Re: A few more comments on the Filkcon idea

replyKaren Rall wrote:
>
> (1) "A preliminary concom meeting" = Clarrise suggested her
> place in Jan, but that doesn't appear to be workable for most
> of us. I think Anne's idea of doing it at Rustycon (and
> maybe subsequently at Norwes or Wester if there's the interest)
> might be a better idea: a time & place at least some of us
> will already be, without having to make any extra effort at
> this early stage.

Who is "most of us"? For the more southerly types the date/times you suggest do require "extra effort". They're all Seattle area. Yes, my lady and I are planning on doing Wester, but certainly not Rusty, and most likely not NorWes. We, at least, would be willing to make the extra effort to make a Portland meet, but Seattle is a real problem.

        This, I think, is going to be an issue. We need the core group to be fairly co-located. This implies either a Portland based effort, or a Seattle based effort. Without that core we're whistling in the wind. So, is there a core in either location? If there's the critical core in Seattle... go for it. Otherwise, is there a Portland core? If so, P'land makes more sense as a meeting point.

        I will support whichever can get the core together.... I want a NW Filk Con, wherever it may be.

        This is, of course, only my opinion...

Douglas
douglas at camax.com Received on 01/02/97