Open discussion of topics raised in candidate Q&A threads

[MichaelEvans]

[-- Note inserted by JeffT (Administrator) --

This thread is for discussion by non-candidates about some of the issues raised in the elections Q&A threads. By popular demand, we are splitting off the threads and creating a place to discuss them. That way the Q&A threads can be focused for those following the elections.

Apologies for editing Michael's post--it's the only way to insert this notice at the top of the thread.

-- End of administrator note --]




(edit, copied my last post with this...)

What do you see as the greatest logistical challenges to spreading ourselves over 2 non-neighboring hotels?

How do you envision addressing them?

Logistically the hardest problem will be convincing our attendees to split up between the two venues without literally strong-arming them in to it.

From memory of three years ago and the websites I'd say that we should /very/ strongly look in to setting up a point to point wifi relay using directional antenna and openwrt/ddwrt flashed routers between the two hotels and use that to carry a live CCTV feed of the other stage.  If possible any video presentations should be displayed locally at each site.

Since there are two rooms setup, one should be used as a dance/rave setting.  The other could have an alternative dance or concert; which addresses a complaint from R&R this year.

Looking at the room layout I'd suggest allocating rooms towards panels in such a way that people naturally want to divide between the two locations to some approximately even degree.  However that also depends on Programming scheduling use of those rooms in that 'evil director' diabolical way that encourages prioritization of event viewing to drive that decision.

What do you think was done well in Operations this year, and what do you think we need to keep doing (or reinforce) to make sure it stays that way?

Unfortunately I don't know what did go well in Operations this year: I think from our attendee point of view the convention was a spectacular success.  So most of what operations did was excellent.

What do you think could have been done better in Operations this year, and what specific changes would you implement to make it so?

Most of the failings Operations did have this year fall in to three categories:

More Yojimbo were needed.  From the sound of things this was an extremely last moment change too.  HOWEVER the way we take on Yojimbo and already expect them to work as if it's the worst-case scenario both reduces the likelihood of them joining AND means that if something does hit the fan at the last moment there's no slack within the department to handle it.

If there were soft deadlines and final hard deadlines for things a few of them were missed.  When such things are hit normally extra resources are assigned to work in parallel from another angle.  There are also some things that cannot afford to fail from the beginning and must go to the last moment.  As Jeff is fond of calling it, a 'no power' plan for working through registration.

I'm not sure of where this got dropped, but since I hadn't received any prior notice before arriving at the convention I had no /idea/ I'd suddenly go from working 100+ hours before the convention to also working 16 at it.  In my choice of shifts from 06:00-14:00, 14:00-22:00, and 22:00-06:00 no less; two of which more or less split when I usually crash at conventions.  However assigning shifts in 2, 3 or at most 4 hour blocks was addressed in R&R.  I'd also say that for any 'fixed' area position only a 2 hour shift should be assigned.  A 4 hour should only be assigned to shifts that involve roaming around an area and which allow for taking a brief restroom break during.

How will we be able to recognize that you're doing your job when you give progress updates, and if you don't meet this standard will you be willing to step down?

Soft deadlines.  They don't all have to be met, those are the warnings that things aren't going to plan.  If I'm the problem, or fail to meet a hard deadline, I'd readily offer my head to the board and through them to the convention.

Assuming they would accept, who would you choose to fill the key Operations manager positions? (If you don't know of anyone whose qualifications make them a prima facie choice for any given position and want to choose through interviews, just saying "Interview" is fine.)

My first choice would be asking former directors and those who'd filled the position in prior years who they recommend for the job.  There's also the slightly more fair and slightly less expedient method of asking the staff who they thought was on the ball in their department.

I really only have one question for the candidates:  Will I be allowed to work in the Con Suite again?

I don't know of anyone who was a problem so I don't think I'd disallow any staff from doing so.

What tasks were you assigned in your position this year, and how did you perform on those?

I nearly started one of my tasks too late because I hadn't thought to ask for a soft deadline on it and nearly got bitten when a quite unexpected hard deadline was delivered.  I feel that I did complete things quite well once I was given a deadline, and that's one of the things that I learned from being staff this year.  /every/ task should have a soft deadline, followed by maybe more, and then a final hard deadline.

Specifically tasks that you hadn't planned to deal with as part of your job.

Manning the elevators.  I think given the situation I was reacting well, but I honestly got too stressed out by elevators arriving in huge bursts or not at all, and the general confusion spreading in to the attendees.  Next year I would very much suggest designated line up and route in/out areas for elevators; via tape on the floor if we can, or poles and rope if not.  I'd also suggest marking off every quarter elevator section in the line-up area so that it can be directed by car portion.  (However don't tell the attendees that.  Just number it sections 1 to 8.)

What other time sinks do you have outside of con? It is imperative that the Operations Director be available to the con for it's mini-events like dances and outreach events. Also being able to make reg meetings, board meetings, and general meetings is priority #1.

This is an extremely good question that I hadn't considered.  I knew of the board meetings, and could schedule time to attend those as well; BUT attending everything else was /not/ in my plans at all.   This is actually the first question that would have made me reconsider on my own.

Do you plan on attempting to put together team building events mid-year for your staff? Having the Yojimbo get together more during the year would be something the crew would really appreciate I think.

I think picnic/game day style things worked really well this last year.  We should do those at least once a quarter, and encourage a few hours of game play at the event for mingling and using names.  Large name tags should be required.  (If I say your name 15 times there's actually a chance I'll remember it...)

How do you think you'll go about getting the software guys to be able to set up a system like this?

Oops, I cut off a bit of the question, but I remember it.  Yeah, during the 2 hours that I did check-in I was extremely surprised lookup by that key wasn't there.  Even just /sorting/ the print output for the 'have badge, checking in now' station by that key would have vastly sped up my lookups.  It would be utterly /trivial/ to build a website in at least PHP, and probably any other language that had a database driver to talk to a copy of the DB and load up a template badge for visual confirmation as well as track parent permission forms and other items.  Plus this data would be static on site and be more secure without Internet access anyway.

How do you plan to get computers with the software on them for con?

I think the idea that was tried in 2007 would work well here.  Anything at all that can run a live CD talking over a secured, HARDLINE, network to a laptop running the DB and web-server sounds good.  Any old thing would do really, a few hundred megs of ram and an OK disk could keep up with that client load.

Also, dress-rehearsal is un-necessary; unless you mean beta and usage testing to make sure that the software fulfills the client's requirements.

[kalagei]

What panels/events, if any, do you, as Chair, see yourself attending, just for fun?
Follow-up question:
What did we learn from 2007 con that will require some attention to work more smoothly this year, if anything?
<<EDIT>> I just heard (thank you, Jaki), Assistant Directors (as opposed to assistants *to* directors) are appointed by the given Directors.  Given that, multiple years, maybe even more years than not, we have had Directors (for various reasons) leave, & late in the year get replaced, usually by their Assistants, do you have an opinion as to whether Assistant Directors should  also be up for a vote, either by the membership, or at least by the Board? What do you see as the pros or cons of each approach? What do you see as the most important qualities for Directors' Assistants? (I would say reliability and approachability/ amiability; everyone, at least everyone in their own department, should feel safe to go to them for help.) Given that it is imperative that Directors & their Assistants get along well with each other, perhaps they could run as a slate, as a pair, so that there would not be a risk of members voting in an Assistant who was incompatible with a Director. Would you be open to this possibility?  Thank you.

Just too chip in my two cents...

I think that having directors appoint their assistants is the correct choice, as the assistant director's role pre-con is to assume work that is delegated to them from their director, and to work closely with their director. This being said, the task becomes far easier when you have a cooperative agreement between the two people, as opposed to a voted in asst. director, because there can be cases where the assistant hired would butt heads with the director.

Also, asst. directors aren't implied a directorship if their director jumps ship, it just tends to happen that way, as they will be most likely to be the person who is most knowledgeable for the job at the time. The asst. director is only the director temporarily, and as I understood in 2009 when I was in this position (briefly) the vice chair had more authority over the department than I did as an assistant director (as one of the vice's roles is to step in for directors in absentia).

[RemSaverem]

I am confused. Did Michael pose the questions in the first post, provide the answers for them, or both? Is he running for a position?

@ Kalagei:
Thanks for taking the time to think about what I inquired.
Basically, I would think that whomever is an Assistant Director, in any department, **must** be someone that anyone in the department would be comfortable to approach for help with their convention job responsibilites, if they need timeline or policy clarification, tech or other material support, there is a problem that emerges during con, or whatever. If that A.D. is experienced as inaccessible or intimidating by various among the staff in her or his department, it could very negatively impact the functioning of the department, because it would create a gap in information flow and a gap in a sense of cohesion for the department -- no matter how tight a friendship outside of con the individual might have with their given director or the rest of the directors, nor even how well they work professionally just with that director.
I honestly do believe that there would be more transparency and better result overall for the con if each Director/Assistant pair ran as a slate.
It might be years before we get there, but I do believe it is a logical destination, that could increase the feeling of staff at lower levels than directors, of having input in who shapes their departments and sets their overall tone.
I remember being at a Sakuracon elections meeting where there was a very large contingent of folks who, upon a particular person being elected to a particular spot, left, as a group, for Anime Evolution. Prayerfully, everyone in Kumoricon gets along better than that, and is more of the same frame of mind vis-a-vis the direction for KC's development, and we would never be in such a situation. 

[JeffT]

I am confused. Did Michael pose the questions in the first post, provide the answers for them, or both? Is he running for a position?

I split out "answer"-type posts from the Q&A threads posted by people who are not running, into a dedicated discussion thread.

[kalagei]

I am confused. Did Michael pose the questions in the first post, provide the answers for them, or both? Is he running for a position?

@ Kalagei:
Thanks for taking the time to think about what I inquired.
Basically, I would think that whomever is an Assistant Director, in any department, **must** be someone that anyone in the department would be comfortable to approach for help with their convention job responsibilites, if they need timeline or policy clarification, tech or other material support, there is a problem that emerges during con, or whatever. If that A.D. is experienced as inaccessible or intimidating by various among the staff in her or his department, it could very negatively impact the functioning of the department, because it would create a gap in information flow and a gap in a sense of cohesion for the department -- no matter how tight a friendship outside of con the individual might have with their given director or the rest of the directors, nor even how well they work professionally just with that director.
I honestly do believe that there would be more transparency and better result overall for the con if each Director/Assistant pair ran as a slate.
It might be years before we get there, but I do believe it is a logical destination, that could increase the feeling of staff at lower levels than directors, of having input in who shapes their departments and sets their overall tone.
I remember being at a Sakuracon elections meeting where there was a very large contingent of folks who, upon a particular person being elected to a particular spot, left, as a group, for Anime Evolution. Prayerfully, everyone in Kumoricon gets along better than that, and is more of the same frame of mind vis-a-vis the direction for KC's development, and we would never be in such a situation. 

Having Director/Asst. Running in pairs does seems like an interesting idea.... I mean... at the very least, we do run the U.S. President Elections that way...

[MichaelEvans]

Jeff, really this was more confusion as I suspected it would be. At the time I answered the questions my resignation from running had not been accepted yet and I was still morally obligated to answer anyway.  Now I look like even more of a disruption for you having moved this to it's own thread, instead of just a coward for running away without answering questions.

Additionally, I've yet to check the other thread, but if you just moved the post then my set of questions may not still be where they should be.

I am confused. Did Michael pose the questions in the first post, provide the answers for them, or both? Is he running for a position?

I /was/ running, got talked out of it, posted my resignation from running, and while waiting for it to be accepted did what I thought was the honorable thing and answered all existing questions.  It was intended to fulfill the curiosity of others and to add my perspective to the discussion.  In the end I also asked some questions of the other candidates and provided my own answers (following the logic that I should still answer all questions posted before my resignation from running was officially noted).

[RemSaverem]

@ Kalagei: Precisely.
To be blunt:
There undoubtedly are some people out there who maybe would've thought about voting for McCain, but Palin was so abominably unworthy to be 2nd in command that they didn't ....(just putting that out there as a hypothetical).

Were it up to me, which it never will be, it would go something like this:

Each person who is running for a directorship names her or his top 3 choices for a running mate.
When we vote for a given nominee for director, we rank in order of preference those 3 options (or just vote for one) & have an option for a no-confidence vote.

Among the other reasons I feel this would be of value is that we so often have people running unopposed. In such circumstances, staff could still feel empowered that we are shaping the future of the department, by electing the 2nd in charge.

It makes sense that directors like to pick their friends for top jobs, but it also makes sense for the people who have been working under them to have some evaluative say, some influence, amongst the subset of  those who would all be found acceptable by the director for the position.

Long shot, probably won't happen at KC, but it would in my dream world version of a convention election.

@ Jeff & Michael:
IMHO, if someone gets nominated and accepts or defers, and during said time, answers questions aimed at candidates while him or herself presently is a valid candidate, then said input is not extraneous and should not be removed from the thread simply because later said person declines. Just IMHO.

[hanawaya]

Personally, I feel like anyone is in a position of some type of authority should be able to choose their own assistant. Yes, it means that they could choose their friends over other people who may be more capable. HOWEVER, it also means that they can most likely work well together. Knowing this from the professional realm, having an assistant manager or director or whatever assigned to you has the potential to royal suck. If the two of you don't get along than everything under you suffers. Most of the time, when a director makes a decision about who their assistant is going to be they know something that the general members and staff of Kumoricon may not know. Directors make their decisions by taking in all the information, evaluating it and thinking about the good of the Con.

[MichaelEvans]

...
Were it up to me, which it never will be, it would go something like this:

Each person who is running for a directorship names her or his top 3 choices for a running mate.
When we vote for a given nominee for director, we rank in order of preference those 3 options (or just vote for one) & have an option for a no-confidence vote.
...
@ Jeff & Michael:
IMHO, if someone gets nominated and accepts or defers, and during said time, answers questions aimed at candidates while him or herself presently is a valid candidate, then said input is not extraneous and should not be removed from the thread simply because later said person declines. Just IMHO.

Thanks for agreeing; though I did post my actual resignation before I posted the answers; though as stated elsewhere, I posted the answers before the resignation from running was officially accepted because I felt it was the right thing to do both for Kumoricon, it's membership, and my self.

Next, that is an extremely interesting idea.  Compound ranked voting.  Selecting both the primary and secondary choice from among their lists.  Though I fear that would lead to an un-naturally large and confusing ballot.  The number of permutations quickly becomes non-trivial for human minds which are used to coping with a handful or two (5-10) of things to think about at the same time.

[JeffT]

Jeff, really this was more confusion as I suspected it would be. At the time I answered the questions my resignation from running had not been accepted yet and I was still morally obligated to answer anyway.  Now I look like even more of a disruption for you having moved this to it's own thread, instead of just a coward for running away without answering questions.

Additionally, I've yet to check the other thread, but if you just moved the post then my set of questions may not still be where they should be.

I did not know the specific reason you continued to answer. Withdrawals don't need to be "accepted" (you can't be forced to run). Furthermore, I split Brandon's at the same time, and I created the thread in that manner because another staffer PMed the Secretary suggesting we make a dedicated thread for elections discussion, she agreed, and asked my opinion (I agreed too), and because of all that, I thought it would be a good idea.

But, you're right, it makes sense to move your second post back. I was doing it quickly so didn't look at that closely.

@ Jeff & Michael:
IMHO, if someone gets nominated and accepts or defers, and during said time, answers questions aimed at candidates while him or herself presently is a valid candidate, then said input is not extraneous and should not be removed from the thread simply because later said person declines. Just IMHO.

As far as I knew the posts that I split were posted after Michael declined. It looks like it was just a misunderstanding based on whether it was appropriate to keep answering. I did not mean to highlight it or make a big deal of it, but based on the reasons above I and it seems two other staffers thought it would be advantageous to have a thread where people could participate without worrying they are overflowing a thread that is intended for just candidates' answers.

[MichaelEvans]

Thank you for moving the post back; it seems we were each acting with the best interests but came to different conclusions given our different surrounding contexts.  I think that having explained where our decisions and reactions to other's actions came from everyone can feel better about the outcome.

[RemSaverem]

AFAIK, I haven't met Michael, know little or nothing about him, have zero attachment to whether or not he would run for a position, have zero personal knowledge of his qualifications for any given position. So please note that I am making a general point here, rather than advocating for an individual.

My main concern, in regard to both subjects presently being discussed in this thread, is the same:
There are cliques within Kumoricon.
Who you know & with whom you are friends outside of con really does influence how you experience KC, not just as an attendee but as someone trying to work at any level in the con.
The Elections process is very insular, in the sense that, although the forum threads for the election process are open to all users of the forum; and anyone can make a nomination; and anyone can come to the election meeting; and any staff can vote; very few people actually take advantage of some of these opportunities, and every year, it is usually the same people, at least in terms of asking candidates questions on the forums. Moreover, it is often the case that the only people running are people who are incumbents or who are friends with incumbents. While this may be totally natural and is not an intrinsically bad thing, if it were ever the case that someone (a) were legitimately nominated, (b) legitimately accepted the nomination, (c) legitimately answered questions regarding the position for which he or she were nominated, but then (d) received some sort of public or private pressure from people in any sort of clique, or individuals in any sort of position of authority, to withdraw, perhaps in the form of those people insisting the individual does not meet their own sense of what the qualifications would be for the position; IMHO, that pressure would constitute undue influence over the election, which I would consider a form of corruption. What can I say, I am from Chicago, I grew up knowing about people forcibly being removed from political contexts. Yes, it can be entirely legitimate and even benevolently intended, for someone who actually knows all of what is entailed in a position to choose to educate a potential candidate about aspects of the job about which the potential candidate was unaware, which might lead a candidate to decide he or she does not qualify for the position. Yes, it can be entirely legitimate and even intended for the good of the group, for someone who knows a potential candidate well to inform others of aspects of the individual's conduct or areas that are lacking in the individual's skill sets that might make them less than ideal as a candidate. But it remains up to the individual to decide whether or not they run, & it remains up to the voting populace to decide whether or not they win. IMHO, the good of the convention community is served by seeing all the replies in election threads by all those who have legitimately accepted nominations for directorships, even if individual nominees later withdraw, because there is a chance that those who have decided to withdraw may have had ideas that are novel that could continue to be of value to the development of the department, and especially because if any of those new ideas would change the status quo, if there is any chance that proposing those changes led to the person being pressured with withdraw, the voting population should have the opportunity to see what those proposals might have been.

Again, I am neither presuming nor alleging  that Kumoricon in any way presently has any form whatsoever of this type of corruption, nor in any way casting doubt on any past, present, or future directors or candidates. I do feel, however, that it can be a safeguard against any future problems, if posts by valid candidates are permitted to remain in the candidate threads even if those candidates later withdraw. The present status of who is actively in which races is maintained in a separate thread by the Secretary (thank you, Jo), so if anyone is confused as to who is still running, that clarification is readily available.

If I hadn't been at a Sakuracon meeting at which an entire large contingent of staff physically left a meeting and then left the convention for another convention upon hearing a particular person got elected to a particular position, I would not be feeling as protective of election process. Please forgive if in any way my comments feel left field to anyone.

[JeffT]

I do feel, however, that it can be a safeguard against any future problems, if posts by valid candidates are permitted to remain in the candidate threads even if those candidates later withdraw. The present status of who is actively in which races is maintained in a separate thread by the Secretary (thank you, Jo), so if anyone is confused as to who is still running, that clarification is readily available.

Ellen, since my moderation actions are the only ones at issue here, I repeat: No split off posts were posted by a candidate, when they were a candidate. Please check the timestamps of the posts if you would like to verify this.

If I hadn't been at a Sakuracon meeting at which an entire large contingent of staff physically left a meeting and then left the convention for another convention upon hearing a particular person got elected to a particular position, I would not be feeling as protective of election process. Please forgive if in any way my comments feel left field to anyone.

Regarding the rest of your post, as somebody who has been around for awhile and "observed" many elections (and although I was not at the election you describe above, I am pretty sure I know which one it is), I'm contacting you privately to comment.

[Rathany]

We retained 104 staff from 2009 into 2010.
We had 44 people at the elections for the 2010 Board, many of whom had proxies.  I remember some discussion of trying to find people to hold proxies since myself and some other staffers were maxxed out on how many people they could proxy for.  So, many more than 44 staffers voted.  

So, of our year to year returning staff, I am fairly certain that at least 50% of them vote.  I know that some staff choose not to vote, because what they due for the con is of limited scope and they trust more other staff to have more perspective and to cast more informed votes.  

Now, staff retention is a separate, but very serious issue.  But, for our returning staff, the percentages are actually pretty good.  

Google tells me that in the 2008 federal election, voter turnout was about 56.8%* .  So, our turnout (of returning staff) percentages are about the same as for governmental elections in years where we are electing a new president.  While I would like to see both percentages go up, I thought I would give some perspective on how many of our staff do vote.  

(Thanks to Madam Secretary for helping me with the deets)

(* Number is based on number of voting age Americans, not just registered voters.)

[@random]

In 2007 the pre-reg line was 22 minutes at it's longest an there was no line to speak of most of the weekend.  We can do this.  We have done it before.  10-key computerized check in is blazingly fast and more accurate than paper.   What plans do you have to make sure this happens again?  

(Hint - I want to see the words 'dress rehearsal' in your response.)

I agree completely Dawn.

Future Ops Directors: How do you think you'll go about getting the software guys to be able to set up a system like this? How do you plan to get computers with the software on them for con?

Software guys, you'd probably be the best by far to chime in on this directly: How easy would it be for you to set up a system like this, and what system requirements would it entail?

If it's possible to do something that doesn't require convention purchase of laptops, that would be superb. When Ian started burning through the badge validations on Saturday, all I had to do to help was pull out my own laptop and a flash drive, since it only required Excel / Open Office.

Actually - would we benefit from splitting the attendees into different files by the first letter(s) of their last name, and have different stations for each file instead of trying to interlink? This would have a lot of advantages, starting with 1) not having to keep the same file open on multiple computers, and 2) not having a single rate-limiting step that cripples efficiency no matter how many helpers you have. Out of the issues that caused registration to be a multi-hour line, one that I particularly noticed was when will-call badges were being kept in Just One Spot. It had people almost literally climbing over each other, and contributed significantly to the misordering that made pickup take 2-3x as long.

With this in mind here's my questions: If the decision is made to split the tickets across both Info Desks how are you going to track the tickets and the cash that comes with some ticketed events? And if you decide to use the Internet to assist with this solution, who is going to build the system so that it is Info Staff friendly?

Just my suggestion, but I think that it'd be far better to split the ticketed ~events~ between Info Desks, not the tickets themselves. I.e., tickets for events A and C are picked up in one hotel, B and D in the other. Preferably, keep the event tickets in the same hotel where the event is held.

Splitting tickets for any single event would have really troublesome logistics.

As an aside: Amber, you're probably going to hate me for saying this - but it might be a good idea to increase the number of ticketed events. With the increased room for more attendees, the chance of any given event building up an insurmountable line gets a lot higher.

[RemSaverem]

The statistics put things into perspective, as did the PM. Thanks for both.

[MichaelEvans]

Generally with information contention issues you're better off using existing solutions.  Databases, both free and super expensive, are more than able to provide ACID http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACID (it completes fully and reliably or it never happened at all).  Even my very old broken monitor laptop could easily run a database and webserver using free open source software.  Any other system on that network could connect to it and access data.  Securing that is a slightly larger logistical hurdle... but it could be done with a self signed SSL cert that we instruct new workstations to accept (once, at setup) and which would then protect the transactions there after.  With a web-interface, any remotely modern operating system, including free live linux CDs, can be used as a client.  People's windows laptops can be clients too.

[hanawaya]

Splitting the ticketed events between the two hotels is a great idea! It would cut down on the amount of pressure or strain that one Info Desk would feel over the other.

Having more ticketed events has advantages and disadvantages. One advantages is it helps to regulate fire code. A disadvantage is more lines. A suggestion for next year would be to create a system that keeps track of the tickets that can be accessed by more than one computer. This year, I basically rebuilt the Info Desk from the ground up. I neither had the time or the skills to create something like this, but having it would defiantly help. If we were able to access a data system with more than one computer it would cut our line time in half. We also ran one line for both sets of tickets on Monday this year when there were two ticketed events. An attempt to separate them did not go over very well due to space issues. The idea was proposed to move the desk, but once something has been set in a location trying to move it on attendees isn't the best idea. If we were to run more than one ticketed event like we did on Monday it would need to be done either with two lines and more than one computer for each event or have the events split between the two desks. Event A would be at the Hilton, Event B at the Red Lion.

Here's the other thing to think about, everything but the power strip that was used at the Info Desk this year personally belonged to a staff member. The monitor belonged to Robert, one laptop to me, one to my assistant, the cables to my assistant, and the laptop lock to one of my staff. There is no guarantee that any of this equipment will be available next year.

[@random]

Generally with information contention issues you're better off using existing solutions.  Databases, both free and super expensive, are more than able to provide ACID http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACID (it completes fully and reliably or it never happened at all).  Even my very old broken monitor laptop could easily run a database and webserver using free open source software.  Any other system on that network could connect to it and access data.  Securing that is a slightly larger logistical hurdle... but it could be done with a self signed SSL cert that we instruct new workstations to accept (once, at setup) and which would then protect the transactions there after.  With a web-interface, any remotely modern operating system, including free live linux CDs, can be used as a client.  People's windows laptops can be clients too.

Thank you for the explanation and the link.  I particularly like the ACID principles - poor little Shiro (my Macbook) froze at one point while I was helping Ian, and I was lucky that I'd been routinely saving and could verify that the last few entries got restored.

In terms of implementation, what would such a system require? Among other questions in this vein, would the convention need to purchase a server? Would it require more than a trivial amount of time for software installation before people can use their own laptops? (This would probably need to be coordinated ahead of time, and it could make it difficult for others to jump in and help.) And would it require cabling, or would a wireless solution be possible?

[MichaelEvans]

Setting up the server could be done with practically any old generic computer (provided it was built within the last 10 years) that still worked; that part would take a little bit of time to install and properly configure.

Coding extremely basic systems like ticket tracking for events should be workable in under a week of work-hours provided the interface didn't have to be too complex (or about a month of spare time during a boring part of the year; yes these are pessimistic estimates, but I'd be ashamed of my self for missing them without good reason).

Actually what would take longer is proposing the functionality, system behavior, and user interface.  Though for a simple thing like this that shouldn't take too long either.

[kjayers]

Setting up the server could be done with practically any old generic computer (provided it was built within the last 10 years) that still worked; that part would take a little bit of time to install and properly configure.

Coding extremely basic systems like ticket tracking for events should be workable in under a week of work-hours provided the interface didn't have to be too complex (or about a month of spare time during a boring part of the year; yes these are pessimistic estimates, but I'd be ashamed of my self for missing them without good reason).

Actually what would take longer is proposing the functionality, system behavior, and user interface.  Though for a simple thing like this that shouldn't take too long either.

I understand the main obstacle to using existing software is licensing, but I don't want to ignore the fact that Excel has built-in workbook sharing: Multiple users each have their own instance of the spreadsheet open, and each time they save, it merges changes with the other users.  If folks are conscientious about saving before and after every entry (before to get your colleagues recent changes, after to add yours to the master), it's really easy to maintain.

I have a hard time, myself, balancing "reinvent the wheel" against "pay for someone else's wheel."

[MichaelEvans]

Except that the 'wheel' you're talking about is lacking a number of key safety features.  A better comparison would be between an SQL console and Excel.  One has a flashy interface, but the other has far more flexibility and can easily wrap the transactional safety in to a single function.  Potentially thousands of simultaneous users could each operate at the same time, even with far older hardware.  Additionally MySQL and PostgreSQL are both free of cost and to modify.  The web interface however would add abstraction, visualization, and security to the process; which is where the development time costs are almost entirely spent.  Also, I did note that it was a very pessimistic time estimate.

[RemSaverem]

I would like to put in a little plug for Google documents, for things that have to be organized prior to con.
I use both the regular documents and the spreadsheets (which I *think* resemble Excel), in managing Creation Station across multiple cons.
The advantages are that
(a) It's free.
(b) Anyone can sign up for Google to start a document.
(c) Anyone who has email can receive a link to view or edit a document.
(d) No software purchase required.
(e) No networking of computers required.
(f) No need to save files or transfer files; anywhere you can get the 'net, you can view them.
The disadvantages are that
(a) In spreadsheets, you have to be really careful how you click on a cell to read its contents, or you could accidentally erase it, and there is no working "back key" to fill those contents back in (that I personally have found yet).
(b) I don't know how helpful they would be during con, if the space at con in which info would have to be acquired from them lacked internet access.
           Does anyone yet know whether there is internet access in con space at either or both of the new hotels? Perhaps where offices are situated would reflect that, if only 1 offered it?
Separately, any idea which departments have most & least staff turnover?

[Rathany]

What about tickets actually needs to be tracked?  Other than how many are given out?

Anything where we are dependent on an internet connection has got a serious Achilles Heel. 

[tbatzel]

This year we recorded badge number, name on badge, and what event the ticket was for.

[MichaelEvans]

If looking at it for how well a custom solution could work; entering just the badge number and having the names auto fill in (or at least populate with the correct set of choices if possible).  Checking off which of the day's events there are tickets being distributed for.  Clicking OK and seeing the tickets recorded as OK to give out, at which point the paper can transfer hands.

That could be done via the existing website if there is free Internet access in the lobby; or from a local server if not.

The no-power solution is to check off/punch out the number of tickets; in the case of non-Internet access distributing tickets from both hotels could still work by exchanging 'leases' on blocks of tickets until there were just a few left, which would be when every ticket would need to be tracked by both desks.

[tbatzel]

I believe we would be fine just recording badge numbers.  Day badges would need to maintain unique values, which was problematic for us this year.

I think both options (1 source for tickets; or tickets for hotel A are available at desk A) would work well.

[@random]

Setting up the server could be done with practically any old generic computer (provided it was built within the last 10 years) that still worked; that part would take a little bit of time to install and properly configure.

Coding extremely basic systems like ticket tracking for events should be workable in under a week of work-hours provided the interface didn't have to be too complex (or about a month of spare time during a boring part of the year; yes these are pessimistic estimates, but I'd be ashamed of my self for missing them without good reason).

Actually what would take longer is proposing the functionality, system behavior, and user interface.  Though for a simple thing like this that shouldn't take too long either.

I understand the main obstacle to using existing software is licensing, but I don't want to ignore the fact that Excel has built-in workbook sharing: Multiple users each have their own instance of the spreadsheet open, and each time they save, it merges changes with the other users.  If folks are conscientious about saving before and after every entry (before to get your colleagues recent changes, after to add yours to the master), it's really easy to maintain.

I have a hard time, myself, balancing "reinvent the wheel" against "pay for someone else's wheel."

For that matter, Open Office has the same functionality - and it's free. It is a bit crashy sometimes, but if we're saving after every entry that shouldn't be much of an issue. I'm not sure how well this would work in practice, though.

Wrt reg tracking, I think it goes back to what Rathany said in the Ops Questions thread - whichever system gets chosen, we need a dress rehearsal during one or more of the staff meetings to make sure it works well under fire, with a variety of machines. An Excel or Open Office shared document would probably work well; ditto for splitting the reg file into smaller ones (A-D, E-K, L-Mc, etc) so that different computers don't have to use the same file at the same time. And I'm sure that Michael's correct and by all rights the system he's describing ought to work flawlessly. But when it comes to something that makes the difference between either happy attendees, or half the rants in post-con threads being about reg lines, it's better to waste a little time and be 100% sure than it is to only be 95% sure. (Plus, it wouldn't hurt to let the reg staff get better-acquainted with the system before they have to use it.)

[RemSaverem]

@ randompvg, I think things like KC Lite have been used for reg dress rehearsals before & that that's one of the reasons for having them.

[@random]

@ randompvg, I think things like KC Lite have been used for reg dress rehearsals before & that that's one of the reasons for having them.

Thank you for the context. (^_^)

[RemSaverem]

@ randompvg, I think things like KC Lite have been used for reg dress rehearsals before & that that's one of the reasons for having them.

Thank you for the context. (^_^)

At least this was true when the 1st one was held

[Rathany]

@ randompvg, I think things like KC Lite have been used for reg dress rehearsals before & that that's one of the reasons for having them.

Thank you for the context. (^_^)

Yes, the year Reg had a dress rehearsal the pre-reg line was 22 minutes at its longest and had no wait most of the weekend.

/ me beating a dead horse

Also, what little I know of tech setup and other conly things comes from the mini-events.  They have been great training for me, at least. 

[kylite]

Im gonna side with Dawn on this one. Ten Key was the most awsome reg line. I did a lap of the building to check on the post reg line. came back and pre reg line was gone. then another lap and post reg was gone

[pyronine]

Thank you Jeff for making this thread, I didn't feel comfortable chatting about subject in the candidate threads.

Seeing as we are in 2 hotels and will have 2 yoji offices containing 2 lost and founds, each yoji office must be manned by a minimum of 2 yoji, one running the front desk and the other mannig the computer. Each office also ahs 3 shifts, Morning, Swing, and Graveyard so thats 6 people per office.

That is 12 Yoji. This last year we had a little over 40 and were stretched very thin and pulling people form other departments to cover shifts.

How do you plan to address this so we have proper coverage in both buildings without exausting out staff beyond their limits

So this brings up a good point, We are going to be having 2 of a lot of things. Just a suggestion for everyone, from years of experience with running multiple offices (i call them command posts - 17 years military) Have 1 main office, and a second satellite office. Use a runner, phones, email, and chat programs to communicate and keep the logistical flow moving. It is near impossible to run 2 main offices at the same time while keeping records straight between the two on a real time basis.

For example, Have the main Yoji office in the opposite hotel from the operations office, while this sounds crazy it works. The ops office is a satellite yojimbo office, we can call it a Customer Safety desk which has the ops director and Yoji 2 or 3. While at the other hotel the Yojimbo office is a satellite ops office, where the asst director is located with Yoji 1.

Registration needs to have 1 central location due to the security control of information, badges, and funds. Running 2 separate day of con registration areas is a logistical nightmare. Tracking every attendee in real time can be done, but due to the issues that arise at the desk, I would not want to make them all walk to the other hotel to resolve an issue. However we can advertise, only if the system is working, a secondary pre-reg check in only. We are working on a central database system and software for quick check in. If we want to speed up the line, we can not do data entry at the desk, which means no information is being passed to the other hotel. Having 2 hotels may mean a much larger area for registration. I will be up there soon to see what we can have for an area.

@ randompvg, I think things like KC Lite have been used for reg dress rehearsals before & that that's one of the reasons for having them.

Thank you for the context. (^_^)

Yes, the year Reg had a dress rehearsal the pre-reg line was 22 minutes at its longest and had no wait most of the weekend.

/ me beating a dead horse

Also, what little I know of tech setup and other conly things comes from the mini-events.  They have been great training for me, at least. 

OMG yes, i so want to do this!!!!!!

Splitting the ticketed events between the two hotels is a great idea! It would cut down on the amount of pressure or strain that one Info Desk would feel over the other.

Having more ticketed events has advantages and disadvantages. One advantages is it helps to regulate fire code. A disadvantage is more lines. A suggestion for next year would be to create a system that keeps track of the tickets that can be accessed by more than one computer. This year, I basically rebuilt the Info Desk from the ground up. I neither had the time or the skills to create something like this, but having it would defiantly help. If we were able to access a data system with more than one computer it would cut our line time in half. We also ran one line for both sets of tickets on Monday this year when there were two ticketed events. An attempt to separate them did not go over very well due to space issues. The idea was proposed to move the desk, but once something has been set in a location trying to move it on attendees isn't the best idea. If we were to run more than one ticketed event like we did on Monday it would need to be done either with two lines and more than one computer for each event or have the events split between the two desks. Event A would be at the Hilton, Event B at the Red Lion.

We are already working on a system like this amber, it should not be too hard to incorporate Info booth into it.

Here's the other thing to think about, everything but the power strip that was used at the Info Desk this year personally belonged to a staff member. The monitor belonged to Robert, one laptop to me, one to my assistant, the cables to my assistant, and the laptop lock to one of my staff. There is no guarantee that any of this equipment will be available next year.

The same for the reg desk, every item there was personal except the power cables and strips. I will have it back next year (if i am manager still, fingers crossed), can you help make it look more like your display, pleeeeeeease.

[hanawaya]

Pyro, you just made my day!

Getting Info into a similar system set up to handle ticketed events would be awesome!

Also, Tim is around the forums somewhere. He's the one who put our slideshow together. I believe he agreed to help you with yours as well. Hopefully he'll see this and confirm that.

[RemSaverem]

@ pyro, impressive thinking.

[tbatzel]

@ pyro.  Yes, we can work on the displays.

[BigGuy]

Tracking all the data of badge numbers of the people going to the ticketed events is impressive, my main question is, how necessary is it? If we had a ticketed 18+ panel, the only checking I can think of would be making sure the person was actually 18+.
   Keeping a simple tally of how many tickets we give out to events should be good enough, and would make things go a lot faster.
I'm not saying bad about info booth staff, you guys were awesome. I'm just a big fan of the simple solutions to things.

[RemSaverem]

Tracking all the data of badge numbers of the people going to the ticketed events is impressive, my main question is, how necessary is it? If we had a ticketed 18+ panel, the only checking I can think of would be making sure the person was actually 18+.
   Keeping a simple tally of how many tickets we give out to events should be good enough, and would make things go a lot faster.
I'm not saying bad about info booth staff, you guys were awesome. I'm just a big fan of the simple solutions to things.

I am only guessing here, but perhaps the value has been preventing any individual from returning multiple times to get additional tickets, potentially even dispersing them to people not entitled somehow to go to the particular event? Just a thought.

[hanawaya]

The reason why we tracked badges was to eliminate the possibility of double pick ups. The rule was one ticket per attendee per badge. We had four thousand people and let's be honest, none of us remembers every face and person we see at Con. If the person had already picked up a ticket, when we started typing in their name it would auto-fill. Thankfully this never happened. We did, however, get countless people wanting to pick up somewhere between 2 and 10 tickets. I had very specific instructions. No picking up tickets for friends and no double pick ups.

[@random]

The reason why we tracked badges was to eliminate the possibility of double pick ups. The rule was one ticket per attendee per badge. We had four thousand people and let's be honest, none of us remembers every face and person we see at Con. If the person had already picked up a ticket, when we started typing in their name it would auto-fill. Thankfully this never happened. We did, however, get countless people wanting to pick up somewhere between 2 and 10 tickets. I had very specific instructions. No picking up tickets for friends and no double pick ups.

Just my opinion, but I see the absence of anyone trying to cheat the system as an affirmation that the system worked. Its greatest value wasn't prevention, it was deterrence - knowing that we were checking kept people from trying.

RemSaverem is right about one of the reasons for no multiple-ticket pickups, but there's at least one other reason I can think of: Preventing a lot of empty seats. If John picks up four tickets for his friends but two of them are unaware and get their own tickets, the extras will probably end up discarded. Ditto if Jane picks up four tickets, but two of her friends actually wanted to go to another panel.

BigGuy's comment about simple solutions gave me an idea for next year: If we can get printouts of badge numbers to be checked off, that would remove the need for laptops. However, this would only work if registration has a system for preprinting numbers onto all badges.

[tbatzel]

Laptops should scale to a larger number of ticketed events, even with just a spreadsheet. As long as the two desks are not issuing tickets for the same event. Using USB number pads to only record badge numbers, will make the process more efficient. 

I learned this year we can't use the laptop running the display for anything else, it just doesn't work well.  We'll need more laptops, and either a networked or flash drive solution.

Randompvg, printouts would work for all pre-reg badges. We just need a sheet of paper from 1 to 4000. I'm not sure how that will work with day badges, or industry / press badges.

[kjayers]

I learned this year we can't use the laptop running the display for anything else, it just doesn't work well.  We'll need more laptops, and either a networked or flash drive solution.

I'm a fan of secure wireless networks.  I had a small LAN in Member Services so Brandon's computer and mine could both reach the paper printer and my NAS.  My switch was my router from home, and Pyro (who's been to my house A LOT) could see my network from the 20th floor from his room on the 4th or 5th.

[RemSaverem]

I agree with randompvg re: empty seats. I seem to recall there may have been some occurrence (I think it may have been last year) where an overestimation of how many tickets would already be in use led to a huge number of empty seats at the AMV contest, yet, people not being allowed in. Is that ringing a bell? Hope I'm remembering that right.

[@random]

Randompvg, printouts would work for all pre-reg badges. We just need a sheet of paper from 1 to 4000. I'm not sure how that will work with day badges, or industry / press badges.

If it explains, I was thinking in terms of having the paper badges not only printed in a fixed quantity, but with unique numbers.

In my experience, variable-data b/w printing is only a mild pain in the butt by comparison to using a three-color ribbon printer, but if it becomes an issue I could lend a little expertise. For that matter, with some types of preprinted paper stock I could handle the number printing directly.

[kjayers]

I just assumed she was using it for local service and not the internet so i did not connect through it.

FYI, you are correct.  /digression

[MichaelEvans]

Registration needs to have 1 central location due to the security control of information, badges, and funds. Running 2 separate day of con registration areas is a logistical nightmare. Tracking every attendee in real time can be done, but due to the issues that arise at the desk, I would not want to make them all walk to the other hotel to resolve an issue. However we can advertise, only if the system is working, a secondary pre-reg check in only. We are working on a central database system and software for quick check in. If we want to speed up the line, we can not do data entry at the desk, which means no information is being passed to the other hotel. Having 2 hotels may mean a much larger area for registration. I will be up there soon to see what we can have for an area.

This is precisely what I'm referring to when I ask questions about Information-Technology Services and how they fit in to the convention's department structure.  We have a lot of capable people in this area, but an extreme lack of coordination since we report two two different chains of command.  There isn't even a shared view of currently working projects to prevent conflicting development efforts.

[Jamiche]

I agree with randompvg re: empty seats. I seem to recall there may have been some occurrence (I think it may have been last year) where an overestimation of how many tickets would already be in use led to a huge number of empty seats at the AMV contest, yet, people not being allowed in. Is that ringing a bell? Hope I'm remembering that right.

I'm not sure what you are remembering, but the rule with the tickets is that they guarantee you a seat, not that you have to have one to get in.

We actually release fewer tickets than the room will actually hold.  Once all ticketed attendees are in, then other people can get in.  There should be no reason for empty seats expcept for low turnout.

It is very doubtful there will be a need for tickets at both info booths... tickets should be given away in the hotel where they event is, and since only Main Events is ticketed, it should only be in that hotel.

[JeffT]

I've split off the posts dealing with wireless reception to a new thread in Off-Topic and Chat:

http://www.kumoricon.org/forums/index.php?topic=14049.0

[RemSaverem]

@ Jaki, thanks for the clarification on how ticketed events work. I don't think I've ever been to one.