Convention models & accessibility

[mirrorshard]

Something the Bicon accommodation flap (which I don't propose to comment on here) brought to mind is the constellation of assumptions involved and decisions made.

A couple of examples to establish the field, first - all of these are long weekends (Thursday or Friday to Sunday or Monday). The costs are the lowest prebooking prices I can recall or get hold of.

Bicon: university campus. Single rooms with the opportunity for self-catering, £100 or £175 for ensuite.

LRP main event: Scout campsite. Camping with catering vans, shower blocks, and the opportunity for all the self-catering you can do without burning anything down, £60.

Eastercon: Mid-range hotel. Single, double, and twin rooms, all en-suite, no self-catering. £40 a night (based on sharing a twin/double room) for three nights, plus £50 convention membership, makes £170.

Basically, all of these have things about them that are deal-breakers for some people, and organisers always have to choose between them. Well, in principle - in practice they often default to one or another model that they're used to and comfortable with.

In the campus model, it's the combination of small tatty student rooms, possible lack of en-suite bathrooms, and tiny shared kitchens. On the other hand, you've got small-group community and cheapness. This model works well for a relatively young & healthy community, who generally know each other already; less well for older people and positively hostile to families.

Camping is a deal-breaker for a great many people, though I love it. It's something you need to have a fair amount of practice at, and prepare for in advance, and it works better if you do it as a family or an organised group. It can be positively hostile to the disabled, and sometimes to those with food issues.

Hotels are my favourite overall, and it's possible to drive the cost down further. The conference facilities are not always up to what a university can give you, but that varies a lot between hotels. They're generally better at comfort, commodiousness, and responsiveness to needs than university campuses are, but they can also be quite a bit worse in terms of allergens and pathogens. On the other hand, you're limited food-wise to the hotel restaurants (which are generally sub-standard and over-priced unless it's a very, very good hotel, in which case they're just over-priced) or whatever's within any distance you're comfortable staying away from the con for.

I've doubtless left out some factors, so all comments and contributions welcome.

Comments

Re: Interesting overview, but...

[the-alchemist.livejournal.com]

Not all hotels are comfortable with holding a convention focussed around sexuality.

I'm pretty sure that under the Sexual Orientation Regulations 2007, their 'comfort levels' are irrelevant: they have a legal obligation not to discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation. This is certainly the case with hotels which host weddings but refuse to do civil partnerships, or who try to refuse double rooms to gay couples.


Disability and health issues crop up again in a hotel situation - some people cannot manage to eat at set times, or have very specific dietary needs which the hotel may not be able or willing to meet.

I tend to get around this by carrying a toaster around with me to hotels and so on, and/or packing food I can eat which only requires you to add water. It's far from ideal, but it just about works.

I've never yet come across a hotel that isn't willing to meet even very complicated sets of dietary needs at their lunchtimes or dinnertimes, although they do occasionally screw up.

Re: Interesting overview, but...

[mirrorshard.livejournal.com]

I've never yet come across a hotel that isn't willing to meet even very complicated sets of dietary needs at their lunchtimes or dinnertimes

This is the basic problem with food at hotels, for me - I'm always going to need food outside specific mealtimes, and especially late at night after sensible people stop serving. It's dealable-with, but takes preparation, as I know you're familiar with.

Re: Interesting overview, but...

[valkyriekaren.livejournal.com]

It's dealable-with, but takes preparation

Of course, this is true with a lot of the usual quibbles!

Historically hotels haven't been an option simply because they're too expensive. As well as higher accommodation costs, they also tend to charge a lot more for the conference suites themselves. SF conventions etc can get extra revenue to cover that through things like dealers' rooms, sponsorship of programmes/website by publishers, celebrity auctions and so on, which is something BiCon simply can't. I'd be really interested to see the accounts of an EasterCon and do a critical comparison with the accounts of a recent BiCon, actually.

Re: Interesting overview, but...

[caramel-betty.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure that under the Sexual Orientation Regulations 2007, their 'comfort levels' are irrelevant: they have a legal obligation not to discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation.

Comfort levels may be irrelevant, but there's a difference between a venue enthusiastically helping you have a great weekend and a venue grudgingly letting you have use of the facilities.

Re: Interesting overview, but...

[valkyriekaren.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure that under the Sexual Orientation Regulations 2007, their 'comfort levels' are irrelevant: they have a legal obligation not to discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation. This is certainly the case with hotels which host weddings but refuse to do civil partnerships, or who try to refuse double rooms to gay couples.

That's as may be, but they can certainly say things like 'no nudity in the conference rooms' or 'no fetishwear', which would put a crimp on some people's fun. (Bear in mind that I'm speaking historically about why hotels were problematic - so from before those regulations came in, and I'm aware that this issue needs revisiting).

Re: Interesting overview, but...

[alextiefling.livejournal.com]

I've never yet come across a hotel that isn't willing to meet even very complicated sets of dietary needs at their lunchtimes or dinnertimes, although they do occasionally screw up.
Willing, perhaps. Able, no. At a union conference in Torquay, for which friend_of_tofu and I were in a pre-booked hotel, and where we had given proper dietary notice three months in advance, we still got the wrong things, up to and including breakfast delivered to our room which contained sausages and bacon. (We're both vegetarian.) In the end, we ate out whenever possible, and told the union not to pay that portion of our bill.