I's nice to see that my initial suggestion to put fursuiters in an early batch had a lot of meaningful responses.
Just to make one thing clear: I'm not concerned with fursuiters per se, it's just a way to start a discussion
. If all fursuiters can leave their suits in a safe room in the hotel while staying and if carrying the stuff to the hotel and back again once is not a problem, then the idea of putting them in an early batch is less urgent. However, even one of the skeptics of this idea did mention putting fursuiters close to elevators and such, which proves that it is of some concern after all.
I suggest we look for rational, social and practical criteria. Look at it as a logistical operation, which it is in many ways. Such problems are hard to solve if everyone fights for his own interest; but solutions can be doable for everyone if some thought is put into it and there is some central coordination.
Some people are concerned with fraud and with criteria. That's a reasonable concern, but I think we're more than a pack of hungry wolves and we can think about the interests of other people than ourselves to some extent. The more reasonable and doable the criteria are, the more people are willing to stick to the rules, even if they have to take a step back personally.
The problem with solutions that need too many details is that this puts too much logistical stress on either the hotel or the con organisation. So criteria have to be simple and are thus not ideal by definition.
A simple criterion is to make an estimate about the weight of your stuff and luggage and how much carrying around is needed. Then it is clear that a comic dealer should get an early room close to the dealer's den. Same for maybe puppeteers and some suits, but not all.
Whatever system we can think of, there will be some amount of fraud. But there are proven counter-measures to prevent fraud; we don't need to reinvent the wheel. The nice thing about weight is that it can be measured by objective standards. Of course, requiring every furry to put his stuff on a balance, like at an airport, would be silly. However, if we really want to have some policing, we can randomly select a small group to check if they told the truth, and put (possibly symbolic) sanctions on abuse. That will inspire the majority not to mess with the system. That is, if people are really that distrustful and need such policies.
But nobody knows if a better system is better indeed until it has been tested. The worst thing we can do is let a crappy and frustrating system continue for the next ten years without trying out at least some alternatives.
