I have recently received a few arguments regarding early access from a high-ranking person at EF (Who will stay anonymous unless necessary, to avoid the witch-hunt) and would like to respond to them (I hope said person will correct me if I misrepresent their argument, if I do so - I'm sorry):
"You don't have any arguments against the current system"This splits into two different cases:
1. If people can still get commissions and hard to get items even without sponsoring, then there is no reason that this perk will cause people to super-sponsor in the first place.
2. If people can't get commissions and hard to get items without sponsoring then it's unfair, and they can still get their super-sponsor friends to do it for them instead of super sponsor themselves (The incentive behind super sponsoring is helping the con first, not buying the perks. Reward the ones that give extra, don't penalize the ones who don't).
"You even removed your poll because the results didn't suit you"The strawpoll was removed because it was too easy to cheat on, the results on
Telegram suited me well before it was removed by the poster.
There isn't a significant amount of attendees supporting your claim.There isn't also a significant amount that oppose it, post an official poll or after con feedback form if you want any validity to this argument.
Your arguments aren't controllable, they are simply envy or blind idealism.Calling it envy is flat out ad hominem and disrespectful, especially when it comes from an official. Not only that but even if it was true (It isn't, I hope I don't need to show my paycheck or something), I could still get a super-sponsor friend to get me stuff. Even if this wasn't an option and it was flat out envy - it doesn't make the arguments weaker. Attack the arguments, not the one who presents them or his motives.
Blind idealism? How can you assert that, maybe it's realistic? If you want to assert that, get us to fill an official feedback form.
-------
I don't understand the personal attacks regarding this topic or any other feedback. The reason I put time and effort to write this, answer other people and debate here is to help the con. Isn't the mindset of the con "Maximize the amount of fun people have while sticking to the available budget"? Everything I said is inline with this ideal.