The True History of the MediaWest*Con Early Hotel
Reservation Request Procedure
Those of you who are new to
MediaWest*Con
may not he familiar with the
reasons behind the hotel reservation request system which was
implemented over 20 years ago; as such, we thought the following
history
would bear repeating, especially since online trolls are now trying to
rewrite history with their twisted version of events in an ongoing
effort to misrepresent
MW*C
policies and defame us personally.
Due to experiences in having to share hotel space with a high school
prom and a softball league early on, we learned to book all hotel
function space and to block all* sleeping rooms with preference for
MW*C
members; the best way to avoid conflicts with non-members is
not to have them around. This policy has been in effect since
1982. (*With membership at current levels, however, we do not fill all
guest rooms.)
After the failure of the old hotel to fulfill these contractual
obligations during
MediaWest*Con
11 (1991), we agreed to hold
MediaWest*Con 12
at the Holiday Inn South (where they had been actively
seeking our business for years). The new hotel was more than happy to
have the volume of business
MW*C
represented. Shortly before
MW*C
13,
the hotel decided that they wanted to take room reservation requests
during
MW*C 13
for the following year, so we agreed on a system which
was then noted in the Program Book. The hotel did not get the forms to
us in time to include them in the membership packets; while the forms
were eventually available at both con registration and the hotel
reservation desk, many members remained unaware that advanced
registration requests were possible. Even so, the number of people
taking advantage of this opportunity were far greater than was
anticipated, resulting in long lines Monday morning (complicating the
check-out process). The hotel staff was overwhelmed, receiving
reservation requestsfor the following year in excess of the
available rooms before the end of the con (the hotel now considers
their
taking room reservation requests during the con to be a BAD IDEA).
Understandably, those who were shutout also brought the matter to our
attention, pointing out that this system favored those already staying
in the hosthotel (by general proximity and access to the forms) and
discriminated against those staying in other hotels (proximity and
access to forms), full members who were unable to attend (due to lack
of advance notice), Supporting members (same), and any others who might
later become members. As always, we listened to member input and took
steps to address these concerns.
Unfortunately,
before we had actually determined a policy, much less been able to
announce it, the rumor mill was already at work on nacent online forums
like GEnie, where bizarre versions of the supposed policy were bandied
about based on rumor, or just fabricated.
Of course, some had
already made up their minds to oppose the hotel procedure, despite not
knowing what the actual procedure would be.
From a troll who was never even a
MW*C
member, to a fellow troll:
Category
23, Topic 27 Message 249 Sat Apr 30,
1994 [Randy] at 23:45 EDT
:
MaryB: Waiting for
it to
appear in writing won't lessen our reaction any, will it? :)
From the fellow troll:
Category
23, Topic 27 Message
253 Sun May 01,
1994 [MaryB] at 11:49 EDT:
I'm
really sorry but the details of how the [hotel procedure]
will be run
are completely irrelevant. The only thing that any of us (the paying
members) are concerned about it is how the _end results_ will affect us.
And later:
Category:
Conventions: Central Topic: MediaWest*Con 14 Msg
No: 176 [MaryB] Posted: 06/07/94, 08:45PM:
I'm supposed to
care about whether other people get a hotel room? Why, pray tell?
The
main objection from these trolls seemed to be based in a selfish
disregard for fairness, and the belief that they were somehow entitled
to preferential treatment at the expense of all others. One
in
particular simply had an axe to grind, as we had already found he had
been making false accusations against a staff member of as well as
making other
misrepresentations.
Of course, not everyone on GEnie was a
troll. Some were reasonable, or at least willing to wait to
see
what the actual procedure would be, and some even defended us.
When
we became aware of the nonsence on GEnie, we agreed to do a Real Time
Chat to dispell the false rumors. Moderators
were obviously aware of the tenor of the previous "discussions" and
issued this warning:
Category
23, Topic 27 Message
266 Mon May
02, 1994 at 16:22 EDT:
I
have suggested an RTC with the folks who run MW*C here on
GEnie.
Do you think this is a good idea for you folks? I know I'd like to hear
about plans for the coming convention. If it's going to turn into an
attack session, however, I'm not going to allow it.
Unfotunately,
while the live chat undermined the false "straw man" the trolls had
been attacking, it didn't deter them from continuing to attack and
defame us personally.
It got so bad that they were warned by moderators to stop the
defamation:
Category:
Conventions: Central Topic: MediaWest*Con 14 Msg
No: 266 Posted: 06/20/94, 03:58PM:
The
slander HAS happened, and it NEEDS to stop. Now. Pretending it didn't
happen, looking the other way, or trying to provide a different
interpretation of the facts will not change anything.
Of
course, there was nothing unusual or sinister about the Early Hotel
Reservation Request Procedure. Hotels taking group
reservations
is not sinister or even unusual; in fact, it is a standard
industry practice.
We addressed the concern of
those who questioned the randomness of the process by fine-tuning the
procedure in adding the random selection (by Attending members' own
hands) of numbered ticket stubs, which only determined the order in
which
reservation requests were processed (again, all with the knowledge and
consent of hotel management).
Of
course, this only further frustrated the trolls, who, finding
themselves unable to game the system, then coined the derogatory term
"room lottery" to further misrepresent the Early Hotel Reservation
Request
Procedure and disrespect us.
Apparently signalling his intention to continue his smear campaign
against us, this troll said:
Category
23, Topic 27 Message 418 Wed Aug
03, 1994 [Randy]
at
00:11 EDT:
On the other hand,
there is the bad word of mouth principle.... I mean, we're all aware of
how the negative comments regarding [another con]
(rightly or wrongly doesn't
matter) badly tarnished that convention's reputation.
His statement "rightly or wrongly doesn't matter" is particularly
telling. Eventually he "quit" GEnie before he could be kicked
off.
We recounted the misrepresentations and misinformation on GEnie in
Progress Reports, and ran the reasons for the Early Hotel Reservation
Request Procedure along side the procedure itself for many years in
MW*C Program Books,
and on the
MW*C
website once one was established in 1995. We even ran a Q & A
in MW*C 15 Progress Report 1 (August 1994) addressing "issues"
raised on GEnie and elsewhere.
The trolls mostly kept to vague claims of untrustworthyness or
favoritism (none of which they ever provided a shred of evidence to
support), since on the rare ocassions the trolls made a specific charge
it was easilly disproved.
Over the years, we made many adjustments and refinements, such as
taking reservation requests online, appointing a
MW*C
Hotel Liaison in 2012 to handle the reservation requests, and going
paperless in 2017 at
MW*C
37 for
MW*C
38.
You'd
think after over 20 years these people would've noticed the system was
working, and that with current membership numbers and hotel location
anyone who wants a room can get a room, but that would be expecting
rational behavior from trolls. Instead, they continue to try
to
politicize a very benign policy that only treats everyone as fairly as
possible, blaming
things
on the system that have nothing to do with the system, or for things
that no system can solve (like the fact that when you have more people
wanting rooms than they are rooms, someone is going on a waiting list).
Unfortunately, there is no lack of irrational people on the internet,
so new trolls join with the old ones that are still around.
Despite our
best efforts, rumors and misinformation continue to be circulated (if
not originated) by a few people that seem to have their own axes to
grind., and are now trying to rewrite history online and elsewhere.
For those who are more rational, we offer the summary below
(adapted from
MW*C 15
PR1, Aug 1994) .
MW*C Early Hotel Reservation Request Policy Q
& A
1.
Everyone
hates this plan. Not true. Of
those we heard from directly, some thought it was fine to begin with,
others decided it was OK after all, and many were just willing to wait
and see how it worked. While people with strong opinions tend
to assume they represent the majority (or, in extreme cases, the
totality), the total number we actually hear from on any given issue
(including this one) is probably meaningless by statistical
standards. In general, people are more likely to voice a
complaint than agreement.
2.
Why try to
fix what ain't broke? Just because
the problems didn't affect you (or you benefitted from them) doesn't
mean they aren't problems for others.
3.
My hotel
reservation is none of your business.
Wrong -- the convention hotel room rates and the method of taking
reservations are, and have always been, part of a contractual agreement
between
MW*C
and the host hotel. This includes making sure
that
MW*C
members get first dibs on rooms in the host hotel.
4.
Why not
just let the hotel do its job and handle the
reservations directly? Part of their job is to
handle
reservations in a way that is mutually beneficial. Verifying
membership numbers has previously caused delays in confirming
reservations; we have to build a database, print it out, get
it to the hotel, etc.. As memberships can change on a daily
basis (cancellations, changes to/from Supporting/Attending/GoFer,
etc.), any such list is inherently out of date. We also had
to hope that the hotel would catch any discrepancies; if they
did, then there was a timelag as they call us, we look up the info, get
back to them, etc.. By verifying membership numbers before
the forms go to the hotel, we eliminate a lot of these
problems. We still do not handle deposits or other payments
to the hotel. The random drawing only determines the order in
which the reservation requests are processed; the hotel still
makes the actual room assignments.
5.
Other cons
don't do this. Actually, some other
cons (some WorldCons, for example) do handle the hotel reservations
(they may also get a monetary kickback for doing so;
MW*C
does not). However, most cons don't have the problem of the
hotel being booked up during the con for the following year (most
hotels aren't even set up to take reservations that far in
advance). One hotel did tell us, however, that the committee
of a similar-sized event they deal with does, indeed, make specific
room assignments themselves, and decides who goes in the overflow
hotels. We have chosen not to do this.
6.
Why not go
back to the hotel postcards? We went
to a larger form to include additional information that will not fit in
the postcard format. Elements of the old postcard system(s)
did not address the current problems.
7.
What's
wrong with "first come, first served?"
The way the hotel was effectively booked up during
MW*C 13
for the
following year shut out Attending members who weren't already staying
in the hotel, non-attending members, and any new members who might sign
up later; basically, the same people would always get rooms
under that system. "First come, first served" by mail
discriminates against members from overseas, Canada, and distant
states, as well as those postal "black holes" that cause delays or
outright disappearance of mail regardless of postmark date. (Now that
the number of members wanting rooms does not exceed the number of room
available, this is no longer an issue.)
8.
People can
always do overnight delivery, can't
they? Not everyone can afford to pay an
additional 1/3 of
membership cost for postage. No-one should have to.
9.
Why don't
you move the con to a bigger hotel?
The options are limited (finding the optimum combination of rooms,
function space, location, etc.), and it would not be practical to
commute to
some other city (or state). While you only need to come to
the
host hotel once
a year, we have meetings with hotel management throughout the
year. During the con, we can zip home if we need to (as we
often do), because we live here.
10.
Why not
move programming/dealers' room/dealers' hall to
other hotels?
Simple logistics (available manpower,
communications, etc.) make such expansion impractical. The
choice of a hotel/convention center as the con site has always been
intended to make the con as self-contained as possible, in part to
minimize conflicts with non-members by shutting them out. Not to
mention the burden that would place on many handicapped members.
11.
Why
should I care about anyone/everyone else?
Apparently, your value system doesn't require you to (although it would
be the fannish thing to do). However, we do -- we have a
responsibility to all the membership, not just to you or your clique.
12.
You can't
please everybody. No, but we can try
to treat everyone as fairly as possible; That includes new
members as well as long-time attendees. Anyone who doesn't
think they've been treated fairly should address us directly, instead
of grumbling (or worse) behind our backs.
We hope this serves to dispel the myths that have been circulated on
this topic.