So, let's talk about this here, since I made a flippant comment elsewhere

[ericcoleman]

This started with a flippant comment on philady's LJ, but it seems to have escalated, so I feel I should discuss it.

As some of you know, I do not attend Convergence



philady posted a poll here that said

Are you getting stoked for CONvergence?
Yes.
HELL YES!
I'm not going. I'm lame.

Me being me, I said

"I'm not going, the people who run Convergence are lame"

433 took exception to this, and for good reason.

So, the reason for my problems with Convergence go back several years. When I was trying to do the 12 cons in 12 months I contacted them to see about playing.

I have one rule when it comes to cons, if I contact a con about playing, it is my responsibility to pay for my badge. If they comp me, that's a good thing, but that is up to them.

If they contact me, they are contacting me as a pro. I don't make much of my living playing music, but I certainly do at least a little. Unless you are a tiny tiny con, you comp the pros. Period.

The next year I was contacted, please come play at the con. Cool. I had a good time the year before. Oh, if you want to do anything else, you have to buy a badge.

I said that I can't do that, you're asking me to drive there and play a show for no recompense except hopefully selling some CDs, I can't. I was nice about it, I do try to treat any venue I play with a good degree of professionalism, then the guy got all defensive and weird and went off on a rant about how it is not "pay to play" since I would get into my own show free.

I live 200+ miles away from the Twin Cities. At that point driving there and back cost me around 60 bucks. This guy asked me to play a free show that is costing me money, and tells me that it is not "pay to play". If I was local I suppose that I might have had a different reaction. I'm not.

The way I see this is like ... well ... if I was playing at a club, and they said, "sure, you can be on the stage, but if you want to go anywhere else you have to pay the cover charge".

It's a terrible way to treat people who you invite in to perform for and entertain YOUR guests. We are part of the show. You should show us respect. I think I may have had a different reaction if not for the "it's not pay to play thing". It would have just been left there, and I wouldn't go to Convergence. But the guy was an ass.

I know a little about the history of TC cons, and I know that there was a point where too many people got comped, things got out of control. But there is a point at which it is just silly.

So there is why I made my little flippant comment 433. It wasn't the best way to handle it, but maybe this will do some good. I have talked to other folks involved with Convergence about this, but nothing has come of it. It's a big con. You can do what you want because of that. But it does not serve the con well to treat people badly.

Comments

[gundo.livejournal.com]

I agree with Eric completely on this one...I've never asked to be comped at Cap, but that's because even though it's turned into a regular gig on Thursday nights, I'm the one who contacts and asks if we're going to do it again this year. Since I make first contact, I don't ask about comping.

However, I've/we've been asked to play other cons, and in those cases I've also been comped.

[pheltzer.livejournal.com]

True but depending on what else you do at the con for the con... they should comp you anyway. At least that's my opinion. Because really... if we don't have people giving up their time to put on shows/panels/events etc. then we're going to have a hard time justifying the membership fees to everyone else. Obviously each con has to decide where this line is for themselves.

[gundo.livejournal.com]

Exactly...and there are other commitments that may not be visible to the con. It seems to me that it's an ongoing conversation.

For me it would seem to hinge on how available the musician is outside of the show...if they are committed to the con in general, and available for panels and such, then yeah, I'd want to comp. If they are doing a hit-and-run...questionable.

[born-to-me.livejournal.com]

Absolutely - they *should* but I don't think that the performer should *insist* if s/he was the one to contact the con in the first place. To me it's wrong to go asking and then *expect* the freebies.

[erikvolson.livejournal.com]

You just hit the problem. The reason we called it a membership was that *everyone* used to help out. The answer wasn't "they need to restock the consuite," the answer was "Hey, we're out of coke -- where's the stash, I'll stock it."

We've lost that. Which means, arguably, we should admit this and stop selling memberships and start selling tickets.

I've always been in the "everybody works, everybody pays, and we do reimbursements if the money is okay" camp. But that's because I've always been in the Everyone is a Member camp.

Arguably, everyone should do fanac at a con (however you define such.) The membership money is there because we can't do it on $0. But if you posit that you're either working or watching, it changes things -- and that's the difference between selling memberships, and selling tickets.

Do you charge memberships to someone throwing an open party? Arguably, they're spending vastly more on the con that a con staffer.

There's lot of questions here. I don't know the answers.

I vastly prefer, myself, to pay and, if the money is good, get reimbursed. It just sits better with FIJAGDH and FIAWOL, IMHO.

[pheltzer.livejournal.com]

We've had this discussion several times :) And I'm okay with agreeing to disagree. It's one of the things that I like about Cap... the person in charge of the Con determines what's best for the con that given year. Unless of course the Board makes some sort of ongoing policy changes, which the bylaws make difficult for them to do.

[prettymuchpeggy.livejournal.com]

Interesting. I find that even as a pro I am inclined to help out if I see help is needed. This is not the point that Eric seems to be making. Which is there is a vast difference between being asked to a con as a pro vs. as a fan. Being asked as a pro there are certain obligations that you fill even before you get to the con. Plus the time that you put in at the con itself. As a pro you put in your effort before the con by preparing to be on a panel, or a judge or a performer. At the con as a pro (even if you are enjoying parties) you are at work. Yes, this can be a labor of love and altruistically given.

Most pros/artists understand the value in growing a venue and that there is a time for giving your time for free to help that process. Most pros/artists however define their own cut off points. For instance I used to perform at any venue that would have me. Now, I will not perform at a venue more than once if I do not at least make car fare home. End of story. Have I helped with set up and tear down at these establishments... why, yes. But if the overall cost starts outweighing the benefits, then it is not good for anyone as there can get to be animosity on both sides.

[billroper]

I'm of the opinion that folks who do music programming at a con should be comped according to the rules for the rest of the folks who do programming. A concert is surely a programming item, just as a panel is. I would tend to give more credit toward a comp membership to someone doing a solo workshop or concert than I would to a person who's sitting on a five-person panel, because there's generally more prep time involved.

So I'm less concerned with whether the con asked me or I asked them and more concerned with whether I'm being treated the same as the other people on programming items.

[qnofhrt.livejournal.com]

'm of the opinion that folks who do music programming at a con should be comped according to the rules for the rest of the folks who do programming.

As a programming chair, I would absolutely concur. A concert is a program item and takes more time to prepare for than sitting on a panel. Just like if you are doing a presentation (whether solo or with somebody else) that also takes more time and should count for more. My rule of thumb has been 3 programming items (usually panels) = a badge and concerts/presentations = 2 panels (at least). For authors, an autograph session or a reading also = 1 programming item.

But that's just me. Every con does it their own way and as long as they're consistent, I don't have a problem with that.