On one page on my blog, I had this tidbit of info:
“Just because you didn’t enjoy the 3/100+ events you attended, doesn’t mean the con sucked, you just don’t know how to enjoy things in general/too lazy to go outside your box.”
Let’s expand a bit on that, shall we?
Please, when going online & reading people’s accounts of their con experiences, please be wary of those that say “this con sucked!”. They usually only attended a very small amount of events for the con & have experienced little else of the con, and the minute the events they went to weren’t absolutely perfect, the entire con sucked. Worse yet are the ones that essentially attribute their own laziness/close-mindedness to the con sucking; i.e., they were too lazy to stand in the line for an event but blame it on the event management vs. fessing up to being to much of a fat bastard to just stand in the line or come later when their isn’t a line. Also, some just have a stick so far & so firmly up their a$$ it really doesn’t take all that much for them to hate anything. Heck, they’re looking for reasons to hate something, in this case cons, & will use the most minutiae of things to justify defaming the entire event.
To wrap up this whole s*it cake, they usually like to play the “well, such & such con is way more organized/better/whatever else”, which is total bulls**t, because comparing 2 cons to each other is comparing apples to oranges. Each con has grown, developed, & matured in their own environment unique to them with their own resources particular to that area, no con is the same. The only time you can even justify comparing 2 cons is when they happen at the same venue (like MAGfest & Katsucon, they’re both @ the Gaylord at the National Harbor) & even then, both of those cons have different resources to work with within the organization hosting the event. Anybody who does this usually already has a bias & favors that particular con over anything else, & are just fishing for reasons to say why that con is better than any other. Additionally, these people have no idea what they’re talking about & have no idea how cons work X/ They don’t realize how cons are planned, that no con is perfect, the logistics involved in running these things, &, most of all, are just plain talking out their a$$. It’s one thing to say you don’t like a con, it’s another to assert a con sucks & you have all the reasons why it sucked. B*tch, you didn’t do anything but jerk yourself off the duration of the con, what the f**k do you know about anything, let alone how cons are ran & what gives you the right to criticize them??? It’s even more funny when someone questions them, like saying the con they’re so busy blowing is just as if not more disorganized than the con they’re sh*tting all over, & watching them be like “O rlly? I didn’t know that.” No, sh*t you didn’t, you wouldn’t know if ice water is cold you shallow a$$hole X/
Likewise, if you didn’t like a con, just say you didn’t like it. Don’t say it sucked or it was horrible because you didn’t like the 3 events you did out of the 200+ available, that makes no f’ing sense. This whole way of phrasing things basically gets back to my issue with people stating personal feels as if they’re objective fact, when it just isn’t the case. There is absolutely no reason why you can’t say “I didn’t like the con” & why some insist on saying “this con sucked”, absolutely none. It just makes you sound dumber than what you already are, so just STFU.
To wrap up this impromptu rant, I’m definitely not saying any con is perfect or 100% awesome, but that’s the thing, no con is perfect, so it’s ridiculous to find these ppl. who denounce the entire event because one minor things isn’t to their liking. Hyperbolize much?