"HMGS BOD Election 2018 Announcement" Topic

Dudley said "1. In the last BoD election, there were approximately 450 votes cast. Scott Landis received the most votes – 258."

I stand corrected. There were 499 ballots cast, and John Spiess got 283 votes. Paul Trani and Dave Waxtel both got the lowest winning votes at 232.

I was correct in stating that Dudley got 125 votes.

For what it is worth, I do not know if Dudley's conclusions as to how to address these concerns are correct, but I did personally observe Dudley speaking to several vendors on this topic, and those conversations I observed did include the concerns he is repeating, so he is not making this up.

I hope I'm not misunderstood. I'm not doubting he spoke with the vendors. I'd just like to see the raw data for myself.

Hmmm… "A scrubbed final count."

Why does the data have to be scrubbed?

To most minds Scrubbed = Fudged?

What is wrong with simple honesty. like "This is what our computer tells us we had. We had X attendees.

My God people, chill out. Let him run. Vote or don't. I will. I, personally, can't wait for a Regime change. Wait, What? Are these the US Mid Term Elections or HMGS we're talking about??? Oh well, either way. I'm voting. See ya in the Dawghouse…

My God people, chill out. Let him run.

Oh goodness, I'd never think of telling not to run! Please do! There are just some discrepancies that we'd like to iron out before we decide to vote for him.

Another spirited debate on TMP over the future of HMGS (East) which, like most of the others, will probably have little or no impact on how the organization is run in the future.

How can I not jump in?

For now, just a few comments on the numbers discussed so far.

Regarding the last election, the following numbers are from the HMGS web site, available to all members:

1997 ballots mailed;
499 returned.

The vote totals for the top 4 winning candidates:

John Spiess--283
Scott Landis--249
Paul Trani--232
David Waxtel--232

Followed by 4 other candidates with vote totals from 200 to 160;

Followed by the OP in last place with 125.

Regarding the number of games at Historicon 2017:

Yes, there were 500+ games in the program. (I went back and counted them all but don't have the numbers in front of me. I'll add them to a future comment, as I'm sure this topic will go on for a while.) According to some, this was an all time record for Historicon and, in the opinion of many, especially those who favor a convention in VA, a sign of how popular a location F'burg is with GMs and gamers.

What the program doesn't show, however, is the dozens, even hundreds, of unclaimed game tickets that were available at the Events Desk throughout much of the convention. Yes, there were plenty of games at Historicon (more on that later), but there was ample evidence that there were not enough gamers to support the 500+ games at the show.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled program.

I'm sorry, 47Ronin, I worked that desk, and I'm not up on the "dozens, maybe hundreds" of game tickets left at the end of each day. In my recollection, most tickets were gone by 2PM latest and there was a line waiting for us to put them out for the next day at 1600.

It usually looked more like this (yes, actual photographic evidence from the same convention-- taken Thursday around 1 PM)

In my opinion Fredericksburg had more capacity than it ever filled-- we were always thin on the ground with events, and most people doing walk up (not pre-registration) had to content themselves with a second or third choice in a lot of instances.

Now, was that the case at the actual tables? I have no idea who showed up and who didn't. But I can attest that the tickets were in high demand.

There are certainly clever ways to do ticketing and tracking attendance at the actual event, but that would be a big investment we aren't ready to make.

Walt

Walt – what your picture doesn't show is how many games had no-shows. Any game I wanted to get into – all I had to do was wait. Every game had a no-show slot I filled.

Hey Walt, do you remember "The Dark Coterie"

"There are certainly clever ways to do ticketing and tracking attendance at the actual event, but that would be a big investment we aren't ready to make."

It is my experience that when HMGS moved to the ticket system years ago the no-show rate went up significantly. It would not be unreasonable to question whether all the work that goes into pre-reg is worth it. Of course HMGS has not done any internal look at its business practices.

Further, tracking attendance is not all that hard. Nor is seeing if these games were even put on(tickets can be handed out, but at any given con there are dozens of cancelled games – and those are only the ones HMGS knows about).

Tracking game attendance could be as simple as walking around with a clip board and noting if 1.) the game showed up, and 2.) if it had 4 or more players (keep it simple). This could be coordinated out of a gaming area management table which helps resolve table conflicts, and other issues GMs encounter. Yet HMGS doesn't really seem to have a clue about its core product – games, or really care that much. Its obsession with an overall body count seems to have blinded it to examining its core product and operations – games.

And Walt hit the nail on the head regarding space. FECC cost twice as much (then) as the Host for only 1/3 more floor space, accordingly to my old friend Pat Condray. The extra space was never needed and less so over the years as attendance dwindled. Personally, I never cared for the facility – mainly due to the noise level. The fact it was put on a major east coast traffic artery didn't help either.

And Walt hit the nail on the head regarding space. FECC cost twice as much (then) as the Host for only 1/3 more floor space, accordingly to my old friend Pat Condray. The extra space was never needed and less so over the years as attendance dwindled. Personally, I never cared for the facility – mainly due to the noise level. The fact it was put on a major east coast traffic artery didn't help either.

This is what I find so interesting from the "We gotta keep it in FECC" camp. Not one person wants to take on the subject of how to deal with dwindling attendance. One person stepped forward with "geographical diversity" – and he got the lowest votes in the last election. Other people complain how the location was "never given a chance" – which, after six years, I simply can't fathom.

I'd challenge anyone to come up with a solid business plan to keep the convention at the FECC. This plan should include how to grow the convention attendance by 5% annually over the next five years. If you can't provide that, then anything else you want to offer on the subject simply doesn't matter.

To History Gamer

I have a little experience on this having put on games at HMGS shows for almost every one, some of them four games at a convention. That makes it in my reckoning about 80 games. As my games usually took 8 players that was 640 slots.
In all my time as a GM I took in precisely THREE TICKETS! The rest were all walk-by's and occasionally a gamer from my home group who couldn't find anything else interesting. Out of that I have had about six of the the eight slots filled on the average.

To me this means the ticketing system is a complete and utter failure. As I tell people who whine about it.

If you want to play in a game, show up at the table the game will be at an hour or two early.

Help the guy move his stuff in (and out) and help him setup.

Show interest. You'll get to play in the game.

At "The Weekend" we have no ticketing system. We also have a terrible Event listing system. I admit it. I am always surprised every year people wind up coming and putting on games, I believe they're called Open Games, which I only find out about after someone gives me a battle report or sends me photos of a game I never knew about! In all the games of the Weekend I also have had only five no-show games,all mine. I tend to urge people to play in other peoples games, because I want TMEN not to have a no-show. My games are there only as a fall back if someone can't find a game to play in. I've had that situation ONCE.

Players go to a convention and WANT to play in games. They want to play in games that are fun. They often get tickets ONLY as a fall-back, that is, something that if they can't find anything better they will go to. I'm ok with that. If they find something better then that's excellent. They're there to have fun. My games are fun, but ANY convention is a bazaar of all things sparkly and wonderful and new.

The ticket system is a useless excresence. Drop it. Wargamers looking to have fun will find a multiplicity of choices.

At the Weekend we have so many GM's that there;s always a game.

Otto

I don't normally disagree with you TheKing30, but a business plan will not make it. War Game conventions are pure luxury items. There is no market or market rules for them. Attendence is dependent on a lure just a shade this side of a mere whim. Maybe it's a habit and when people get out of a habit there's not much left to draw them in.

What always forestalled me from attending Historicon at Fredericksburg was simply the noise. I drive to Maine regularly to work on my retirement home, and when I was working I drove over two hours one way to work, so Fredericksburg is a piece of cake. What killed it for me is I knew about fifteen people who attended and all were united in saying the convention noise was just a few decibles below a shrieking din. I'm not putting on a game in that environment. The horrible off and on loading added to it, and the heat was frosting on the cake. When they tell me that you could not talk to someone across the table without a bull horn, then that's a non-starter for me.

But the real problem is that there is no way to force up attendance. No marketing trick you can cook up will do it. No business plan will facilitate it. War gamers are creatures of habit. War gamers are there for fun, wargamers are squirely. The fault is squarely on the organizers of Baltimore and the "take it to the next level" people people. By moving it out of the Host they "broke" the habit, and more and more people every year stopped going, and when some stopped going, others slowly bled out of the "going by habit camp."

The damage has been done. Moving it back to Lancaster however will not guarantee that everyone will come flooding back. The habits have been broken, and broken again. It will take time to build it up.

But it will be cheaper, and that is something that at least is a known.

Finally, the registration system. Any system that takes FOUR MONTHS AND "Scrubbing" to work even if it's all legitimate give the impression of being fixed. Even with duplicates a number, slightly inaccurate is better as a bench mark than a perfectly accurate number no one believes.

If you keep going on with making the attendance some mystical number that has to be on a life support system of "scrubbing" eventually people will begin to question if the other numbers we get are similarly scrubbed… like how much we have in the bank.

Thanks for the response Otto. I think you know I have a tremendous amount of respect for you so allow me to respond (and please take my response in that light)…

Failing to plan is like planning to fail. There has to be some sort of plan to get from point "A" to point "B". Where do you want to be when this is complete? What is the criteria for "success"? What is the roll back plan?

Let's look at The Weekend. You have a "plan" that you follow – whether it's by design or not. There's a streamlined registration system that you have. There is a way that you encourage GMs to put on great games. So far that plan seems to be working. There is a goal and the convention always seems to be moving towards that.

Now let's look at Historicon. There were a few things that were not planned for…

1) Communication – the attendees that supported the convention were, in general, not on board with the move to FECC. Leadership thought that we would pick up more people from the southern states – more than enough to offset the loss of people not willing to travel. That never materialized. This shows me the BoD that moved Historicon simply did not understand the people – or in this case – their "customers".

2) Criteria for Success – I don't think this was ever well defined. From the onset of this move, someone should have defined what would have been successful. If we grow the convention by 1%, we're successful. We're looking at a situation where the convention attendance SHRUNK and people still think it's a success. WHAT???

3) Mitigation – Once we saw Historicon shrinking, there should have been steps put in place to mitigate this problem. This should have been discussed and planned for before the move to FECC was attempted. I can't say for sure this was ever done.

4) Roll Back Plan – we've done everything we can but Historicon is still shrinking. We need to roll back to something that works. It wasn't until the current BoD that this line of thinking was implemented.

This all being said….

If Dudley wants to run on the platform for "A convention needs to be in the FECC", then show me you understand these principles. He's currently taking a very narrow point of view, with few verifiable facts to back himself up and hoping he's going to swing the masses to agree with him. Let's keep in mind that he was on the BoD that was involved with the Baltimore disaster. If he hasn't learned from his mistakes then keep doing what you can do well – which seems to be running the dealer hall.

For the record, I do agree that the three conventions need to be in different locations. I think that FECC was too far for most.

Sorry for the long winded post.

As a person with no dog I this hunt other than as an attendee my 2 cents are that while the Host is pretty much a dump I'd still rather attend HCon there than in Fredericksburg.

I fly out from California and I used to attend about every other year. About 3 years ago I decided I would not attend again while the convention was in Fredericksburg. The combination of horrible traffic, extreme noise, heat/humidity and pretty crappy food choices at the venue were the deciding factors for me. YMMV.

Anyway I already have hotel reservations (not at the Host which continues to get horrific customer reviews) for 2018 and I'm looking forward to attending again. I'd be happy to attend at a non-Host locale if it was a reasonable drive from a major airport, had weather that wasn't akin to being stuffed into a sweatbox, and actually allowed conversation without having to shriek at the top of your lungs.

Sorry, Walt, but I'm not wrong.

I enjoyed your Historicon AAR, as always, but I respectfully disagreed with some of it.

I don't dispute that Thursday was a busy day for games, as shown by your screen shot. That's because of the low number of games on Thursday. More on that below.

The reason I know there were "dozens, maybe hundreds" of unclaimed tickets for unfilled games was because on late Friday night I went by the Events Desk after it had shut down and looked at the number of tickets that were left. Given that it was late (after 10pm) and all the games were done or in progress and nobody needed a ticket, I picked up what was left over. The next morning I showed them to HMGS officials, including BOD members, to show them how much overcapacity there was. In fact, I still have them. I don't have the time or capacity to take pictures of 100 tickets and post them here, but they're out there. That was just for Friday.

Saturday wasn't much different. I saw award winning GMs on Sat. basically playing themselves because there weren't enough players to go around. By Sat. afternoon, "The Great Exodus" had begun. Combine that with the lack of "day-trippers" which F'burg never attracted (compared to Lancaster) and the Sat. morning flea market was one of the slowest (and warmest) I've ever been in, and I've been doing the flea market for years.

Like historygamer and Otto, I remember the pre-ticket system which had sign up sheets for every game. That system wasn't broken, but like many other things at HMGS, somebody decided to "fix" it. I've talked to people who tell me that the ticket system has benefits. Maybe so, but I can't see them and I've been a GM for over 10 years running multiple games at almost every convention, even back to the days when you were CD of Cold Wars. (I was looking at the 2006 CW program last night. Sadly, many GMs from those days are no longer around for many reasons. I'm impressed at how many have lasted this long, myself included.) I even served as convention staff one year (many years ago) and worked the Ticket Desk. I realized after one year that my time contributed to the hobby and HMGS was better spent as a GM hosting games.

As promised, here's a breakdown of games by day as listed in the Historicon 2017 program:

Thurs.--116
Fri.--206
Sat.--194
Sun.--8

Total--524

You can see how there was a shortage of games on Thursday when compared to Friday and Saturday.

I didn't count the events that were added and cancelled, but I'd be willing to bet that they roughly evened out at 15-25 each.

Top three reasons things don't change:

1. We've always done it that way before
2. It's too hard
3. I don't have time

I will keep saying this over and over – HMGS does not manage its gaming area to any extent, other than tables are set up and games are assigned to tables.

HMGS has no idea how many games don't show up, only the ones that self-report, or are reported by players. There is no compilation of such data from con to con.

HMGS has no idea how many pre-reg gamers don't show up for their game.

The ticket total only shows how many tickets were handed out. I have known more than one player that gets their ticket(s) then either looks at the game and moves on (as all games area accepted), or gets caught in a another game and never shows up. Unclaimed tickets are another kettle of fish.

There is nothing that says HMGS can't determine the maximum number of games it needs at any given time and limits the number of games – allowing for the average no-show game rate(which it has no idea what that average is – see #1 above)

There is nothing that says HMGS can't hold slots for specific types/genres of games and give them first priority as registrations come in – that is called managing your gaming area.

There is nothing stopping HMGS from reaching out to known GMs to solicit their games in particular and scheduling them first (known quantities).

The reasons such things are not being done – see #1-3 above.

Some great points being brought up here by a number of you.

Bottom line is the move to the FCC did not work; the attendees they lost from the move were not replaced by southerners who starting coming who did not attend Historicon in the past, they lost more than they gained, no disputing that.

Also, I agree the for the most part they lost the Saturday day tripper shoppers. This past Historicon, far and away my best day was Thursday, I did about 65% of my total show sales in those 6 hours, Friday was so so, Saturday for me was terrible, Sunday was complete waste of time as are all Sundays for me at the three HMGS conventions.

Last year pretty much played out the same; I checked my sales numbers and about 50% of my sales came from Thursday.

I think there was a mass exodus out of the convention center Saturday, mostly from the northerners to beat the horrific Sunday traffic.

It will be interesting to see how things play out in 2018; not sure if moving it back to Lancaster will work or not, can it get any worse is the question……………….

"Sunday was complete waste of time as are all Sundays for me at the three HMGS conventions…"

So why not let those dealers that want to leave Saturday evening, leave? Why would HMGS force anyone to stay that doesn't want to?

Double G: Interesting stats. Mine differed this year, but generally do not always follow this theme (each show is different). Saturday for us was our best day this time around and actually matched total sales for Thursday and Friday. Friday was horrible. Again, this does differ over the years at Historicon, but generally Saturday is always our best day.

Sundays on the other hand are usually pretty good for us, but sales usually end by a little after 11am, so we start packing up early (same trend at Lancaster). In the end the 2 hours of sales can be very good for us.

Regarding vendors leaving on Saturday night, I am not sure how you police the place while the building is not secured while vendors pack out. This has always been my concern. Now if HMGS was willing to compensate us for any theft while vendors were packing out in the evening……

I do not have an easy answer for the Sunday thing. Should a show move too far north or into NJ, I would have to pack out first thing Sunday morning to make it work for us. Everyone has different experiences and needs.

HG; what Doug said, the hall closes at 6:00pm on Saturday and gets locked down, dealers packing to leave would need it to stay open a few hours afterward, who's going to be liable for theft or who's going to get roped into sticking around to wait for the last guy to leave?

Not to mention it's pretty pointless to leave Saturday night; using Fredericksburg as an example, by the time I get out of there, it would be 8:00pm, I've got a 10 hour drive ahead of me, so it's a non starter.

Doug; good for you that Sunday is a good selling day and good for you The Wargaming Company that you did tremendously well on Saturday.

My mileage varied, but there you go……………..

Dear TheKing30

Thank you for the compliments.

You say "Failing to plan is like planning to fail. There has to be some sort of plan to get from point "A" to point "B". Where do you want to be when this is complete? What is the criteria for "success"? What is the roll back plan?"

In almost all things I agree with this. I admit the benefit of doing it. My question is that I don't know if a plan can be made to do this in wargames. Planning depends on agency, that is that you can do something to effect the plan. I do not know if that ability exist, that is, IS there even a plan you could do to affect attendance.

Thamks again for saying nice things about the Weekend. "Let's look at The Weekend. You have a "plan" that you follow – whether it's by design or not. There's a streamlined registration system that you have. There is a way that you encourage GMs to put on great games. So far that plan seems to be working. There is a goal and the convention always seems to be moving towards that."

Thanks but it really can't compare with Historicon. It has a different organization, different model and is much smaller than Historicon. It is not fair to historicon to compare it to the Weekend.

But I wish to point out that NOTHING in this thread is new. It has all be said a dozen times before at least. The question comes down to a simple one.

Conventions depend on money-- which we got.

Conventions depend on volunteers to do the work-- which we got.

Conventions depend on attendees. Which we ain't got and losing more every day.

So the only thing to run on, and the most important thing to run on is how do you get more people to come down to the convention.

My solution to this, my opinion on what the HMGS needs to do on this is simple.

You could try being nice to people.

Thanks but it really can't compare with Historicon. It has a different organization, different model and is much smaller than Historicon. It is not fair to historicon to compare it to the Weekend

Hmm… Let me phrase it differently. There is a principle in play. Every event has some sort of a plan to make money, break even or grow to get to that point.

When Dudley announces that he's running to bring one of the conventions back to the FECC, he needs to address known issues, e.g. declining attendance, cost of the location, the infamous beer raid, etc. He needs a plan for this. So far I've yet to see him even acknowledge that any of these are an issue.

If I go to open a WaWa, 7-11, Sheets in any area, I need to know that customers will come into my store, spend money and allow me to make a profit after I've paid all the bills (rent, electric, supplies, etc.). The same principle applies here. FECC is currently a known failure for HMGS. The convention, in six years, has yet to grow. So why would you want to bring another convention down there if you haven't addressed the issues that plague Historicon?

When you started The Weekend at the Continental, you knew there was a demand for it. There was a demand for The Weekend in that location during that time frame.

My solution to this, my opinion on what the HMGS needs to do on this is simple.

You could try being nice to people.

That does go a long way. But there are other things that can be done to bolster this and make Historicon 2018 a success…

1) Better advertising. I'd be on different podcasts talking Historion 2018 up. Get the message out to all war gamers.

I'd also try and get more vendors to come down and give demos and talks. The guys from Blood and Plunder were giving demos of their game at Historicon and it seemed successful. Remember when the Perry brothers came to Valley Forge? Maybe get the guys from Foundry to help Badger Games sell their product.

Heck – Bill Thornhill – the sculpter for Footsore Miniatures is always at the conventions – and his work is amazing!!. Maybe work with him to give a class on sculpting??

2) Better pricing. With the costs of the location going down, pass some of that savings on to the dealers.

3) Maybe better swag bags that cost more? Look at Adepticon. The more you pay, the better your swag bag gets. What if we work with Gripping Beast or the Perrys and include a box set if the admission price goes up to, let's say $50.00 USD? Maybe for $60.00 USD throw in a coupon for The Flag Dude, Lon at Brigrade Games, Old Glory, etc.? Work with these vendors to make sure it's profitable for everyone.

4) Pimp the daylights out of Hobby University. On the front webpage, I would put the works of all the teachers and what they're going to teach. Bring that stuff front page! Get people talking about it!

5) Use Twitter and U Tube more effectively – interview vendors, Hobby University, etc. and put links on TMP, The HMGS website, etc.

6) I see that Bolt Action normally has some sort of campaign during the summer. Maybe work with them to have a few of the battles staged at Historicon. The outcome at Historicon could affect the entire campaign. How cool would that be??? And that would be in addition to the FoW tournaments, etc. But again, this needs to be right on the front page of the website and hyped up on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc.

Now I just threw out six ideas that could help Historicon grow. Heck – you might even incorporate that into a plan.

Again, sorry for the long winded post.

Dudley et al,

Because I was Chapter Secretary for some time and I also cover Historicon for wargamer.com (I get paid, its not a blog), I have a ton of records to include emails and spreadsheets from convention and event directors in response to my inquiries. Now, I guess I cannot absolutely, notarized by Jesus, Mary and Joseph prove methodology and accuracy but here are some useful comparison figures from official, reconciled sources:

a. Attendance Hcon 17 – still unknown
b. Highest attendance Hcon I have on file – 3755 in 2008 (offical spreadsheet)
c. Events Hcon 17 – 526 listed in program
d. Highest event total Hcon I have on file – 689 in 2007 (official spreadsheet)

Maybe Bill R meant this was a record for FCC shows?

Ciao, Colonel Bill

I think attendance last year at Hcon was around 2,400. So dividing 2,400 by 526 games comes out to about 4.6 players per game. But….

Say there were 200 visitors (wives, kids, looky-lous), and now you are at 2,200. Back out the dealer numbers (70 dealers with 2 per booth), now you are down to 2,060. Back out many of the staff who never play (Painting U, registration, etc) – say maybe 40 more – 2,020. Let's say that 120 people only come to shop – maybe day trippers. I'd bet it's more, even at FECC. I know lots of people who only come to shop. That puts you down to about 3.6 players per game.

Some games have 6 or more players, meaning other games running at the same time have less. I also doubt the above numbers take into account the people who only come to play in tournament games

How many of those games were cancelled? How many pick up games were put on? How many people set up board games and played off to the side somewhere?

Point being – at that level the games are not full by a long shot. We don't need that many games and therefore we don't need a facility that big (and expensive).

Number of games is meaningless without context. Size of facility should be in proportion to what is needed.

Dark Coterie? It hardly applies.

"My solution to this, my opinion on what the HMGS needs to do on this is simple.
You could try being nice to people."

Again, I'm speaking as a volunteer here.. one who DOESN'T DO IT FOR THE WHATEVER "PERKS" people think volunteers get. In my experience HMGS staff ARE "nice to people". They fall all OVER themselves to be nice to people. I worked the events desk for three days (plus some) at HMGS and I can guarantee there were people that were seeing people being nice to them-- not just me, although I do try to be helpful and pleasant, but everyone I worked with. I helped out briefly Wed. night at registration and everyone, and I mean everyone I saw was trying to be nice to people. This is not an organization of nose-picking, indifferent slobs who could care less about the problems of customers (and they ARE customers, even in a volunteer organization). That's not what I see; and I'm NOT one to sugar-coat things.

Bill Rutherford can attest that we had a couple of thorny problems in events we had to jump through our own necks to solve-- he knows the gentleman I am referring to, I think. Basically, a gracious "I'm terribly sorry, this is screwed up, let's quickly make it right for you" is better than a thousand "we're working on it, standbys"

I know there a lot of people out there that get set in their ways and don't see the changes that do take place, or worse, can't appreciate or don't want to appreciate attempts at change, because 'it's not the way we done things forever" and one of those things people don't ever to want to change their minds about, it seems, are perceptions that "The BOD are (pick one) evil, lazy, corrupt, taking junkets with our money, idiots, shortsighted, a dark coterie of thieves.. and blah blah blah." Do people think every person on the BoD drinks the koolaid once they take office? There have been dozens of people on the board of directors since I first became a member. Some of have been disasters. Some of them have been mumbling do-nothings. Most of them tried to do the best job they can with the information they had while in office. The only universal constant I can ascribe to a BOD member is they become one of "them" the day they take the job.

It's getting old. I don't agree with the recent decisions made by the BOD. So what? I'll still go to H'con if it's not too far from me-- and I wish whatever iteration of the NEXT BoD every success in the world in relocating conventions out of the Host, which I think they should do. No matter WHO serves on the board.

Peace out,

Walt

The bottom line is dinosaurs die… and Ottoathome hit it square on the head with – "But I wish to point out that NOTHING in this thread is new. It has all been said a dozen times before at least."

Until the HMGS-E approach to planning and executing conventions (whether driven by a motivated and coordinated membership or an innovative and forward looking Board with brass ba**s and a strong sense of stewardship) is reconsidered and retooled in a significant way yielding a more practical, professional, and user-friendly event, this discussion will go on, and on, and on…

Two cents worth,
wargamingusa

Until the HMGS-E approach to planning and executing conventions (whether driven by a motivated and coordinated membership or an innovative and forward looking Board with brass ba**s and a strong sense of stewardship) is reconsidered and retooled in a significant way yielding a more practical, professional, and user-friendly event, this discussion will go on, and on, and on…

I gotta agree with Walt on this point. The current BoD is one of the best that I can remember – and I've been a member on and off since 1997.

They're willing to make tough decisions to ensure the survival of the flagship convention of HMGS. In the past other BoDs have been willing to sacrifice Historicon so they could have it in their back yard. This Board realizes that can't be an option.

Dear The King 30.

Walt didn't say that. WargamingUSA did.

I do agree with YOU that the current BOD is one of the best that I can remember, and I've been a member from before your time. Not bragging, just concurring.

I don't give a rats rear end about diversity. It's a lie and a stalking horse. I'm a hard boiled guy. I reiterate.

All that counts is

1. THE MONEY!

2. THE HELP

3. THE ATTENDENCE.

The first is easy, the second is more difficult, and the third is hardest of all but the simple gage of success at any event, and by the official figures, it's been going down every year. So move all three HMGS conventions to the south.

Diversity? What sort of diversity is there? Southern gamers, Northern gamers? Are they different types based on some sort of criteria? is there a cultural diversity between war gamers? I thought we were all geeks, dweebs, dorks, wierdos, and crackpots. Is there a special breed of southern wierdos as opposed to northern wierdos? Do they have different customs? Is there a specific way that southernors moan and complain about their bad die rolls n a way different from people in the north? Do northerners eat doritos while southernors eat tostitos? Is this a coke/pepsi, ford/chevy, grits/scrapple thing? Do northerners paint their miniatures from the feet up or from the top down like they do in the south. Sounds like someone is trying to divide war gamers for personal ends by playing the "Let's you and him fight." Do Southernors have materially and obvious ways they run their conventions than the way they do in the north? Potato/Potahto, Tomato/Tomahto, let's call the whole thing off.

Let's recognize "diversity" as a non-issue.

Diversity? What sort of diversity is there? Southern gamers, Northern gamers?

Hi Otto. I don't think that is what they mean. It's geographic diversity for the sake of the vendors. If the 3 cons are at different places the potential draw for shoppers covers a larger geographic territory. Hopefully, that will translate into bigger sales.

Once my head is over the table, and I'm (usually) getting beat up by my opponent, it doesn't matter if the gaming room is in Pennsylvania, Virginia, New York or Canada.

Hi Otto. I don't think that is what they mean. It's geographic diversity for the sake of the vendors. If the 3 cons are at different places the potential draw for shoppers covers a larger geographic territory. Hopefully, that will translate into bigger sales.

Didn't really seem to work out for the vendors in this case. Honestly, this is what we would call "smoke screen" – you're throwing something out there to get people's focus off the real issues.

He can't very well run on the premise that Dudley and his buddies want the convention right next to them – especially in light of all the problems this uncovered. So he uses this "excuse" to push his personal agenda.

Just to add – this doesn't make him a bad person in any sense (I hope I didn't come off that way). Everyone has an agenda. At this point, I ask who's agenda is going to better align itself with the betterment of the convention.

I'm wondering if a special "task force" could be set up by the BOD to determine the most efficient way to manage the games at the HMGS conventions. The task force would be a small committee of HMGS members in good standing who are overseen by a current BOD member (God knows they already have enough to do). They would make recommendations and report back to the BOD, who would then vote upon all or some of the suggested changes.

Or better yet, getting a professional efficiency expert to look at how the conventions are run and how to make the conventions more ergonomic, less wasteful and how to produce "best practices" to drive up attendance. There are people who do this.

Or better yet, getting a professional efficiency expert to look at how the conventions are run and how to make the conventions more ergonomic, less wasteful and how to produce "best practices" to drive up attendance. There are people who do this.

I wholeheartedly support this idea. If nothing is said again, I'm going to bring it up at the next membership meeting.

+1 to Bowman. Maybe even 2.

This is what I have been suggesting all along. Manage the gaming area(I can't say manage it better as that would suggest there is already some management occurring).

CDs often like to brag about packing more games and tables into the con. Aside from the fact that most cons don't need more games – the result of that effort is to make the gaming area even less enjoyable – that is, unless you like fanny-rubbing up to the guys at the table next to you.

The layout at FI last year in the Distlefink room was pretty bad. I don't know if there were more tables packed in there, or they were just laid out poorly. No room between tables, no main access ways for people to get stuff in and out. It made for a less enjoyable gaming experience. Yet no one was there to correct or manage that problem.

Too often management equates a better convention with "more" instead of "better."

I also have to wonder why the layouts at the same facility hosting multiple cons aren't set in stone to avoid such problems?

Whomever does the review should not be current or former CDs or events managers. They would come to such a position with inherent biases already. Better to get people who are primarily just gamers and/or GMs as that is your target audience. You are looking to enhance their experience, not management's.

Dear Bowmen.

The first flaw in your plan is in your recommendation "I'm wondering if a special "task force" could be set up by the BOD to determine the most efficient way to manage the games at the HMGS conventions"

The second flaw is

"They would make recommendations and report back to the BOD, who would then vote upon all or some of the suggested changes."

No vote will ever be taken because a decision will be made.

The third flaw is that of an independent agency. Once again the only one that will be hired is one that will vomit back the opinion of the BOd, and it won't be adopted. In fact the report will never be made and if it is made it will be quashed and squashed and "scrubbed and fudged" even better than the attendance figures.

This happens all the time in industry where such things have about as much credibility as Constitutions in the Congo or elections in Russia.

The only thing which would have a ghost of a chance of working would be if there was an election of GM's for the independent body, NOT run by HMGS which would make its own report and publish it on its own, independent of the BOD.

Sauron does not share power.

Once again… Bowman--- this was tried before. It was called "The GM Help Desk" started by Pete Panzeri and others and worked on by such diverse souls as Mike Hillsgrove, myself and many others who thought it was an excellent means of bringing in outside input. It was always resisted by the BOD who saw it only as a political vehicle to get Pete Panzeri on the Bod and which it was. When he got on the Bod he dropped the Help Desk like a hot potatoe (because now HE was now Sauron) and it died on the vine.

Too bad, it was a great organization which had great potential to give the GM's a say in their own destiny. But, Alas… it was tried and failed.

The HMGS for better or worse has its own system and culture. If you want to get things done you have to get your candidates elected to the BOD when, unrestrained by any real safeguards, including public opinion which is left largely to flounder around on its own, it can do what it wants.

Dudley is not wrong in his method. He is tossing his hat into the ring with a specific object and specific plan. His methods are quite correct, it's his motives and sensibility I question. I am sure he has others who will run with him.

So if you want to have it your way, then do as he is, attempting to organize issue driven factions to gain control of the Bod and exclude all opposition. Develop a political party within the HMGS, gain enough people willing to run for the bod year after year and when you have a 6or 7 person hold on the board do what you want.

Otto:

Point of order. The GM Help Desk died out because a hand full of people turned it into their hangout instead of doing work and it was starved for lack of resources. James Curtis ran the desk for a while after Pete moved to the BoD. You can make the debate that Pete and the then BoD (remember, you need four votes) did not give the GM Help Desk any funding, and it died a death over time – especially when James stepped down. The only left-over from the old GM program are the GM game awards – not that many are even aware of that, also due to a lack of funding.

HMGS has made many decisions during and since the GM Help Desk to fund all sorts of pet projects. I won't name them, but this again goes to the fact that HMGS has neglected taking care of the gaming areas and taking care of the people who put on games.

It makes no sense to treat Dave Bonk and his crew (Carnage and Glory games) the same as the guy who showed up with primed only GW figures and tanks and no ground cloth, but they do.

Sauron does not share power.

"1) Better advertising. I'd be on different podcasts talking Historion 2018 up. Get the message out to all war gamers."

This is the most important. I follow a lot of non historical youtube channels that are super DIY and probably would love to do 10 minute segments of people explaining the cons. Especially with the rise of skirmish game that many of these channels are playing.

Maybe by bring in more people at all the cons you can afford to more them all to more strategically located venues.

Dear History Gamer

I'll accept your view of it as many people have different views of a thing and it's no doubt correct.

But the central fact remains.

I had great arguments with Panzeri on the yahoow group and I never felt it (the Help Desk) should have anything from the HMGS except the permission to have the space. Beyond that I wanted the GM's to be helping each other and doing things on their own to enhance and help the conventions and themselves.

But I accept your view of things.

I do however totally agree with you that the HMGS has always taken the GM's and the Dealers for granted, and done little for them. If they could find a way to squeeze money out of the GM's they'd do it.

I also still maintain that if anything is going to be done for the GM's then they are going to have to do it on their own. Much the same with the dealers.

So on to Cold Wars and we shall see who runs for the Bod.

By the way, case in point. The deadline for the Pel for Fall-In closed four days after Historicon, Oh well, maybe I'll put on an open game

Otto

You can still register a game today. It says it closes on the 4th but I'm not sure of the time.