Re: The return of "DC in 2011"
- From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 9 Apr 2009 22:06:46 -0400
<Doug Berry> wrote:
"Keith F. Lynch" <kfl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<Doug Berry> wrote:
The rule is to prevent regional dynasties from controlling several
years of Worldcons.
I know. I just think 800 kilometers is overbroad. DC, Boston,
and Montreal are in three very different regions.
I like it since it forces the convention to move significant
distances.
Yes, on a two-year cycle. It could, in principle, be in the same city
two consecutive years.
What's wrong with my half-joking proposal to multiple the number of
votes for a site by the distance to the site? That avoids any sharp
unnatural cutoff.
And there's no war on tourism, Keith. Or if there is, you're the
Lt. Hiroo Onoda of that war.
I don't think it's a hopeless cause yet. It's basically Bush's war,
and he's been out of office for less than three months. There are
promising signs, such as "Real ID" being quietly allowed to die,
Denver's city bus system relenting on demanding ID of riders, and
the DC Metro suspending their plans to randomly search bags.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
.
- References:
- The return of "DC in 2011"
- From: Keith F. Lynch
- Re: The return of "DC in 2011"
- From: Doug Berry
- Re: The return of "DC in 2011"
- From: Keith F. Lynch
- Re: The return of "DC in 2011"
- From: Doug Berry
- The return of "DC in 2011"
- Prev by Date: Re: Civil unions for everyone?
- Next by Date: Re: Mass Transit
- Previous by thread: Re: The return of "DC in 2011"
- Next by thread: Re: The return of "DC in 2011"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|