I think the most painful thing is someone using the [info]planetfantastic username just slagged off the programme for Swancon 2000.
That was me - I was logged on at work - and I think the comment has been misquoted, but I can't be absolutely sure because you're now deleted it.
I was referring to Swancon 20 (Cadigan/Datlow/"people are complaining because we haven't had any open programming meetings but we are Generation X and we don't care" printed in the Progress report/24 hour programing without consulting or even warning any of the panelists including the guests/"I have no idea why I'm on this panel or what it's supposed to be about"... right number, yes?), not Swancon 2000. If I accidentally typed 2000 instead of 20 and didn't proofread, I apologize; mea maxima culpa. I had not intended to dis Swancon 2000 or anyone's role in programming it. Apart from some problems with the venue, I remember it being an unusually good con.
However, I stand by my statement that Swancon 20's program was a disaster, and I was hoping that by drawing attention to a probable cause of the disaster, we could prevent Swancon 31 making exactly the same mistakes.
Sorry if any mention of Swancon programs is adding to your stress levels, but I thought it needed saying - and very sorry to hear about the holes in your roof, but that definitely wasn't my fault.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-01-17 03:42 am (UTC)That was me - I was logged on at work - and I think the comment has been misquoted, but I can't be absolutely sure because you're now deleted it.
I was referring to Swancon 20 (Cadigan/Datlow/"people are complaining because we haven't had any open programming meetings but we are Generation X and we don't care" printed in the Progress report/24 hour programing without consulting or even warning any of the panelists including the guests/"I have no idea why I'm on this panel or what it's supposed to be about"... right number, yes?), not Swancon 2000. If I accidentally typed 2000 instead of 20 and didn't proofread, I apologize; mea maxima culpa. I had not intended to dis Swancon 2000 or anyone's role in programming it. Apart from some problems with the venue, I remember it being an unusually good con.
However, I stand by my statement that Swancon 20's program was a disaster, and I was hoping that by drawing attention to a probable cause of the disaster, we could prevent Swancon 31 making exactly the same mistakes.
Sorry if any mention of Swancon programs is adding to your stress levels, but I thought it needed saying - and very sorry to hear about the holes in your roof, but that definitely wasn't my fault.