Re: Next Convention

["Karen Randall" <krandall@world.std.com>]

You know, guys.  I have no interest in "competing" with anyone.  Last year
SF was all psyched up to do the convention, then backed out.  I don't WANT
to do the convention here, I just went to the trouble of doing some initial
leg-work to get a committment from local people.  I don't want the
convention to die under the weight of inertia that so often plagues the AGA.

The idea of another "International Summit" sounds great on the surface, but
the fact is that it will still be just another convention with a different
name.  We came close to doubling our attendance this year based on our
current format.  I would like to think attendance will continue to rise. (I
am almost certain of it if it's held in the North East because of the very
strong organized hobby in this area... we have a much better network for
contacting local hobbyists than most areas of the country)  We were already
pretty "international" this year... with attendees from Canada and the UK as
well as from Japan.

The original summit, as I understand it, was quite different in format than
our conventions.  Wasn't it a group of hand-picked high-level aquarists who
met with each other?  Yes, they were international, but who really
benefitted?  Not the general aquarists in any of the countries represented
as far as I can tell.  That format certainly wouldn't be in the best
interests of aquatic gardeners in this country.  And if it's simply a set of
speakers and panel discussions, we can do the same thing without changing
the name of the event.  We can also work harder to publicize the event in
other countries and encourage people to come IF someone will do the work
involved.  But it would still only be "international" in that we might
entice a few wealthy and avid aquarists, or those already commercially
sponsored to come.  The average aquarist in all those other countries would
still be unable to attend.  Heck, I'm not sure the "average" aquatic
gardener in THIS country can attend the current AGA convention.

As far as how it's organized, or what is done during the convention, whether
we do it in Boston, or someone else does it elsewhere, I think it's great to
get suggestions from other people.  HOWEVER, I strongly believe that the
people who are actually doing the work have to have the final say in terms
of what is done and how it is done.  Then the AGA has to support those
decisions.  If the AGA starts to try to micro-manage the convention, they
have to be ready to put forth the people to get the job(s) done as well.

I can tell you right now that the Boston folks (me included) will NOT bail
the AGA out if we fiddle around hoping that some "more desirable" location
comes through.  They have to plan their own annual event, and that requires
booking facilities close to a year in advance.

I can also tell you I will NOT be available to arrive early and run myself
ragged another location for a 3rd year in a row. So you, Neil, or someone
else will have to commit to taking extra time off from work and going down
there early to help out the local people with details.

Believe me, I would love to see someone else run next year's convention, but
I'm not even going to start with the idea of "competing" for the honor of
doing all that work.  If the AGA wants to hold it else where, it's fine with
me, but don't expect Boston to stand by as the fall-back position.
Likewise, I can't guarantee that the offer will be open for another year.
It might be, but the subject would have to be revisited at that time.  So
please keep those factors in mind as you weigh your options.

Karen

  ------------------
  To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@thekrib.com
  with "unsubscribe aga-sc" in the body of the message.
  Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-sc
  When asked, log in as username is "aga-sc", and password "showy".