However, most new visitors have no idea what they're really going to get unless they search outside of your website for references to the con.
I definitely think Eurofurence needs a positive restructuring in presentation of hierarchy, and that it should be clearer for the visitors of the conference who is in charge and what will be done.

Below the banner they see: CONTACT US and NAVIGATION.
I feel these categories are a bit too clumped together, while all of them redirect you to an impersonal form. That's not a very good way of representing yourself. Make sure that the visitors know who's in charge and what will happen by means of visual clues.
The navigation could be simplified, and there should be a good page that tells all about your conference without needing to go to the forums.
Once you've made sure that your visitors can understand what makes them excited about the con, who they can talk to (perhaps even their avatars!) and where they can have all their questions answered in a detailed matter (not just: Do whatever seems respectful to you) you'll be all in. You'll have friendlier users with a more packed community and probably less online fights.
Make sure you communicate a lot more with your community. Organise small games or online events, Q&A perhaps, who knows? You could even ask your friendly furs what they would like to see. Interact with them.
Never forget that no matter how many years you've run for, you'll always need to find ways of adapting without ever having to be negative about it.

Today's professional communication is all about transparency and thoroughness. Be complete, first introduce the subject you're talking about. Then what the problem is, then what you're going to do about it, then you finish with what you'd like to see in the future. Tada! Writing skills :) -> Better replies + better understanding. There will always be naughty furs, but Eurofurence should find the real professional way to handle those furs. Find the fine line between transparency and closure and find the fine line between honesty and being rude. We all want to say: "F*** those dirty cubs and dildo wearers and those boobs who make guys have instant boners."(not my quote), but being politically correct is still more important than giving out your raw opinion. You've got being politically correct semi-covered, but you're still not clear and transparent enough about it.
I hope my message has arrived properly, transparent and clear. I can see that Eurofurence can think about bringing the good things in, I'm definitely confident about that.
I wish the staff the very best and I think that aside from those problems the con will be as fun as every year.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Fineas on 09.06.2015, 22:01:41

At this point I feel the site, which is your portal towards communicating with furries from all around the globe, is lacking in administrated and thorough communication.
You arrive at the site, and find a big banner with only a small scroll down button. This is your showcase. However, most new visitors have no idea what they're really going to get unless they search outside of your website for references to the con.
I definitely think Eurofurence needs a positive restructuring in presentation of hierarchy, and that it should be clearer for the visitors of the conference who is in charge and what will be done.

Below the banner they see: CONTACT US and NAVIGATION.


I might be mis understanding you there, but did you notice the menu at the top right?
And is that what you are looking for or are their still things missing in your opinion?

Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: VickyVixen on 10.06.2015, 00:01:06
Oh I forgot to talk about that menu, but I think the same applies a bit from above: bit less cluttered. What I find a pity about making lists for links for info is a nearly endless hopping from the home page to a piece of information.  I'd love to see that sidemenu with links turned into a showcase on the main page itself. Little bits and pieces that really give a feel of the con. I like the art a lot, but I'd love to see a nice welcoming and a page that gives anyone who'd be interested in the con the real vibe :)
I really should have said that in my previous post instead of just talking about visual clues only. Heheh... ^_^

Edit: Whoosh this almost is starting to look like it could fit into the feedback category.
The point of this and my previous post is however to reveal a link between community, the site itself, disputes and attitude.
What I wanted to show is how design can help create a friendlier and informative environment and thus contribute to a better community with less disputes and misunderstandings.
The biggest role model in this case should be Eurofurence staff, of course. Good representation is key.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Runo on 10.06.2015, 00:18:25
One thing I think everyone should always keep in mind when talking about organisations like Eurofurence is that it's run entirely by volunteers, and free of charge.

This is not meant as an excuse.

Rather, what it means is that the organisation will continue as long as the people responsible or it have fun doing it, and enough of it do do it for free.

Try to force these people to run such an organisation like a business, to accept all and everything, no matter how much it irks them, to give up themselves "for the good of the organisation"? That won't work here, because the only reward they get is the fun they have doing it, and their dedication to the community. Take the fun away, and sooner or later, there's no motivation left to continue.

So please, cut all those people that invest every last bit of free time and any sliver of sanity they still possess ( ;) ) into it some slack, because otherwise, you might one day find that instead of an event that might be a little rough around the edges at times, there will be no event at all anymore.

 :-\

PS: If there was any doubt: No, this is no official statement or anything at all. It's just my peronal opinion as someone who's seen a lot of people break down and lose their nerve behind the scenes at some point or the other. I know I wouldn't want to be in their shoes, doubly so in times like these.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Suicune on 10.06.2015, 00:27:57
I'm wondering why the dresscode stuff has to be pointed out that specifically. I mean how to behave here and there should be part of everyones education. But it seems like that wasn't the case. oO"

Talking from a personal point of view here:

There is the saying "behind every rule there is a story".

I know. But it's still sad that it's always like that ^^
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: timoran on 10.06.2015, 01:22:43
During both this incident and the incident around EF's refusal to refund a membership for a dealer in January, several members of the EF staff made comments on their (yes, personal, but very much public and identified as EF staff) Twitter accounts to leave the impression that Americans are unwelcome at Eurofurence. This includes one of the members of the EF Board of Directors.

Do the other members of the Board share this anti-American sentiment? Could this be clarified? I have seen that American visitors to EF are no insignificant number, based on the nosecount page.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Runo on 10.06.2015, 01:27:15
During both this incident and the incident around EF's refusal to refund a membership for a dealer in January, several members of the EF staff made comments on their (yes, personal, but very much public and identified as EF staff) Twitter accounts to leave the impression that Americans are unwelcome at Eurofurence. This includes one of the members of the EF Board of Directors.

Do the other members of the Board share this anti-American sentiment? Could this be clarified? I have seen that American visitors to EF are no insignificant number, based on the nosecount page.

Honestly, think for yourself for a moment, check past cons' photos for with how many Americans EF staffers hang out, and the American cons' photos for how many EF staffers are there… do you really still believe something like that would be true?  m(
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: timoran on 10.06.2015, 01:40:48
Honestly, think for yourself for a moment, check past cons' photos for with how many Americans EF staffers hang out, and the American cons' photos for how many EF staffers are there… do you really still believe something like that would be true?  m(

Hmm, could you link me to any such photos which contain either of the two EF staff who expressed the anti-American sentiments on Twitter?
Otherwise, the only thing I could conclude from what you've said is that the Eurofurence organization is divided on their thoughts of America.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Akeela on 10.06.2015, 01:53:08
During both this incident and the incident around EF's refusal to refund a membership for a dealer in January, several members of the EF staff made comments on their (yes, personal, but very much public and identified as EF staff) Twitter accounts to leave the impression that Americans are unwelcome at Eurofurence. This includes one of the members of the EF Board of Directors.

Do the other members of the Board share this anti-American sentiment? Could this be clarified? I have seen that American visitors to EF are no insignificant number, based on the nosecount page.

To my knowledge, there is no anti-american sentiment within the EF organisation. Also, to my knowledge, the entire board of directors visits the USA and cons there on a regular basis. I can wholeheartedly say for myself that I haven't met an american fur yet I wouldn't drink a beer with, or share a good con with. Personal sympathies apply as usual, of course. Last but not least, I believe I can say with confidence that uncle Kage has been a friend of EF, and a personal friend to the board of directors for several years now.
So, no. I don't think that there is any kind of doubt that americans have always been welcome at EF, and always will be.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Runo on 10.06.2015, 08:04:09
Honestly, think for yourself for a moment, check past cons' photos for with how many Americans EF staffers hang out, and the American cons' photos for how many EF staffers are there… do you really still believe something like that would be true?  m(

Hmm, could you link me to any such photos which contain either of the two EF staff who expressed the anti-American sentiments on Twitter?
Otherwise, the only thing I could conclude from what you've said is that the Eurofurence organization is divided on their thoughts of America.

Sorry, but I've got better things to do w/ my free time than to sift through tons of photos just to convince you. :P You'll either have to believe me or do that work yourself. If you're just looking for a reason to justify not attending, I sure won't dump my free time into trying to win you over.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 10.06.2015, 10:17:59
During both this incident and the incident around EF's refusal to refund a membership for a dealer in January, several members of the EF staff made comments on their (yes, personal, but very much public and identified as EF staff) Twitter accounts to leave the impression that Americans are unwelcome at Eurofurence. This includes one of the members of the EF Board of Directors.

I can't remember any board members posting any anti-american tweets - maybe there is a misunderstanding who's on the board of directors? I can assure you, none of the members of the board has any anti-American sentiments :) We have many personal friends over in the USA, and most of us have been visiting US conventions regularly since the mid 90's. Beyond just being an attendee, I also frequently contribute as a DJ - for example at Anthrocon, FCN, MFF, Megaplex. And if you still have any doubt, you're invited to meet me personally at Anthrocon in just a few weeks :)

On twitter, single tweets are often taken out of context and being passed around with comments making them appear to be a huge thing that they really weren't. A lot of very wrong things have been said by various people in the heat of the moment, and that was certainly a mistake - but in many cases, these tweets look a lot less political and more like the actual personal emotional response they were in the original context of an ongoing personal argument between a few very agitated private parties.

There are a few people who are currently trolling our staff and spinning everything they say hopelessly out of control, taking less than a dozen tweets said within a period of less than 24 hours and creating an image of EF based on just that and two lines in our rules of conduct, as if the reality for the last 20 years didn't exist.

We have a staff of more than 200 volunteers, and we're frequently welcoming guests from more than 25 countries and pretty much every continent except antarctica. Really, we're not the kind of event you're volunteering for if you're a nationalistic or politically closed minded person.

You'll be safe at EF no matter where you're from, I can promise you that.

And the same goes for everybody else, including "babyfurs" - please take your eyes of those two lines in the RoC, and look at the whole thing before your make your judgement.

Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ralphie Raccoon on 10.06.2015, 13:24:35
Of course there is a difference between the statement and the application of the rules.

From my experience at ConFuzzled, I've seen a few attendees in the past wearing sleepers and pacifiers with no problem (walking around in an exposed diaper would probably be frowned upon though). And the wording in their CoC is exactly the same.

I think that perhaps in this case, it is worth spelling out the rules more specifically in terms of fetishes, listing items of apparel and other articles that are permitted and that are banned, and a clause to ask permission for anything else.

But in the end this whole thing really isn't about the rules, it was a breakdown in standards of communication. What happened on twitter is unfortunate, but the damage has been done. I know EF and some of its staff have received a lot of bile in retaliation, and I will not say that it was deserved, but I think EF has to be the bigger person here and work to rebuild bridges with the affected community. I would also consider making an exception to the no refund policy for this year, for those affected by this incident that no longer wish to attend.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Eisfuchs on 10.06.2015, 13:40:14
Yes,make the rules more complex, that will always help. Even considering that they have been unchanged for years and worked perfectly since then. We all agree that an outburst on twitter justifies this measure, even exceptions to rules agreed upon before registering.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 10.06.2015, 14:01:08
I think that perhaps in this case, it is worth spelling out the rules more specifically in terms of fetishes, listing items of apparel and other articles that are permitted and that are banned, and a clause to ask permission for anything else.

Thanks for your suggestion - we've considered that before. Unfortunately, as Eisfuchs said, making the rules more specific can actually make them worse. A significant part of the current outrage is already about the question why we are (seemingly) singling out specific groups, people are getting offended, expect a political agenda because we "ban" group A while not mentioning group B ... People have gone so far, as to claim that the item list in the RoC is actually my personal "hate list", sorted by my personal priority. And some people see rules as a challenge to find the one item you missed. We don't really want to encougare playing that game.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ralphie Raccoon on 10.06.2015, 14:25:57
I would cite the example of the Cfz weapons policy as an example where a rule revision really helped. As it was a Medieval theme, the staff anticipated many people would want to bring imitation weapons. As a result, they revised the rules on them to make them more specific and clear, and people were generally happy about it. Just make it really clear that anything not on the list has to be cleared with a member of staff before the convention or it will not be permitted.

Even if you don't want to do that, I think it might be worth making a public statement anyway just clarifying if wearing a pacifier or a sleeper is permitted in convention areas (I'm going to assume an exposed diaper is not). A strict reading of the rules would say no, but the example is gave with Cfz shows that they aren't usually read that strictly.

I think I should state right now that I am not a babyfur, so I don't have any personal beef with these events.

Yes,make the rules more complex, that will always help. Even considering that they have been unchanged for years and worked perfectly since then. We all agree that an outburst on twitter justifies this measure, even exceptions to rules agreed upon before registering.

There's no need to be so snarky, thankyou.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cairyn on 10.06.2015, 15:05:42
Even if you don't want to do that, I think it might be worth making a public statement anyway just clarifying if wearing a pacifier or a sleeper is permitted in convention areas (I'm going to assume an exposed diaper is not). A strict reading of the rules would say no, but the example is gave with Cfz shows that they aren't usually read that strictly.

A little bit of common sense goes a long way, I think. The hotel lobby is a public area. Would you go to a restaurant wearing pajamas? Would you suck on a pacifier while riding the subway?

I like to believe that the overwhelming majority of attendees is happy to apply that measure of common sense. Those who are not, are most likely intentionally looking to make trouble, and no amount of specification in the rules is going to deter them.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Giza on 10.06.2015, 15:28:00
During both this incident and the incident around EF's refusal to refund a membership for a dealer in January, several members of the EF staff made comments on their (yes, personal, but very much public and identified as EF staff) Twitter accounts to leave the impression that Americans are unwelcome at Eurofurence. This includes one of the members of the EF Board of Directors.

Do the other members of the Board share this anti-American sentiment? Could this be clarified? I have seen that American visitors to EF are no insignificant number, based on the nosecount page.

This American attendee (EF 10) and Staff Member (EF 20) has never been made to feel unwelcome at Eurofurence.

Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ralphie Raccoon on 10.06.2015, 16:30:06
A little bit of common sense goes a long way, I think. The hotel lobby is a public area. Would you go to a restaurant wearing pajamas? Would you suck on a pacifier while riding the subway?

I like to believe that the overwhelming majority of attendees is happy to apply that measure of common sense. Those who are not, are most likely intentionally looking to make trouble, and no amount of specification in the rules is going to deter them.


Would you do either of those things wearing an animal costume? Common sense is subjective. What is considered OK by some people is considered offensive or inappropriate by others. Some furries, I dare say, would consider, or have already done the above activities.

Personally I'd just save the drama and make it crystal clear. I know it hasn't been a problem up until now, but it clearly is a problem for some furries now due to this incident. If EF doesn't want babyfurs wearing anything cub related other than a cub badge outside their hotel rooms, then fine. I'm sure if they are unhappy about it they can ask for a refund and not attend.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cairyn on 10.06.2015, 17:20:16
A little bit of common sense goes a long way, I think. The hotel lobby is a public area. Would you go to a restaurant wearing pajamas? Would you suck on a pacifier while riding the subway?

Would you do either of those things wearing an animal costume?

While I won't claim a fursuit is "normal" attire to be worn at every occasion*, people are regularly fursuiting even outside of a convention parade. They partake in LARPs and go to non-furry sci-fi cons. You will be looked at, but your fursuit will be seen as costume variation or mascot, and that's okay**. Try the same in pajamas in the same situations. I have yet to see a "pajama walk".

Common sense is subjective. What is considered OK by some people is considered offensive or inappropriate by others.

This is true, also the standards change over time, so maybe one day people will be accustomed to pajamas on the street. At the moment, I think this is not the case.

----------

* Your job interview may be a bad time and place to wear a fursuit, e.g.

** In fursuit, a restaurant makes little sense anyway because of the problem of eating with a mask.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ralphie Raccoon on 10.06.2015, 17:36:06

I have yet to see a "pajama walk".


I'm from the UK, you can find people in pajamas doing their shopping during the daytime. Some consider it trashy, and some stores have specifically banned it, but some people consider it acceptable.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 10.06.2015, 17:56:31
Drawing a line is hard, and no matter where you draw the line of what is acceptable and what is not, it is almost always possible find something that is so close to the line that you could argue "why is this even excluded" or "oh come on, you allowed X, now you can even allow Y" or "I saw someone last week on the subway who totally did not get beaten up for it". But there is so much more to it than one criteria. As I mentioned in the original posting, it's a balance between personal freedom of expression and what we can get away with in public. But even that is not a black and white situation. We do not explicitly state so in our rules, but of course we are aiming at a certain atmosphere, and within a crowd, there are cool ways of sticking out, and then you can stick out like a sore thumb. Or, as you put it, trashy. Who wants to be around people who dress trashy? A basic dress code keeps people on common ground. It strengthens the sense of community. That is also what it's for.


(Edit: Anthrocon explicitly puts this in their RoC, by the way: "Attendees, when in public areas, may not wear clothing which is overly revealing or inappropriate to the atmosphere of the convention". We could adopt a similar wording in the future, if that helps understanding the intention.)
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ralphie Raccoon on 10.06.2015, 18:52:07
(Edit: Anthrocon explicitly puts this in their RoC, by the way: "Attendees, when in public areas, may not wear clothing which is overly revealing or inappropriate to the atmosphere of the convention". We could adopt a similar wording in the future, if that helps understanding the intention.)

To be honest, that's sounds even more vague and nebulous, perfect american legalese, the sort of thing that in other cases makes lawyers lots of money  ;)

I still think in this case, it would be worth being more specific. I've listed 3 yes/no questions below. I don't ask for myself of course, but I know quite a few babyfurs who would perhaps appreciate some clarification.


If you can answer these with a simple yes/no answer, I think it would go a way to clearing up some confusion. I haven't included the one on badges, since you already answered that.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 10.06.2015, 19:03:15
  • Are you allowed to wear a sleeper (sometimes called a onesie) in the public area of the convention (including ones with "babyish" designs)?
  • Are you allowed to suck on a pacifier in a public area of the convention?
  • Are you allowed to display a clip-on pacifier on apparel in a public area of the convention?

Yes, I understand perfectly what you are suggesting.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Dhary Montecore on 10.06.2015, 22:29:07
Of course there is a difference between the statement and the application of the rules.

From my experience at ConFuzzled, I've seen a few attendees in the past wearing sleepers and pacifiers with no problem (walking around in an exposed diaper would probably be frowned upon though). And the wording in their CoC is exactly the same.

As Chief of Security for ConFuzlled I have to state that this is NOT true and IF it ever happened it was overlooked by my team by accident.

I would cite the example of the Cfz weapons policy as an example where a rule revision really helped. As it was a Medieval theme, the staff anticipated many people would want to bring imitation weapons. As a result, they revised the rules on them to make them more specific and clear, and people were generally happy about it.

Yes, It was me who wrote the weapons guide and I introduced it 1:1 at EF and CFz. It is a GUIDELINE, not a change in rules. All weapons have to be checked in with the security upon arrival as all the years before. BUT I do get your point. It might be a good idea to make such a guideline on fetish gear in public areas as well, just as a courtesy and service to our attendees. Thank you for that suggestion! :3
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: AliothFox on 10.06.2015, 22:45:38
I have been very public on Twitter in my responses to this drama.  Let me explain my take on the matter.

I think the main reason the drama spiraled out of control is because of the things that a few of the staff members said, "in the heat of the moment," as Cheetah said.  However, the one thing that caught my attention is when he said, "On twitter, single tweets are often taken out of context and being passed around with comments making them appear to be a huge thing that they really weren't. A lot of very wrong things have been said by various people in the heat of the moment, and that was certainly a mistake - but in many cases, these tweets look a lot less political and more like the actual personal emotional response they were in the original context of an ongoing personal argument between a few very agitated private parties."

The tweet in question said, "Go suffocate yourself with a diaper," followed by epithets that I won't repeat here out of politeness.  Now, I think (I HOPE) everyone here can agree that there is no possible context that would make such a statement acceptable, under any circumstances.  That is where the line was crossed, and the initial post of this thread really doesn't seem to respond to that.  It says, in essence, "Our staff acted wrongly, but you should have known better than to provoke them."  At the risk of using political buzzwords, that sounds a lot like victim-blaming.  No matter what was said to the staff member in question, his response - whether on an official EF channel or on his own channel - was completely over the line.  When he wished death on his critic, it moved beyond merely heated - and even, I'll admit, verbally abusive - dialogue.  The babyfur community is not blameless in this, but it was the Eurofurence staff who allowed what should have been a simple matter of clarification to turn into an ugly brawl that resulted in the tweet in question.

And the reason it turned into the public frenzy is because those concerns have not been substantially addressed.  You said, "We're very sorry."  Great! You should be. It got out of hand, and it's good that you recognize that. But what is being done to correct it?  The official response is very vague.  Re-writing social media guidelines and re-assigning responsibilities are not particularly clear.  You said you were "re-assigning responsibilities."  Can you clarify what this means?

Now, the other matter that I'm concerned about is the fact that EF seems to have taken the position of, "We can only address the issues that happened on EF's official channel."  Perhaps not in those exact words, but that seems to be the general attitude.  And that is part of the problem.  The tweet that was mentioned previously is a prime example of that - and Eurofurence has not done anything to address how WRONG that tweet was.  It did not happen on EF's official channel, but it did happen, it directly concerns EF's staff in relation to EF, and it was very public.  There are numerous screenshots on Twitter reflecting this. 

This was a public mistake, and it deserves a public apology with no strings attached.  Let me say this very plainly so that there is no mistaking or word-twisting: The rules and policies may have been what started this scandal, but they are not the main issue.  You've clarified the rules.  You have settled a lot of those questions.  What you have not done is made any admission that the staff acted inappropriately.  It was a "sorry, not sorry" response.  Have the responsible parties been relieved of their duties?  Will they be personally made to apologize for the tweets in question?  This cannot be handled "behind the scenes" because that's not where the tweets occurred.  At this point, the damage is done, and you have lost what will likely be a substantial number of attendees - continuing to take the, "Those tweets were inappropriate, but it's your fault for provoking them" position is not going to be helpful.  A sincere apology, however - with no strings attached, and with a clear, detailed (not vague, as this one is) plan of what will be done both to prevent this from happening in the future and to redress the specific grievance in question may do something to help you recover the tarnished reputation.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Tsanawo on 10.06.2015, 22:54:32
Just to be clear, these views are my stance and my stance only, I do not speak for any other staff members nor EuroFurence in general.

Quote
Will they be personally made to apologize for the tweets in question?
I certainly hope not, the moment I will be forced to apologize for anything I wrote in my personal Twitter timeline, how outrageous it might be, is the moment I resign from staff.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Dhary Montecore on 10.06.2015, 23:12:39
Just to be clear, these views are my stance and my stance only, I do not speak for any other staff members nor EuroFurence in general.

Quote
Will they be personally made to apologize for the tweets in question?
I certainly hope not, the moment I will be forced to apologize for anything I wrote in my personal Twitter timeline, how outrageous it might be, is the moment I resign from staff.

I absolutely agree. I saw the tweet-conversation in question and I agree it was completely out of line, but so has been the entire conversation. This entire convention is based on the countless hours of VOLUNTEER work. Even if we wanted to we couldn't force PRIVATE people to apologise (or to anything for that matter) for what they have said on their PRIVATE twitter. The moment we would do that we would lose our staff and the con would be over for far more than 2000 people that have nothing to do nor care about this twitter drama.

You might overestimate the amount of support the agitators in this drama have amongst our attendees.

The consequences taken are clear and stated in the public statement: We WILL make sure that no offensive tweets/answers will be posted on our official twitter account again and we will establish a purely professional PR system to avoid such escalations in future.

Again, we are very sorry for the emotionally stained tweets that have been made in response to some of the tweets thrown at EF.  
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: AliothFox on 10.06.2015, 23:18:25
Just to be clear, these views are my stance and my stance only, I do not speak for any other staff members nor EuroFurence in general.

Quote
Will they be personally made to apologize for the tweets in question?
I certainly hope not, the moment I will be forced to apologize for anything I wrote in my personal Twitter timeline, how outrageous it might be, is the moment I resign from staff.

I absolutely agree. I saw the tweet-conversation in question and I agree it was completely out of line, but so has been the entire conversation. This entire convention is based on the countless hours of VOLUNTEER work. Even if we wanted to we couldn't force PRIVATE people to apologise (or to anything for that matter) for what they have said on their PRIVATE twitter. The moment we would do that we would lose our staff and the con would be over for far more than 2000 people that have nothing to do nor care about this twitter drama.

You might overestimate the amount of support the agitators in this drama have amongst our attendees.

The consequences taken are clear and stated in the public statement: We WILL make sure that no offensive tweets/answers will be posted on our official twitter account again and we will establish a purely professional PR system to avoid such escalations in future.

Again, we are very sorry for the emotionally stained tweets that have been made in response to some of the tweets thrown at EF.  

And you continue to call the victims the "agitators of the drama."  This view only reinforces the lack of professionalism.  I'm not here to stir up drama.  I'm here to address legitimate grievances.  If I were to tweet on my timeline in a public way (yes, the tweets in question were public - the account in question has SINCE been made private, but it wasn't at the time) about my employers/organizers, I would be relieved of my responsibilities, and rightfully so.  If I were to wish death on another person in such a public way, I would be fired/relieved from any position I held - and rightfully so.  Anything less is tacit endorsement of that position.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ralphie Raccoon on 10.06.2015, 23:34:30
As Chief of Security for ConFuzlled I have to state that this is NOT true and IF it ever happened it was overlooked by my team by accident.

It was while the Con was at the Britannia, so some years ago. It was also on the last day after the closing ceremony, but security were still present. They had a little get together near the nightclub. It may have been before your time, I don't know when you joined. There were sleepers and "kiddie" clothes, and a few pacis around necks. No exposed diapers, as you'd expect. Quite discreet, really. Trust me, it happened, as a couple of them are good friends of mine. Nobody seemed bothered. Personally I don't think such things are an issue, after all, I've seen worse things at fancy dress parties in nightclubs(!), but of course I don't make the rules.

And Thankyou for accepting my suggestion! At least then if anything, if someone wears something specific that is banned you have something to cite that will prevent a dispute. Saves a whole lot of bother if you can just point to a list!  :)
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Tsanawo on 10.06.2015, 23:39:23
I think we're using two different meaning of private which confused the conversation a bit.
1. Private as in personal
2. Private as in protected.

To avoid confusion is it possible to use either personal or protected instead of private in both cases. This might help clear up some miscommunication.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: AliothFox on 10.06.2015, 23:43:07
I think we're using two different meaning of private which confused the conversation a bit.
1. Private as in personal
2. Private as in protected.

To avoid confusion is it possible to use either personal or protected instead of private in both cases. This might help clear up some miscommunication.

To clarify, then.  The tweet in question was made from a personal account.  The account was NOT protected at the time the tweet was made, but it has since been switched to protected.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Dhary Montecore on 10.06.2015, 23:44:35
And you continue to call the victims the "agitators of the drama."  This view only reinforces the lack of professionalism.  I'm not here to stir up drama.  I'm here to address legitimate grievances.  If I were to tweet on my timeline in a public way (yes, the tweets in question were public - the account in question has SINCE been made private, but it wasn't at the time) about my employers/organizers, I would be relieved of my responsibilities, and rightfully so.  If I were to wish death on another person in such a public way, I would be fired/relieved from any position I held - and rightfully so.  Anything less is tacit endorsement of that position.

You are measuring a volunteer organisation by commercial standards. This does not work. And yes, I am talking about the agitators. Those that sparked the entire drama by very personal and insulting tweets. I do NOT talk about the babyfur community or those (more than 80%) of the participants of the conversations that argued in a calm and respectable manner. This entire escalation is based on a few known agitators and the very emotional and unprofessional response they got. Our response is not to be excused but so are the original tweets.

Again, we are a volunteer organisation, we are NOT paid, we pay ourselves. So please do not try to force a convention organisation into a commercial companies frame.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Dhary Montecore on 10.06.2015, 23:48:01
As Chief of Security for ConFuzlled I have to state that this is NOT true and IF it ever happened it was overlooked by my team by accident.

It was while the Con was at the Britannia, so some years ago. It was also on the last day after the closing ceremony, but security were still present. They had a little get together near the nightclub. It may have been before your time, I don't know when you joined. There were sleepers and "kiddie" clothes, and a few pacis around necks. No exposed diapers, as you'd expect. Quite discreet, really. Trust me, it happened, as a couple of them are good friends of mine. Nobody seemed bothered. Personally I don't think such things are an issue, after all, I've seen worse things at fancy dress parties in nightclubs(!), but of course I don't make the rules.

And Thankyou for accepting my suggestion! At least then if anything, if someone wears something specific that is banned you have something to cite that will prevent a dispute. Saves a whole lot of bother if you can just point to a list!  :)

You're most welcome! It is not that we don't see the issue. The Problem is, that this topic is very emotionally charged on both sides. Things will be rectified, promise. But this does only work in a constructive dialog. Suggestions like yours are highly valuable and always help to improve things for everyone instead of trying to gain personal benefits. So thank you again!

Regarding ConFuzzled: In this case you are absolutely right. I took over after the Britannia-Years and I reworked the CoC only then. :3
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: AliothFox on 10.06.2015, 23:50:44
And you continue to call the victims the "agitators of the drama."  This view only reinforces the lack of professionalism.  I'm not here to stir up drama.  I'm here to address legitimate grievances.  If I were to tweet on my timeline in a public way (yes, the tweets in question were public - the account in question has SINCE been made private, but it wasn't at the time) about my employers/organizers, I would be relieved of my responsibilities, and rightfully so.  If I were to wish death on another person in such a public way, I would be fired/relieved from any position I held - and rightfully so.  Anything less is tacit endorsement of that position.

You are measuring a volunteer organisation by commercial standards. This does not work. And yes, I am talking about the agitators. Those that sparked the entire drama by very personal and insulting tweets. I do NOT talk about the babyfur community or those (more than 80%) of the participants of the conversations that argued in a calm and respectable manner. This entire escalation is based on a few known agitators and the very emotional and unprofessional response they got. Our response is not to be excused but so are the original tweets.

Again, we are a volunteer organisation, we are NOT paid, we pay ourselves. So please do not try to force a convention organisation into a commercial companies frame.

I don't feel like this discussion is likely to be productive any further.  You are blaming "known agitators" while defending/ignoring the larger issue at hand.  A forced apology is no apology.  At this point, the damage is done, as the babyfur community (which accounts for a much larger percentage of the furry fandom than you seem to be aware of) will likely encourage its members and their friends to simply not go.  Time will tell.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 11.06.2015, 00:16:13
(Edit: This took a long time to write, so while I typed this, about 10 other replies have been posted. That means, this reply is completely ignorant of them. Please keep that in mind when reading.)

The tweet in question said, "Go suffocate yourself with a diaper," followed by epithets that I won't repeat here out of politeness.  Now, I think (I HOPE) everyone here can agree that there is no possible context that would make such a statement acceptable, under any circumstances.

Well, the tweet he responded to said "You're using retarded shit logic that just because you are outside of Germany, you haven't registerd for EF, fucking idiot", and was subsequently called a Nazi.
I hope you can agree that there is also no possible context that would make such a statement acceptable?

Really, it's a moot point to score the insults and then declare a winner and a loser. Doco has no representative function within the staff, and he was personally attacked on his personal account, it's his own right to free speech. Yes, he got a stern talk, because we really did not enjoy having to cope with the extra provocation that caused, but you can't go and privately insult volunteers, and then expect them to react like salespeople. We disagree with what he said, we apologized as an organisation, but we're not going to enact a sacrificial ritual on the basis that the mob demands blood. Figuratively speaking, of course.

What I find more embarassing, and what I'm way more sorry for is what happened on our official twitter account. That's a place where you should be able to expect factual, professional and level headed answers, and that is the part that I feel responsible for. As you might have read in our declaration above, twitter responsibilities and policies will change so that won't happen again.

Quote
The official response is very vague.  Re-writing social media guidelines and re-assigning responsibilities are not particularly clear.  You said you were "re-assigning responsibilities."  Can you clarify what this means?

It means that different people will handle the twitter account than before, there will be a hierarchy, and a clear policy how we will communicate via twitter.The current draft of the new policy provides for a new twitter PR team lead, a procedure how the different departments can provide content to be posted, and formal communication guidelines - like author tags, and rules such as that the account will be for informative purposes only, and will not take part in discussions.  It does not get more concrete than that, because it takes a few days to organize this, and also to find new volunteers for the new positions.

Quote
Now, the other matter that I'm concerned about is the fact that EF seems to have taken the position of, "We can only address the issues that happened on EF's official channel."

First of all, we have about 200 volunteers, and I can not expect them to always act in a representative way, especially not when they are personally being attacked. Each of them are entitled to their own opinions. The board of directors and maybe the senior staff are an exception of that. That's why it makes a difference whether doco says something on twitter, or I say something on twitter.

But, to use your own way of reasoning, you seem to have taken the position of, "They made a mistake, and that means they are not allowed to defend themselves against any kind of retaliation."

Look, if you want to criticise me personally, then please take it to me personally and we can talk about it. Or address the Organisation that I am representing. That is fine. What people however did was, take screenshots from pretty much everything I said on my protected private account, put them on caricatures, and made them go viral with THEIR own spin attached to it.

When I said, "If crapping your pants in public is a requirement for you we have a conflict of interest", that is literally what I wanted to say. (It implies, that if it is not a requirement, we do not have a conflict of interest, by the way.)

I was subtweeting as a reaction to someone complaining about a (non-existing) "diaper ban" and how EF would be totally ruined for him if he wasn't allowed to wear them in public. And since he clearly implied a fetish background, and not a medical one, I was quite angry. First of all because wearing a diaper is only a problem when it's "blatant display", and the rules say so quite prominently. And secondly because, if you don't have a medical condition, why ELSE would you want to wear one in public?

Some people apparently WANTED to spin that into "Cheetah thinks, all babyfurs crap their pants in public", and so they did. Which I, by the way, totally clarified in subsequent tweets, which mysteriously never made it into any screenshots.

A lot of the outrage is fabricated, and I know exactly by whom.

I know what I said was totally not politically correct, and if I had know what I would cause, I wouldn't have tweeted it.

I am sorry for everyone who I unintentionally offended by it.

Quote
Have the responsible parties been relieved of their duties?

If you want to have me relieved from my duties, you'll have to convince the members of the Eurofurence e.V. (the legal entity behind Eurofurence) to call for an extraordinary general meeting, and vote for the removal of their chairman. Everyone can become a member. You, too. I dare you to do it. Take responsibility, and in return you get the power to change. Despite all mistakes I made, the last thing I will do is give in to an angry mob. Sorry, but not sorry.

We could let doco go. But what would that change. It would be just a meaningless ritual. He's already not in a representative position, so that would not change. And the only two jobs we could let him go from are posting travel information tweets once a month, and helping sort badges behind the reg counter.  On the other hand he's been in our team for 18 years. You don't fire someone who's been with you for so long, and who is generally a good person. We're going to handle this internally. You will have to trust us on this one.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: AliothFox on 11.06.2015, 00:36:40
As I said, I did not come here to start drama.  I came here to clarify why people were upset, and to seek a redress for it.  I was denied that redress, so at this point, it is out of my hands.  If the things I've said before have not made matters clear, I see no sense in repeating myself.  If you would like to put some sort of "spin" on that, that's your prerogative.

At this point, I will not be attending EF in the future, and I will be encouraging others - babyfur and non-babyfur - to do the same.  Your responses to my points have made some things clearer - and I sincerely thank you for that - while leaving others unaddressed.  I'm not some sort of appointed representative for the babyfur community; I'm just trying to help EF understand the reasons why people are upset, which I have apparently failed to do.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 11.06.2015, 00:48:33
(To all staffers feeling the urge to flame here: I appreciate your loyalty, but you're not helping the cause right now. Moderation is in effect.)
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: ScritchWuff on 11.06.2015, 10:56:56
(Edit: This took a long time to write, so while I typed this, about 10 other replies have been posted. That means, this reply is completely ignorant of them. Please keep that in mind when reading.)

Thank your for both your original statement and this reply.  It clarifies most of the questions I had after seeing my Twitter timeline explode with "ZOMG fursecution!" posts.  It's pretty clear that this whole blow up is really not much more than a good old-fashioned Internet flame war.  It reminds me of the shitstorms they had constantly on alt.fan.furry on Usenet.  And it really turns out to be blown out of all proportion.   I know some German, though I'm far from fluent.  I think "Massenverblödungswaffen" describes Twitter all too well.  (I LOVE that particular word!)  I'm glad I held off from the Twitter lynch mob that unfortunately formed over this issue.  I swear social media is more and more becoming a channel for organizing angry mobs.  :P

For the record, I'm a babyfur.  I often host cub room parties with my friends at Rainfurrest, Further Confusion, and sometimes other cons.  We're generally pretty harmless, which I'm sure you already know. We don't bite.. We just nip at your heels.  ;D

I empathize with Eurofurence's staff.  What I have read between the lines here (and of course I may be mistaken) is that you all have to deal with a rather high strung hotel, and end up walking a fine line to keep the management happy with or at least tolerant of furries so you don't lose the venue next year.  I also can see where the hotel is coming from.  They have to turn a profit the other 51 weeks when EF is not there, and if they have a certain "upscale" business-friendly image they are trying to portray, they might not want word getting out that their hotel is not a good place to do business because they have people wandering around freaking out customers and partners by their appearance.  Doesn't matter whether such a view is fair or not.  Life's unfair, and people are simply that way, and the hotel needs to keep potential customers happy.  No hotel, no EF.  Enough said.

I also appreciate that convention staff work really hard to make thing happen, for no payment, so everyone else can have a good time.  It really can be a thankless job, and want to say "Danke Schön!"  Seriously, thank you. 

Ok, brown-nosing, aside, here's what I understand to be the case, using myself as an example:

No one is going to kick me out of the con or give me trouble if I go in the public areas in something like, say, a BunnyWarez fox kigu, or really any animal/furry themed kigu within reason.  Maybe I'm mistaken, but to me it seems those types of "pajamas" are really more like an open-face fursuit than PJ's.   And they're really cool to wear around con-space, babyfur or not. :)  IMO they fit nicely with the concept of a furry con in general.  Context: The reason I ask this is I saw in an LJ post that one fur mentioned that a statement had been made to the effect that pajamas were banned and then interpolated that such a ban must extend to kigus.  Just asking to clarify since I rather doubt that to be the case.

On the subject of pajamas, one clarification in language is in order.  The term "onesie" has a different meaning in the U.S. and the U.K., from what I've been able to gather.  What I've seen described as a onesie on this forum is what we in the U.S. call a "footed sleeper" or a "sleeper" if no feet.  In the U.S., a "onesie" refers to an article of infant clothing like a T-shirt with snaps on that go around the crotch to cover up a diaper.  Just figured it was worth noting.

I assume from what I've read that the wearing of a sleeper or onsie (U.S. or U.K. meaning) that is excessively "babyish" is discouraged in public.  I have no issue personally either way, and here's a little secret:  A lot of us babyfurs also frown on that in public as well.  Most of us really don't want to weird out other hotel guests as it can cast our community in a bad light as well.  Then again, there are others that don't care about that.  :(

I'm guessing I wouldn't be bothered about wearing your typical "Marci" babyfur badge, even if it showed a clean diaper.  An example of the character type would be Lil' Sneezer from Tiny Toons.  On the other hand, there are certain earth tone colors, which when applied to certain areas of a babyfur badge, immediately transform it from "cute" to "gross". I think you get the picture.  :-\  Like I said, I'd be surprised to be bothered over 95% of "Marci" type badges, diaper or not.  But maybe I'm mistaken.

That's my main questions.  I will say this.  Some babyfurs are saying they'll boycott EF.. All the best to them, but they don't speak for all of us any more that I do.  I won't be going to EF this year, unfortunately, since it's a LONG trip from New Mexico, and I'm all out of vacation.  It's on my bucket list, though, one of these years, if I can get the time off to do it.

Now let's see if I get lynched.  Wonder what the babyfur word is for "Uncle Tom". :)
 #p
Cheers!
-ScritchWuff
P.S.  Sven, your name is familiar to me.  Don't know if you remember me but IIRC we were one or two mailing lists together way back in the 90s. It's been a LONG time, though. :)
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Dhary Montecore on 11.06.2015, 11:54:40
For the record, I'm a babyfur.  I often host cub room parties with my friends at Rainfurrest, Further Confusion, and sometimes other cons.  We're generally pretty harmless, which I'm sure you already know. We don't bite.. We just nip at your heels.  ;D

Yepp, we know. Due to my position I come in contact with almost everything going on at our conventions and from the "on-site problem-level" babyfur parties are MUCH less of a problem than the average get-pissed-or-die room party. As you say yourself, this is only about the public appearance (not talking about damage to hotel rooms, but we get that from all kinds of room parties.)


I empathize with Eurofurence's staff.  What I have read between the lines here (and of course I may be mistaken) is that you all have to deal with a rather high strung hotel, and end up walking a fine line to keep the management happy with or at least tolerant of furries so you don't lose the venue next year.  I also can see where the hotel is coming from.  They have to turn a profit the other 51 weeks when EF is not there, and if they have a certain "upscale" business-friendly image they are trying to portray, they might not want word getting out that their hotel is not a good place to do business because they have people wandering around freaking out customers and partners by their appearance.  Doesn't matter whether such a view is fair or not.  Life's unfair, and people are simply that way, and the hotel needs to keep potential customers happy.  No hotel, no EF.  Enough said.

I also appreciate that convention staff work really hard to make thing happen, for no payment, so everyone else can have a good time.  It really can be a thankless job, and want to say "Danke Schön!"  Seriously, thank you. 

Thank you! Of course it is always nice to feel appreciated, but these days a simple thank you comes a long way. And yes, you describe the problem spot on. Furry conventions are polarising and powerful in the reactions they can spark. I've seen high ranked hotel staff dance with our fursuiters and have the time of their life but we've had to defend the con against Nazi scum also. It all comes down to what we represent in public. I (and most if not all of our staff) do NOT judge what adult people to in consent in the privacy of their hotelroom as long as it's legal and they don't damage the hotel property.


Ok, brown-nosing, aside, here's what I understand to be the case, using myself as an example:

No one is going to kick me out of the con or give me trouble if I go in the public areas in something like, say, a BunnyWarez fox kigu, or really any animal/furry themed kigu within reason.  Maybe I'm mistaken, but to me it seems those types of "pajamas" are really more like an open-face fursuit than PJ's.   And they're really cool to wear around con-space, babyfur or not. :)  IMO they fit nicely with the concept of a furry con in general.  Context: The reason I ask this is I saw in an LJ post that one fur mentioned that a statement had been made to the effect that pajamas were banned and then interpolated that such a ban must extend to kigus.  Just asking to clarify since I rather doubt that to be the case.

On the subject of pajamas, one clarification in language is in order.  The term "onesie" has a different meaning in the U.S. and the U.K., from what I've been able to gather.  What I've seen described as a onesie on this forum is what we in the U.S. call a "footed sleeper" or a "sleeper" if no feet.  In the U.S., a "onesie" refers to an article of infant clothing like a T-shirt with snaps on that go around the crotch to cover up a diaper.  Just figured it was worth noting.

I assume from what I've read that the wearing of a sleeper or onsie (U.S. or U.K. meaning) that is excessively "babyish" is discouraged in public.  I have no issue personally either way, and here's a little secret:  A lot of us babyfurs also frown on that in public as well.  Most of us really don't want to weird out other hotel guests as it can cast our community in a bad light as well.  Then again, there are others that don't care about that.  :(

There is no and has never been a ban on Kigus! I'll try to explain the rules in more detail: Kigus (as long as you wear something underneath ;P) are certainly not a normal attire in a four star hotel lobby, but they are close enough to the topic and they add to the colourful atmosphere. Most important: Normal people can integrate that image in the context of the general con easily. Yes, you might get the occasional funny look and kigus don't have access to the fursuit lounge simply as they do not qualify/require such intense care. But they are NOT banned, not even from public spaces. Onesies however are something we do not want to see in public, as an adult person in a baby stile onesie is (sorry for using this in lack of a different word) outright creepy to a uninvolved person and even most of the attendees.

The very basic rule should solve it all: If your outfit does fit the general context of the con or the theme and it doesn't creep out more than a few soap-box-boys it is fine. It's common sense, really.

Onesies, bibs, pacifiers or other obviously baby-related stuff is definitely not okay in public. Kigus or a decent badge depicting a babyfur-character are fine. Again it's common sense and we have to ask certain badges to be removed (obviously full diapers, offensive content, etc). Important point here though: EF Security does not, has never and will never confiscate badges or other property of anyone unless in duty-of-care! If someone takes a badge away from you and claims to be security, report it to staff immediately. This is theft!

And because that has been asked before: Wearing a diaper NOT visible under your clothing is fine as long as it doesn't smell. Wearing one above your clothing is an absolute no-go in public. (Yes that includes the hotel corridors). Oh and you do NOT have to inform security or seek permission if you have to wear one for medical reasons. We understand that this is a highly sensitive matter and it is nothing of our business! 


That's my main questions.  I will say this.  Some babyfurs are saying they'll boycott EF.. All the best to them, but they don't speak for all of us any more that I do.  I won't be going to EF this year, unfortunately, since it's a LONG trip from New Mexico, and I'm all out of vacation.  It's on my bucket list, though, one of these years, if I can get the time off to do it.

It is regrettable that you can't make it this year! As for the others: We obviously see when people cancel and believe me, this is not a problem. I think once all the rumours and the false information about bans and rules have been clarified things will look quite different even to these few that pondered cancelling. :3
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: kooriki on 11.06.2015, 16:26:50
Eh, No need for a public apology - It's already out in the open that this event and organizers outright don't like babyfurs. It's mentioned in every "apology" line how creeped out the organizers are by onesies, pacifiers, people with teddy bears etc. We get it - You dislike them and don't want them around, but won't (and can't) stop people from doing whatever they want in their own rooms. It's not worth effort discussing why a dog collar isn't fetish attire and why a bib is - Whoever makes the con makes the rules. I do wish however that the organizers would stop apologizing because they keep using these apologies as a way to sneak in more and more ways to insult babyfurs.

Thanks to all the volunteers who put in their time to help organize these massive events. They put in tons of effort to make these events as fun and smooth as possible for everyone all without any pay. And sadly in the PR dept you get what you pay for.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 11.06.2015, 17:25:04
You [...] won't (and can't) stop people from doing whatever they want in their own rooms.

And to make that perfectly clear: We don't intend to - with the exception of complaints, of course.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Fineas on 11.06.2015, 17:38:58
Eh, No need for a public apology

Ehm... Ok nice.

- It's already out in the open that this event and organizers outright don't like babyfurs. It's mentioned in every "apology" line how creeped out the organizers are by onesies, pacifiers, people with teddy bears etc. We get it - You dislike them and don't want them around,...

That is simply untrue. I can not speak for the whole staff, but our stance which we do all support is that everyone that identifies with the furry fandom is wholly welcome. Even if you do not call yourself furry. As long as you behave to the rules that where set to protect your from harm and at large to protect the host from receiving publicity damage, everyone is welcome.

...but won't (and can't) stop people from doing whatever they want in their own rooms.

Which is also untrue because:
1) EF will permit you to do anything you like in your room, as long as

2a) You do not break the law.
2b) As you do not cause harm to hotel property or break other hotel house rules.
2c) Cause harm to other attendees.
(EF security will not check every room, hotel house keeping however will and will notify the hotel and in a lot of cases notify EF about it)

It's not worth effort discussing why a dog collar isn't fetish attire and why a bib is - Whoever makes the con makes the rules. I do wish however that the organizers would stop apologizing because they keep using these apologies as a way to sneak in more and more ways to insult babyfurs.

Sorry, but I miss the reasoning in that. Why does apologizing for the social media mistake insult babyfurs?
The thing I see happening is that every-single-thing is put under a magnifying glass, taken apart, blown out of proportions and fed to the discussion at large.

Yesterday evening someone suddenly accused EF of hating American attendees. Completely ignoring that Uncle Kage and 2 go out of their way to come back each year and leave great comments about EF.

http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Eurofurence#Quotes_and_trivia (http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Eurofurence#Quotes_and_trivia)

If I'm not mistaking Sir Conway is still befriended by Andre, the German barkeeper from Suhl where EF previously had it's convention.

Just look at this hearth warming reunion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE01WOiggmg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE01WOiggmg)

Thanks to all the volunteers who put in their time to help organize these massive events. They put in tons of effort to make these events as fun and smooth as possible for everyone all without any pay.

Thank you very much.

And sadly in the PR dept you get what you pay for.

I feel sorry you feel that way, but I guess that can not be helped.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ralphie Raccoon on 11.06.2015, 18:50:00
So, just to make this clear, inferring from what Dhary has said, the answer to those questions that I asked Cheetah that he didn't answer, is NO to all of them. Which is fine. I'll tell my babyfur friends that. Some of them might not like it, but hey, that's the rules.

As Dhary said, it might be an official guideline next year, which I think would be helpful.

I would say one more thing, and before I say it, I would like to clarify that I do not wish to understate or denigrate the 1000's of hours that volunteers put in to CFz, EF and the many other conventions around the world. You guys do a fantastic job. However, I don't think the argument that "A voluntary organisation can't be held to the same standards as a commercial one" when it comes to professional conduct during PR holds water. If I was a volunteer for the Red Cross, or MSF, and I did something negative while representing the organisation (so the organisation's twitter feed, not my private feed), I would be rightly called out on it, same as a commercial company. It doesn't matter if I'm being paid or not, if I'm representing an organisation I am held to the same professional standards.

But from what I understand, EF has already made a public apology and personal apologies to those who were initially affected. Which I think is probably what most other organisations would do anyway (with also perhaps some small compensation, but I can appreciate that might want to be withheld from some considering their response was just as bad, if not worse).

So in summary, I don't think you can expect to be held less accountable just because you are volunteers, but for the most part your response is probably what you would expect from any organisation, commercial or voluntary.  

Edit: I just had a thought. It might be worth putting up the official complaints procedure on the main website, to make it more visible. Some of the more aggressive responses may have been because some furs didn't know that such a procedure existed, and saw such responses as the only way of recompense.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Eisfuchs on 11.06.2015, 20:41:04
Edit: I just had a thought. It might be worth putting up the official complaints procedure on the main website, to make it more visible. Some of the more aggressive responses may have been because some furs didn't know that such a procedure existed, and saw such responses as the only way of recompense.
Highly doubtful. Stomping your foot on public "social" media is much more popular than actually filing a constructive complaint.

Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ghostbear on 11.06.2015, 20:54:38
There is no and has never been a ban on Kigus! I'll try to explain the rules in more detail: Kigus (as long as you wear something underneath ;P) are certainly not a normal attire in a four star hotel lobby, but they are close enough to the topic and they add to the colourful atmosphere. Most important: Normal people can integrate that image in the context of the general con easily. Yes, you might get the occasional funny look and kigus don't have access to the fursuit lounge simply as they do not qualify/require such intense care. But they are NOT banned, not even from public spaces. Onesies however are something we do not want to see in public, as an adult person in a baby stile onesie is (sorry for using this in lack of a different word) outright creepy to a uninvolved person and even most of the attendees.

The very basic rule should solve it all: If your outfit does fit the general context of the con or the theme and it doesn't creep out more than a few soap-box-boys it is fine. It's common sense, really.

Onesies, bibs, pacifiers or other obviously baby-related stuff is definitely not okay in public. Kigus or a decent badge depicting a babyfur-character are fine. Again it's common sense and we have to ask certain badges to be removed (obviously full diapers, offensive content, etc). Important point here though: EF Security does not, has never and will never confiscate badges or other property of anyone unless in duty-of-care! If someone takes a badge away from you and claims to be security, report it to staff immediately. This is theft!

And because that has been asked before: Wearing a diaper NOT visible under your clothing is fine as long as it doesn't smell. Wearing one above your clothing is an absolute no-go in public. (Yes that includes the hotel corridors). Oh and you do NOT have to inform security or seek permission if you have to wear one for medical reasons. We understand that this is a highly sensitive matter and it is nothing of our business!
Thank you for clearing this up, Dhary. Of course I can only speak for myself, but as a cub I'm actually pretty fine with that.
I deliberately stayed out of that ruckus and fuss that happened during the last couple of days (in fact I just ducked and ran for cover once insults started flying and refused to come out of my pillow fort bomb shelter for a few days o.o') and decided to ask on a later point of time, when things would have calmed down again and everybody was a bit less aggravated. But seeing you now answering my unspoken questions, thank you.
It's pretty much how I, as a cub, would have behaved anyway, even with more liberal rules.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Dhary Montecore on 11.06.2015, 22:32:48
As Dhary said, it might be an official guideline next year, which I think would be helpful.

Not next year. THIS year. Attendees ask, we deliver. :3
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: VulpesRex on 14.06.2015, 00:07:33
During both this incident and the incident around EF's refusal to refund a membership for a dealer in January, several members of the EF staff made comments on their (yes, personal, but very much public and identified as EF staff) Twitter accounts to leave the impression that Americans are unwelcome at Eurofurence. This includes one of the members of the EF Board of Directors.

Do the other members of the Board share this anti-American sentiment? Could this be clarified? I have seen that American visitors to EF are no insignificant number, based on the nosecount page.

This American attendee (EF 10) and Staff Member (EF 20) has never been made to feel unwelcome at Eurofurence.



   As an American attendee of the last 6 EFs - one who sn't a staff member, or a volunteer, or has any other association with EF where any of the staff might treat me differently than they would any other attendee - I heartily concur with Giza, and state that I have NEVER been made to feel unwelcome at EF, either by staff, by other attendees, or by the hotels which have hosted the event.

   And this covers ALL the people of various european nationalities whom I have had the pleasure of encountering and the privilege of meeting at EuroFURence, NOT just the Germans.

   ...And all of the other American attendees who have attended - in many cases, over multiple years - and with whom I have spoken, have agreed with me.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Zefiro on 15.06.2015, 00:52:35
If I was a volunteer for the Red Cross, or MSF, and I did something negative while representing the organisation (so the organisation's twitter feed, not my private feed), I would be rightly called out on it, same as a commercial company.
Which is why the official Twitter account has apologized and is under closer internal scrutinity now.
However one account which has been cited quite often (apart from Cheetah's) is the private (previously unprotected) account of doco. Which does not, nor has ever claimed to speak for Eurofurence.

*purrrr*
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Macrowolf on 19.06.2015, 23:33:19
The issue isn't so much the convention policies as it is the bullying culture that apparently exists in Eurofurence.  For all of the good things that I've heard of this convention from Kage, 2, and others about how friendly the Germans are, I'm not seeing that here.  Doco, Cheetah and whoever made the tweets on the official account will ultimately be judged on their conduct by the furry fandom, for better or worse.  However for an organization to make an emphatic endorsement of bullying is never on anywhere, but especially in the furry fandom given it's history.  An unequivocal apology on behalf of all of those involved with the organization, volunteer or chairman, was what was needed here.  Instead, what we see is a statement of regret followed by a blaming the victim rant and endorsement of the bullying by staff and volunteers.  Now serious doubts are raised over the way the convention is run, and the culture instilled in it by the leadership.  The fact that Cheetah is having to moderate posts from his own staff in this thread is added cause for concern.  If you were provoked, it is fine to think that and possibly share it with close friends you trust.  However the face of the con you put to the community has to be one of the highest standards that rejects any bullying, no matter who started it or how heated it got.  Kage and the AC staff understand this very well, but apparently Cheetah does not.

You are measuring a volunteer organisation by commercial standards. This does not work. And yes, I am talking about the agitators. Those that sparked the entire drama by very personal and insulting tweets. I do NOT talk about the babyfur community or those (more than 80%) of the participants of the conversations that argued in a calm and respectable manner. This entire escalation is based on a few known agitators and the very emotional and unprofessional response they got. Our response is not to be excused but so are the original tweets.

Again, we are a volunteer organisation, we are NOT paid, we pay ourselves. So please do not try to force a convention organisation into a commercial companies frame.

Let's take a look at this from another all volunteer organization, SoFurry.  There was a somewhat similar incident a few years ago where a member was insulted by an admin charged with helping users though any site issues.  This admin had their credentials stripped.  Now SoFurry is a site that nobody pays for unless they either advertise or donate, yet it is run with highest standards.  Everyone pays however to go to Eurofurence, both to the convention itself and in travel expenses that can amount to thousands of Euros depending on where they are coming from.  While we are mindful of the fact that it's all volunteers and will try to give you a break if some things don't go right at the con, it is within the rights of the community to expect higher standards in terms of your conduct.  Yes, that means commercial standards.

I'm reminded of the old saying if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.  You won't be judged when things are right, but rather when things go wrong and how you handle them.  Handle them with high standards and that's when attendees will forgive the things that don't work out, and will even be motivated to give back to the convention, sponsor, possibly volunteer.  Handle them poorly, and that's when perspective attendees stay away.  If you all are happy at 2000 attendees, keep doing what you're doing, because you're putting off anyone else from going.  If however you want the con to keep growing, there needs to be a major rethink of that statement and how all of the staff are presenting themselves to the fandom.

And to Cheetah, locking your account doesn't shield you from harassment and in fact only makes you look worse.  The only things we have to go by are these "spun" accounts of what was said which make you look very bad indeed.  If what you are claiming is indeed true, that you were horribly provoked into making those tweets, unlock your account.  If doco has any interest in redeeming himself, he should do likewise.  Let the community see the conversation in it's entirety and then decide.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: o'wolf on 20.06.2015, 00:35:37
Moderator's hat off

Doco, Cheetah and whoever made the tweets on the official account

For the record, Doco does not have access to the official Eurofurence account and never had.

Quote
However for an organization to make an emphatic endorsement of bullying

We don't endorse bullying.

Quote
An unequivocal apology on behalf of all of those involved with the organization, volunteer or chairman, was what
was needed here.

Out of curiosity, what makes you think that you are entitled to demand such a thing?

Quote
Instead, what we see is a statement of regret followed by a blaming the victim rant and endorsement of the bullying by staff and volunteers.

That's probably what you saw, but certainly not anyone here intended to communicate. What exactly do you interpret as an "endorsement of bullying"?

Quote
The fact that Cheetah is having to moderate posts from his own staff in this thread

I'm moderating this thread, not Cheetah.

Quote
Let's take a look at this from another all volunteer organization, SoFurry.

I'm sorry, that's a strawman argument. How SoFurry runs their site is entirely their business.

Quote
Everyone pays however to go to Eurofurence, both to the convention itself and in travel expenses that can amount to thousands of Euros depending on where they are coming from.

Have you? Personally? I mean, if not, how is that your concern?

Quote
It is within the rights of the community to expect higher standards in terms of your conduct.  Yes, that means commercial standards.

It's within the rights of the (prospective) attendees. And I think your are mixing up commercial and moral standards. Or rather: you are talking about etiquette. But what etiquette anyway? German? British? French? Dutch? Danish? American? And if American: West Coast, East Coast, Midwest, Southern? If West Coast: Bay Area, LA, CA Central Valley, Portland, Seattle? You know, there are differences in culture, and Continental European culture is way more direct ("brutally honest") than American culture. Given that the selectively quoted personal Twitter statements that caused the uproar were between Germans and Scandinavians, which are both known for their culture of, um, very direct communication, I have the impression that we are dealing a cultural misunderstanding here. At least to a certain degree.

Granted, the commercial standards you are talking about come into play with publicly traded American or British companies, the term is "business ethics". Which are rather strict and enforced by the respective authorities (the SEC in America). In my opinion, a lot of that is quite some nonsense. But in the end, it is part of a contract between a company and their shareholders. Privately held companies can pretty much do what they want, within the limits of the law, of course. Eurofurence e.V., as the legal entity responsible the convention, is governed by its members, currently fourty-something volunteers that are mostly active and former members of staff. It is a not-for-profit organization. The policies are set at the yearly general meeting of the organization in a democratic way. Whether we do or do not adopt some kind of business or community ethics guidelines is up to the attendees of the general meeting. We plan to discuss that topic at the next meeting, indeed.

Quote
If you all are happy at 2000 attendees, keep doing what you're doing, because you're putting off anyone else from going.

"Anyone"? You know, I can perfectly understand if the whole issue gives you the impression that Eurofurence is not an event you'd enjoy. Which is a pity, as Eurofurence is a great event and a lot of fun, regardless the occasional conflict that may arise online.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 20.06.2015, 10:52:40
The issue isn't so much the convention policies as it is the bullying culture that apparently exists in Eurofurence.

I'm sorry we made the wrong impression. But I can assure you that we do not have a "bullying culture" in Eurofurence. The discussion we're having here is really about half a dozen tweets and pretending that's all we are. And as I said earlier, the amount of hate speech that we got in return made our staff's mistakes (including mine) pale in comparison.

Let's take everything else we do back into consideration. All the good stuff which we have been doing for over 20 years, and still do. Do you know of any concrete examples of bullying that actually happened, in real life? And by that I don't mean any anecdotal disagreement between security and any individual, but, actual bullying. The thing you claim?

The feedback forum goes back to 2007 or so, and as you can see, people are not reluctant when it comes to criticism, and we're quite open to receiving it and discussing it in public. If we had a "bullying culture" that should be quite obvious from the feedback we're getting, shouldn't it?

Believe me, I've gotten a lot of criticism lately, and I'm learning from it. But a couple of personal tweets between individuals isn't all that defines Eurofurence, and I'm not going to pretend it is for the sake of a made-up debate.

Quote
And to Cheetah, locking your account doesn't shield you from harassment and in fact only makes you look worse.

That was to stop Sibe's cronies *actually* bullying me, and I'm not talking about a handfull of misguided venting, but a week of one-mention-per-second hammering and posting "parody" pictures of me in diapers and in nazi uniform. Let's not ignore that fact.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: kooriki on 21.06.2015, 23:42:26
Such a shame the way this all played out. I can agree that wearing diapers in the open would be a good line to draw, but the staff have decided to go the whole way and ban ALL clothing/gear/teddybears/some art - Anything that could be taken as ageplay. Babyfurs need to understand that Eurofurence is a more socially conservative furry con. The brutal comments said against ageplayers in heat by a few staffers/higher ups should not be taken as official statements from Eurofurence, just as the over-the-top statements from one or two babyfurs do not represent the larger babyfur/ageplay community. (And I suspect there have been agent provocateurs on both sides.)

Lets be clear - everyone knows babyfurs aren't walking around messing their diapers openly at cons. I've never met a person that had first-hand witnessed that. And if anyone does it is their responsibility to call that person out (Especially if you're a babyfur yourself.) Is ageplay a fetish? Not to most ageplayers, but to those on the outside its easy to see why they think that - The general public thinks of furries and the fandom as a strange fetish as well. Eurofurence gets to ban whatever they want for their event, they have singled out ageplay and BDSM, so leave the teddy bears and leashes at home for this one.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Eisfuchs on 22.06.2015, 14:38:57
Let's not forget that the rules that seem to offend so many have been in place for 5 years now. Nobody seemed to have an issue with them for all that time. So Eurofurence did not "decide to ban" anything for years.

And I'm pretty sure bringing a teddy bear is no problem at all.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: kooriki on 22.06.2015, 19:43:04
"All costumes and accessories related to ageplay" - That means teddy bears, pacifiers, dungaroos, blankies are (probably?) included as well as they are a pretty common item brought to ageplay events.

Its fine that the rule has been in place for 5 years. I've never been to an EF so I never cared to look into this specific cons rules before. Now that it's gotten more popular, people are noticing this con has a stricter/more conservative set of rules. How long they have been in place doesn't matter, people still have the right to complain (or cheer) the rules.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ghostbear on 22.06.2015, 20:15:53
Last page Dhary, as the head of security, pretty much defined what works and what not. And while it's not perfect and some things could maybe be discussed at a later point in time, for the moment, the rules ain't actually so bad.
Discussed later in a constructive way, after things have calmed down a bit and after people stopped pouring kerosene into a smoldering fire that just went out, but is still hot enough to light up again.
Clean badges and room signs are not a problem. Plushies have always been a big part on the con. Kigus are allowed too, as are stealthily worn diapers under normal clothing, as long as they don't smell. And I don't think anybody would hassle you over a pair of dungarees.
Honestly, I think of worse rules. And as I said, maybe some other things can be worked out later.

And yes, I'm a cub/babyfur myself. o.o'
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 22.06.2015, 21:05:03
"All costumes and accessories related to ageplay"

Only *if* they are a "blatant" display of fetish wear, as specified in the paragraph above. As I said earlier, it depends heavily on context - there's just no easier way to phrase it without making it less clear that it is right now. The intention is: We don't want people dressed as adult babies running around - the same way we don't want people dressed as leather puppies or with inflatable gimpsuits in public. It's just not that kind of party. That doesn't mean you can't drop a hint at your orientation. You totally can. Just stay classy. People do it all the time.

(We especially put an exception at the bottom, btw. If you manage to do in a way that is acceptable, non-offensive or even good looking, we're totally happy with pretty much everything, regardless how it could theoretically be categorized. Take it as a challenge if you will.)
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Eisfuchs on 22.06.2015, 21:09:21
I've never been to an EF[...]
That's all I need to know.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: kooriki on 22.06.2015, 21:29:48
Ah Ghostbear - You say dungarees and teddybears are ok but I don't get that from the official rules and general discussion over the last few weeks. Even aside from that, with the whole ageplay issue being a hot debate this last few weeks I wouldn't want to risk attending this one as a known babyfur. Once EF21 is done we can see how welcomed the cubs that did attend felt it went; Both from staff and regular attendees. The rules might not be different for this EF, but the discussion certainly has been. To be honest it's a pretty big trek to risk being confined to a couple of cub-friendly hotel rooms. Saying that, if you've gone as a cub and had no problems in previous years, that says a lot..!

Cheetah: Good to hear. I think you're talking about 'the bottom line' blurb at the bottom of that page? What you wrote here is MUCH clearer than whats on the rules page. Maybe next year they can have you write that page, you're articulate :)

Eisfuchs: :(
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Cheetah on 22.06.2015, 21:33:53
I wouldn't want to risk attending this one as a known babyfur.

Some of our staff are babyfurs. And they never had any problem with our rules of conduct, or fellow staff members.

Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Ghostbear on 22.06.2015, 21:36:20
Kooriki, please take a look at the group pictures (and other pictures) from the last couple of years if you find the time. And then try counting the amount of plushies being carried around on the con. Plushies are such a big part of the furry fandom, they are not counted as "age play" items.
And for a pair of overalls/dungarees ... they are normal pants you can buy in stores. So I see no problems there as well.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: meo on 23.06.2015, 12:05:50
Ok, some cents from someone who was last year at the Con.
At first lets face it, EF ist a BIG convention where lots of cultures comes together. It happens that someone trends to think about some items in another way as some other person. The Rules are written in a style so everyone can have fun (in my opinion). If you want to wear a playsuit do it at your room. There is no Bulling by that words! See it from the perspective of someone who is not into your fetish, Kink or whatever you call it.

Everyone can pick a part of the rule he doesn't like and mock the whole day, but ask yourself if that rule makes a relevant impact for you in having fun at a convention?
Is a pacifier worn in a public place an Item you need so bad to have fun? Aren't the human interactions at a convention that what makes the fun?

Think about it.

The moral standards of someone can prevent that he talks to you and you maybe couldn't be friends. I wouldn't want that to happen. I want to have Fun and make friends! I don't want a fetish to hinder me from going to a con.
Yes, you might say "Ageplay is not a Fetish" but ask yourself if you can live without it for the hours your in public? That's all the rules are asking you for!
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: kooriki on 23.06.2015, 21:19:13
Quote
If you want to wear a playsuit do it at your room.

Thankfully the staff have clarified this and said that if its done tactfully and not overt then it's ok to wear what you like. Lets be honest, EF is a long way to travel to have to hide in a hotel room!

Quote
See it from the perspective of someone who is not into your fetish, Kink or whatever you call it.

Closer to LARPing or a subculture/fandom, but call it what you like.

Quote
The moral standards of someone can prevent that he talks to you and you maybe couldn't be friends.

If my hobby is so upsetting to someones morals then they wouldn't make a good friend anyway. We all can choose who we associate with. I personally avoid smokers for example - I don't like cigarettes stinking up my gear/clothing - yuck!)

Quote
Yes, you might say "Ageplay is not a Fetish" but ask yourself if you can live without it for the hours your in public? That's all the rules are asking you for!

Lets look at it from the other side: Most people think of furries and the fandom as a fetish (Not far from the truth either). Would you be comfortable with a rule "No fursuits or furry accessories in areas the public can access"? Probably not, because we don't care if a couple of fools think the con is an organized fursuit orgy or are creeped out by dancing forest critters.

Anyways, Cheetah has been kind enough to (re)re-articulate EF's official policy on the issue which is good enough for me...!
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: o'wolf on 23.06.2015, 23:53:41
EF is a long way to travel to have to hide in a hotel room!

Have you ever seriously considered attending Eurofurence? Or is it some case of "I disagree with the policy of an event on a different continent that I won't be able to attend any time soon?" What is your motivation to discuss this here?

Quote
Closer to LARPing or a subculture/fandom, but call it what you like.

Now that's peculiar, because further down you write:

Quote
Lets look at it from the other side: Most people think of furries and the fandom as a fetish (Not far from the truth either).

So you are trying to tell us here that age play is just some entirely non-sexual role play but furry and the fandom at large are "a fetish". Sorry, that doesn't fly.

And by the way, as the press liaison I talk a lot to people outside the fandom and listen to how they perceive us. From my experience your impression that "most people" think of furry being a fetish is wrong. And before you play that "maybe in Europe" card: I've been travelling through the Americas a lot, it's not much different there.

Any inside perspective is distorted. This is valid for any social group. If you take a point of view from the outside, things are often much different. First of all, it's not completely black and white. There are large regional and cultural differences when it comes to what is still acceptable or not. However, fursuiters rarely raise an eyebrow anywhere. Open age play, on the other hand, is generally considered unacceptable in Germany. Our venues certainly do not want to be mentioned in a front page article picturing an Adult Baby in the tabloids. Which WILL happen if they find someone running around in such an outfit. And neither do I want to read my name along this, by the way. Even if it were my kink (which it isn't.)

Quote
If my hobby is so upsetting to someones morals then they wouldn't make a good friend anyway. We all can choose who we associate with.

So, as you obviously don't agree with our morals (or even reasoning) and don't want to associate with us, why are you debating?

Quote
we don't care if a couple of fools think the con is an organized fursuit orgy or are creeped out by dancing forest critters.

The dancing forest critters are one of the main aspects of the event, and nobody has a problem with it. We'd have a problem if our public image were that of a four day long orgy (regardless the "themeing"), as we are not that kind of event. It would require a completely different kind of venue, anyway. And attract a different audience, of course.
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: kooriki on 24.06.2015, 03:13:56
Quote
Have you ever seriously considered attending Eurofurence?

Im going to be in London around that time and flights are pretty cheap. I've since made other plans so I'm not going to EF this year (Nothing to do with the recent twitter drama)

Quote
So you are trying to tell us here that age play is just some entirely non-sexual role play but furry and the fandom at large are "a fetish". Sorry, that doesn't fly.

I was saying ageplay is like LARPing/a subculture/fandom, similar to the furry fandom. The PUBLIC perception of the both of these are that they are fetishes. (IE: It's inaccurate to equate ageplay with diaper fetishism similar to how it is inaccurate to equate the fandom with yiff.) I'm sorry if you misinterpreted what I was saying.


Quote
And by the way, as the press liaison I talk a lot to people outside the fandom and listen to how they perceive us.

When you talk with people outside the fandom, do they know beforehand that you are a furry and supporter? That greatly influences their response. I'm a very private fur; No one but my S.O. knows. Coincidentally I work with a very 'out' furry. People around the office (who know what a furry is) thinks he's into kinky costumed animal sex. (Truth be told he's just very socially awkward.) Its not worth correcting them, but its noteworthy.

Quote
Our venues certainly do not want to be mentioned in a front page article picturing an Adult Baby in the tabloids.

Yes, that has been mentioned many times and is accepted. This translates to: If ageplay is an integral part of your fursona/costume/fun, EF is probably not the furcon for you. If you still wish to attend you are welcome to wear your costume privately in your room.

Quote
So, as you obviously don't agree with our morals (or even reasoning) and don't want to associate with us

Im a furry so I totally want to associate with other furries! Im going to assume that you, especially as a press liaison, aren't stating that ageplayers are morally objectionable? It sounds like that is what you are suggesting but I'm going to assume it's a language barrier. Truth be told I can befriend anyone! If a friend looks down their nose at me and is 'morally opposed' to my personal interests that would make for a difficult friendship. Why go if you're not welcome? Its about the attitude of the crowd. Policy is a different matter. Again, Cheetah has cleared this up - Babyfurs are totally welcome as long as they keep the ageplay low-key/hidden.

Quote
We'd have a problem if our public image were that of a four day long orgy
Quote
It would require a completely different kind of venue, anyway.

Hahaha, awesome..!
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Zefiro on 24.06.2015, 08:44:52
If ageplay is an integral part of your fursona/costume/fun
So this is what this is about?
If I understand you correctly, if you can't "ageplay" - showing yourself in a way obviously regarded as (adult) baby by whichever means - then you're not having any fun, at all?
As opposed to it being one of many different activities you could do, each bringing joy - without this one, nothing is worth it?

I'm asking because this is what is puzzling me the most. I've my own kinks (also mentioned in the RoC, btw), but they are "add-ons". Sure, integral part of who I am and what I enjoy, but I can easily enjoy other parts of the fandom without them, and thus keep them to the room or to 'other conventions with fitting venues'. I'm sure even most fursuiters would be fine with a no-fursuit-area/time and still enjoy fandom activities (e.g. some small regulars' tables actually forbid wearing furry identification objects).


*purrrrrr*
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Klaatu on 29.06.2015, 04:04:09
I can fully agree with Zefiro here.

And btw.: I'm still wondering why so many people think that EF is a convention (or an event in general) to display their fetishes. I mean...are you also wearing that stuff at your workplace or in public? I'm sure you don't. And why? Because it's inappropriate and easily causing problems. So why are you guys doing that at EF then? Because it's your free time/holidays and you're among people of your kind (furries)?
I think that many people forget (or don't realize) that EF is a public place as well and that it's being held at a location which is a 4* superior hotel with a kinda good reputation.

If you're showing off your fetishes by wearing inappropriate clothing and accessoires at a convention that clearly distances itself from that section (for the simple reason to be allowed to host a event like that at that place) you don't only negatively affect the general repution of our fandom, but also (more importantly!) our good relations with the hotel. THAT is the most important thing. If the hotel staff and direction feels uncomfortable with it (even if it's no blatantly sexual stuff), there's no need to discuss these things at all, it has to be accepted by every attendee that's going to visit that convention! And the job of the EF-team, the security and the public / press relations department is to make sure that the hotel feels comfortable with us to ensure that they wanna have us coming back next year again (and the years after). And every attendee should have that same purpose as well (if EF is important for you).

I sometimes have the impression that some attendees simply don't care how they're coming across in public or in front of the hotel personnel. But this is not how it works. There have to be rules to follow and if there are rules and you're not agreeing with them, then this might not be the right event for you. With the registration for a con, you automatically subscribe these rules. And still, a lot of people ignore these rules at the con, what causes more strain for the security. Or the sec doesn't see it at all (because they can't have their eyes everywhere), but others do, who then feel annoyed by it. Or the media finds exactly what they're searching for. Do we all want that?

EF is a convention about our furry culture with the main focus on art, music, entertainment, the community and many other cultural aspects. It's not a fetish convention and will never be. That's why there are no official fetish-panels/events in the schedule as well. Everything that happens at the hotel rooms happens at the privat space of the respective persons and is NOT part of the convention. And therefore it's ok, as long as you do not offend against the hotel rules (like destroying things, etc.). No one cares what you're doing at your room and no one considers it as part of the convention, because it's your private space. But please, as soon as you leave your private room, don't forget that you're back to the actual convention space again where clear rules are valid.

No one forbids you to be who you are and to live how you like to. But isn't it so difficult to just respect the rules of the con/hotel (even if you personally don't fully agree with them) and to be a bit more decent? It's only a matter of decency, nothing more than that. If you still think that these rules are not fair or you're feeling "offended" by them, then you should maybe take into consideration that EF might not be the right con for you and that you should maybe better visit conventions that are having the main focus on sexual things and are being held in special locations where you don't have to hide something you can't hide. :)


That are just my personal thoughts on this topic. I'm not part of a department that has something to do with it, so you actually don't have to care about what I've written here.
I just kindly recommend to read my thoughts on that and to think about it. Thanks. :)



Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: kooriki on 30.06.2015, 05:56:21
Thanks for the reply Klaatu, my questions/concerns were already answered by Cheetah.

-K
Title: Re: Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
Post by: Klaatu on 30.06.2015, 16:01:12
@kooriki:

You're welcome.
But my reply wasn't only related to your personal concerns and also not related to babyfurs only, but every kind of "fetish-group" in general. ;)
Fortunately Dhary already posted the great guideline to clothing and decency (https://forum.eurofurence.org/index.php/topic,6268.0.html), that everybody should definitely read. :3