[Introduction: Gary Westfahl has authored, edited, or co-edited over thirty books about science fiction and fantasy, including the Hugo Award-nominated Science Fiction Quotations (2005) and the two-volume Science Fiction Literature through History: An Encyclopedia (2021). In 2003 he won the Science Fiction Research Association’s Pilgrim Award for his lifetime contributions to science fiction and fantasy scholarship.]
By Gary Westfahl: The time has come to cancel or move the 2025 Seattle Worldcon.
And to cancel or move the 2026 Los Angeles Worldcon.
It has to be done, in order to honor a century-old tradition of science fiction.
From its beginnings as a recognized genre in 1926, science fiction has warmly embraced writers and readers from around the world. Hugo Gernsback happily published letters from foreign readers in his magazines and featured stories by several foreign authors. When he established the Science Fiction League in 1934, he included chapters in other nations. The first major science fiction convention in 1939 was proudly named the World Science Fiction Convention, which has been the case for every subsequent event, including two dozen held in foreign countries. Science fiction scholars have also embraced the international community by inviting foreign experts to visit America and having several conferences of the Science Fiction Research Association in other countries. As David G. Hartwell said,
Internationalism has been appealing to the Anglo-American SF community since the 1940s; for more than four decades the colorful fan, agent, and Esperantist Forrest J. Ackerman, for example, has traveled widely to spread the greetings of American SF. In the 1970s there was a large enough international science fiction community among the peoples of the developed nations for Harry Harrison to call a conference in Ireland in order to found World SF, the world SF professional association, which now awards prizes for translations in many languages and promotes the cross-fertilization of SF literatures, inviting international responses to English-language SF.
In sum, science fiction has always welcomed, and should always welcome, writers and fans from all over the world.
Unfortunately, due to the current political situation, we can no longer welcome them to come to the United States.
Every day, there is some new horror story about a foreign visitor to America who, usually for no clear reason, has been detained at the border, thrown into prison, and subjected to brutal behavior until they thankfully are finally released and deported back to their home country. This is precisely the sort of treatment that we can anticipate some foreign fans may experience if they come to Seattle this year.
And this simply cannot be tolerated.
There are alternatives that should be considered. Even though there will be awkward and expensive cancellations, it should not be too much trouble to move this year’s Worldcon to the nearby city of Vancouver, in Canada, to ensure that none of our friends from other countries are mistreated. If this is impossible, the conference organizers should contact every foreign member, advise them not to come to Seattle, and set up numerous options from them to participate in the conference remotely. And if foreign fans insist on coming, the convention should establish a Legal Defense Fund to assist any of them if they are detained during their stay. As for the 2026 Worldcon, there will be ample time to find an alternate venue. Canceling or moving these conventions will also enable the science fiction community to make its own statement of protest against the government’s unrelenting hostility to all foreigners, including those that come to our country legally.
Today, given recent developments, a resident of a foreign country will have to exercise great care in coming to the United States. Tourists should go someplace else; students should seek advanced degrees in other countries; and science fiction fans should reconsider venturing into our country.
Until our nation returns to treating foreign visitors in a lawful and humane manner, the science fiction community should think long and hard before offering another Worldcon in the United States.
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“No, Trump isn’t suspending the Constitution to stay in power. ”
For once, I find myself in lockstep agreement with Cat.
Further, a million people enter the United States every day. If half a dozen over the last three months have had newsworthy problems, that does not mean that it is “dangerous” for a routine traveler whose papers are in order to make a trip here.
And THIS is what you get when a textbook malignant narcissist gets elected, and proceeds to pretend that “President” is the same as “Emperor”.
The US has been a beacon of hope and justice for decades. It is now a cautionary tale.
Move the conference. Match tariff with tariff. Support the ENTIRELY LEGITIMATE separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. Until rationality returns, do as you can to represent decency and resist fascists.
Bill:
Honestly given how bad things could go once someone is held by the US, any risk of it happening is too high. Especially when I can avoid that risk just by not spending £000s on a five day holiday
And I’m white and British and cis and can’t get pregnant (hysterectomy). If I were a person of colour or from a more stigmatised country, or had any chance of being pregnant, or was trans, the risk would be far worse
Do you want a worldcon only for straight white cis men from Western countries? I thought we got past that after Puppygate
A somewhat peripheral question: is World SF still active?
This piece talks about it in the present tense (“… which now awards prizes for translations in many languages and promotes the cross-fertilization of SF literatures …”), but both SFE and Fancyclopedia refer to it in the past tense, stating respectively “World SF activity declined and its operations ceased formally in 2002” and “[i]t lasted until 2002”.
The World SF Blog doesn’t seem to have been updated since 2013, although I’m not sure how connected – officially or otherwise – that was with the World SF organization.
World SF as organized by Harry Harrison et al ended quite awhile ago.
The Italian professional group still styles itself as part of World SF however.
The World SF Blog used the phrase in the sense people refer to “world music” not in the sense of an organization.
The reason the 1977 Worldcon moved from Orlando to Miami Beach is that the original hotel went bankrupt, and declared the contract and rates agreed was null and void. The choice was between cancelling the convention or moving it.
Speaking selfishly, last year I paid for my roundtrip Amtrak fare to Seattle and back, several thousand dollars, and can’t afford to pay a steep penalty by cancelling. Also, my passport expired in 2018, and I can’t go to any conventions outside the USA until I get a new one (too late to simply renew the old one).
Thanks Mike.
Funnily enough, the Fancyclopedia page on World SF links to File 770 #59 with your report about Aussiecon II. That link is in the context of the WSFS mark dispute over the “World SF” name, but the report also has some commentary about site selection and non-US bids that I find interesting in the light of these current discussions. e.g. “The committee took a strong American control over Worldcons for granted.”
Andrew I Porter: The point in this discussion is not why they moved, but that the 1977 Worldcon committee could make its own decision to move and did not require any WSFS input or approval to do so.
@Peter Lindquist–
How much will you be donating to help bail out the committee on the probably hundreds of thousands (or more) penalties and fees and other expenses caused by such a short-notice reneging on all these contracts, with no “act of God” disaster to justify it? We can put you down for at least the modest sum of $50,000, right?
I agree with what others (noticeably those who are con runners themselves and thus know from whence they speak) have said about the impracticalities of moving Seattle and Los Angeles conventions. The people who put all of the hard work into bidding and organizing those conventions are not responsible for what the US government is doing and couldn’t possibly have anticipated it.
To that end, I also don’t believe in changing the rules on people after the fact. That’s an Catch-22 move. If someone wants to change the WSFS bylaws to forbid US Worldcons on a going forward basis, that can be debated on it’s own merits or lack thereof. But punishing people for crimes invented as criminal acts after the fact is wrong and something SF has warned us about for a very long time.
“Are china’s fans not valid then? Every country has its flaws. I’m not condoning the issues I am merely pointing out that your attitude is such that every country would have problems that could make them fail as a favorable locale. And the bottom line is they who win the votes get the convention.”
China’s fans are perfectly valid. China’s “fandom” is not. Chengdu demonstrated that rather tragicly.
And if the worst happens during the Seattle Worldcon and our foreign visitors get mistreated by US Government officials, American fandom will lose a lot of it’s validity too. It’s a lousy situiation no matter how you look at it. It’s unfair; horribly so. But it”s the reality we live in now.
Gary is probably wrong about the practicality of moving these Worldcons; maybe not so wrong about the rightness of canceling them, and is all too right about the need to address the issue. Money and inconvience aside, some of our people face real danger in traveling to the US now.
Or are money and inconvience more important to American fandom?
Curt Phillips: This sounds like a mismatch of problem and solution to me. Seattle and LA don’t have to be cancelled in order to save international fans from a travel decision. They already know there are hazards.
But let me add this to your money and inconvenience equation. If these Worldcons are cancelled, then as a corollary the Hugo Awards for those years should also be cancelled. Never mind money and inconvenience — now we’d really be talking.
I agree that people from other countries should probably not visit the US at this point. But by the same token, people from the US should probably not leave the country, for fear of what will happen when they try to come back. For my part, I wouldn’t go to a con even as close and easy to get to (for me) as Vancouver at this point, for that reason.
We’re hosed no matter what we do. The best solution: virtual online programming, the more of it the better.
@Curt Phillips – the paternalism on display by you and others is really something.
No one is forcing anyone to attend a Worldcon. We are all adults here, and adults get to make their own decision about if they want to travel to attend a con or not. We don’t need to protect them from making that choice. Especially not at the cost doing so would incur.
@cat
No, he isn’t suspending the Constitution. At this point, it isn’t clear to me that they actually give a damn what the Constitution OR the courts say. Witness their contempt for the exceedingly timid ruling by SCOTUS that they had to ‘facilitate’ the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador.
I hope it gets moved. Although it may be too close to move this year’s con. Also to the person going “well MILLIONS enter the country”, A SINGLE PERSON being unjustly jailed should be ENOUGH. You are dangerously close to “well they must have done SOMETHING”.
Until Every visitor is safe the community shouldn’t put anyone in danger.
I think we are all friends and still want to get together and be fans despite the way the world is looking at US now. I don’t think that cancelling the Worldcon serves any purpose that makes Worldcon what it is – the opportunity to get together, talk about our beloved subjects, hang with people we like. And we WISH things weren’t so bad that our global friends can’t be there, but I don’t see how cancelling a Worldcon would do anything to change that.
Mike wrote:
“But let me add this to your money and inconvenience equation. If these Worldcons are cancelled, then as a corollary the Hugo Awards for those years should also be cancelled. Never mind money and inconvenience — now we’d really be talking.”
Well, if less non-American fans attend Worldcon,
then presumably less of them will vote in the Hugos, and thus the Hugos will become that much less relevant. So sure, suspend the Awards too. Then maybe more fans will take this matter seriously.
I’ll repeat the same thing I said in support of the China Worldcon. There are lots of fans in the country who can’t travel internationally for both financial and political reasons. Worldcon should travel to different parts of the world so all fans have a chance to attend one. And yes, that will mean that there will be conventions that some people can’t go to – that’s okay. Add virtual programming to help things.
@Lis Carey
I believe the orange one is on public record at least once as declaring himself “God”.
An argument can therefore be made that cancelling the US cons is owing to force majeure, if not an act of god.
But I’d want at least two years and at least a ten million dollar defense fund in the bank before attempting that argument.
I’m sufficiently down several rabbit holes that I don’t even want to guess outloud what POTUS’ long range goals maybe (I know when sharing my brand of crazy is appropriate), but anyone who definitively states what he will or won’t do should spend more time at the race tracks.
I was not in favor of China winning the bid. Not because of their fans*, but because of their government. I would make that argument today regarding a US bid.
* turns out the bigger danger to the China Worldcon was US fans.
Curt Phillips on April 13, 2025 at 1:26 pm said:
Remind me why we HAVE a Worldcon with costumes and awards, with people who go to to SEE and PARTICIPATE in both. (NB: My first was Iggy of notorious memory. That I went more than once should tell you something.)
(No one is forcing you to go to something that you consider irrelevant.)
Hi, Ed! Long time not seen!
You’re drifting off target, P.J. I’m in the US. Whether I go to a Worldcon in the US or not is beside the point. That point is, that the safety of some of our non- American friends is compromised now because of policies of my countries’ current government. We need to focus on that and try to find some way of keeping our people safer. If we can.
The Supreme Court is cosplaying disapproval of Trump, apparently in the bizarre belief that he will notice and self-moderate. The only way to deal with a bully is to stand up to him. The lower courts are doing an excellent job with that, but nothing in Roberts’ record suggests that he will back them up.
We need a full accessible Worldcon through virtual means including the business meeting and voting there. It’s overdue to accomplish the vast number of fans that cannot for various reasons make a Worldcon wherever it going to be. Would it cost more to be a supporting member if that happens? Yes. But it’s worth doing.
@Cat Eldridge
Seattle had already announced on a fully virtual business meeting to be held ahead of the convention before Trump was even elected. So that’s happening this year.
@Curt
WTF???
You’re the one complaining about the Hugos being irrelevant – and they’re A REQUIREMENT OF THE CONVENTION.
You might want to pay attention to people like Mike.
I find it funny that some people went from moving the worldcon to outright chancel it, wow that escalated quickly.
I am on the camp it is to late to move the con, 2025 should be obvious and 2026 all the experts say the same. The situation sucks but we have to live with it.
The problem is we eliminate one group of fans as visitors during this years no matter what, the people living in the USA or the rest of the world. (And often even in European worldcons you were more than half of the members)
But it is better to have a flawed worldcon than no worldcon and there is no reason to chancel the Hugos since supporting memberships exist (okay new name) and the Hugos itself is not compromised.
P.J.; calm down. I wrote “less relevant” not “irrelevant”, and they do become less relevant when less voters participate. But again, the Hugos are a side issue to this discussion. As for them being required by the convention, is there is no convention then there is no such requirement, is there? And I’m pretty sure Mike understands what I’ve been writing about whether he agrees with me or not. You, however, don’t seem to share that understanding.
I’m going to stop responding to any further comments of yours if you insist on veering off topic.
I mean so far there is a lot of hyperbole. So far Trump is obeying court orders. So far he is accepting the constitution. But as bad as it is, it would be a miss not to at least plan from what point it would be possible to make changes and what changes could be. At this point “Wait and see” might be quite a problem and could cause a bigger problem later on, when its too late to do anything.
So, Im not saying to move any worldcons – Im just saying: Think what could happen and what would happen then. Thats part of organizing an event in times like these.
There’s a part of me as a mom, especially one on the autism spectrum, that wants to just say “Shut up, all of you!” The infighting is disrespectful and detracts from the unity we strive for in our SFF community and specifically for WorldCon. No, it’s not practical, or really, possible to cancel or change the venue for 2025 anymore without dire consequences. But Seattle is planning on virtual programming, and I hope that those travelers who decide it isn’t safe are able to cancel their travel plans without penalty. Future WorldCons should be planning more virtual programming anyway, regardless of location or government policy, to facilitate people who would prefer not to attend in person for whatever reason. Los Angeles might have time to change, but if it isn’t feasible, again, virtual programming is the best answer. I am devastated by what the current presidential administration is doing, and every day I try to find some joy and hope to keep from spiraling over the constant fear of what might be coming. So watching this forum’s comments descend into bickering, when it would be better served by being kind and supportive, just frustrates me no end.
We are better than this. We should be asking the Seattle committee how we can help.
Look, the current government’s situation aside, I agree with Chris Barkley that the suggestion here is so far divorced from the reality of convention contracts that Gary must be in a Philip K. Dick novel with alternate realities or something to think that’s a viable choice.
If e.g. Seattle could get an attrition waiver, /maybe/ moving some stuff up to Vancouver, BC would make sense? It is impossible to move Seattle (we’re now four months out) and likely impossible to move LA (because of the lead time on contracts), but I think doing some of that stuff makes sense, and I think you’ve got a case for at least renegotiating some of the hotel room count contracts due to the mess international travel has become in various respects. Don’t know if it rises to the level of force majeure, but it might?
But I think there’s a bottom line that we didn’t drop a brick on Chengdu at any point in their (horridly flawed) process, even when they (1) didn’t have a contract in hand in 2022 (I /tried/ to make that motion) and (2) up and switched dates without anybody’s say-so. (I think most folks who weren’t involved in the con/Hugo Award process get a bye for not having been able to intervene in the bad behavior there because it wasn’t known at the time).
And Location, Location, Location (which I helped draft) got sent off to committee (and I have no idea of the status of LLL right now given that…absent a clear indication of what is happening, I’ll probably re-tender it, or something close to it, notwithstanding the (in)action of the committee). I know folks said “But that might bite the US”, but I’d point out that what I shot for in drafting it /was/ something that /could/ bite the US (or, basically, anywhere else). After the Chengdu fiasco, I’m comfortable with that risk.
@ArbysMom:
I flatly disagree with you at least in part. “Thou must not criticize but instead ask how one can help” (which is, to be clear, how I read your remarks) is part of how we ended up with Chengdu getting where it did. If folks were actually willing to stand up and say “No, this situation is screwed”, maybe somebody would have actually asked tough questions of Dave McCarty and/or Ben Yalow prior to that shoe dropping.
You had an awful lot of folks who just weren’t asking questions or who were helping out with that con despite serious reservations because it was more important to make sure things didn’t fail than to back out of a truly bad situation. To be fair, I think some of that was concerns about accusations of racism (though due to all of the stuff surrounding China, folks were accused of being racist both for supporting the con [partly, I think, due to the Uighur repression/genocide] and for opposing the con [because it was a non-white-majority-country convention]). I’m only grumpy that Chengdu wasn’t subjected to this sort of pressure because of the self-evident issues there (the convention-specific elements, at least, are not in evidence here).
The impulses were, in general, admirable but the result…not so much. The result was that we ended up with our legitimacy being hijacked in favor of that particular regime.
I realize that, all else being equal, it is better to try to salvage a situation than it is to not, and that complaining from the sidelines only does so much (TR’s “Man in the Arena” bit comes to mind), but all too often all else is decidedly /not/ equal.
Also, this is FAR from the first time that Worldcon Fandom has gotten into a spectacular internal row. You should read about some of the explosions/implosions “back in the day”. I’m only being slightly sarcastic when i say that I think you could argue that having a spectacular row is a great tribute to our forefathers. Any idea that Worldcon Fandom has been a bunch of people sitting around the proverbial campfire singing Kumbaya since 1939 is absurd historical ignorance.
Also, to be clear – if there were sudden evidence of some sort of government interference in e.g. the Hugo Award process, I don’t think anybody would conceptually object to handing the administration of that off to an external organization located in Canada, Australia, or the UK (I pick on these three because of established links and Worldcon conrunning experience). It’s the physical convention that is a mess here.
@Curt Phillips–
Always a brilliant rhetorical tactic, to tell someone disagreeing with you to “calm down.” Absolutely brilliant.
And saying they don’t understand what you’re saying is the absolute capper, after which no one will doubt your brilliance
My apologies. I forgot the golden rules of commenting about anything on File 770. Expect deliberate topic drift and occasional irrationality.
What was I thinking?
To point out the obvious, supporting members can and do vote on the Hugos, all the time.
@Gray
A major issue with the previous Location, Location, Location proposal is that as of last time I checked (pretty recently) it currently would NOT ding the US. And even people who reject the non-sensical calls for Worldcons in 2025 and 2026 to move are pretty united in saying that there shouldn’t be future Worldcons in the US until the situation changes dramatically. But if a US bid had submitted for 2027 this year, Location, Location, Location would not have stopped it from being eligible. So an NGO-ratings based system isn’t a panacea.
Mm I’m sorry, IMO as far as Worldcons 2025/Seattle and 2026/LA-Anaheim are concerned, whilst we in theory might like them not to be currently in the US of A, in practice it is well nigh almost now impossible to change the venues. For the 1st one (and if so, it would be a major financial cost) and for the 2nd one, also there would be major issues re finance. And, again, I repeat when they were approved (in 2023 and 2024 respectively), no one then knew the potential actions of the “orange-tinted mega-narcissist”, in the White House. So if one now objects to actually travelling into the US of A, join up as a virtual member instead. So roll on 2027/Montreal, 2028/Brisbane and (ahem my own City) 2029/Dublin. The (a lovely Irish phrase this) “burning question of the day” is re Worldcons 2030 et seq. (I’ve heard rumours of a Maastricht, Netherlands bid for that year..) Best wishes
@Curt Phillips–
Oh, Curt.
Curt, Curt, Curt.
At your stage in life, you still haven’t learned that telling people who disagree with you to “calm down,” as if disagreement can only stem from uncontrolled emotion and irrationality, and that they disagree only because they do not understand as your perfectly rational and unquestionably correct explanation, does not make either you or your argument look better.
That no one would call you on your inability to handle disagreement.
@Lis Carey
I use “Blog Comment Killfile” , so I’ve hushed him. (If I want to read his stuff, I can.) (It doesn’t kill comments, it hides them. Very useful.)
Anyone who thinks the Hugos are irrelevant is not a fan I want to associate with, because they’re missing much of the point of Worldcon.
@P J Evans–I’ll look for that. Thanks.
MODERATOR’S NOTE: I don’t want to close comments, but this childish rubber-fish-slapfight is over. Further instances have been and will be deleted.
Pretty sure I wrote “less relevant”. Not “irrelevant”. And that was based on the idea that the fewer people who vote for the awards, the less representative they become, and thus they become less relevant.
Am I wrong? If so I’d be interested to know how I’m wrong. Don’t we all want greater participation in Hugo voting?
To make a mistake in the past (for example the Chengdu convention) does not constitute a shackle requiring us to make future mistakes.
Cost on cancellation is a factor, but it’s not dispositive.
There is a difference between not being able to travel to Worldcon because you personally lack the ability, and the government of the host country placing you in jeopardy. An important difference.
Having already made travel arrangements is a factor, but also not dispositive. Individually, you’re just saying that your expense is more important than the principle.
I think, for whatever that’s worth, that the following should happen:
1) a fully remote option should be made for Seattle, whatever the cost.
2) LA should be cancelled, and if penalties cannot be avoided the committee should declare bankruptcy.
3) we should incorporate the parent organization, because there is real value to that..
Mm a quick note (and pre-UK Eastercon: I’m travelling out to Belfast a little early -with some post-Con, Irish family matters thereat also to deal with) : I would have thought that 2025/Seattle would anyway have a virtual option. Thus allowing fen who object to the current White House regime, still to partly participate, from a (safe) distance. And re 2026/Anahem, this is surely a decision to be made by that Con Committee. And again should they still decide to continue, they make sure that a virtual option –for the same reasons above as for 2025– is available. //////Oh and whilst on and BTW, fliers for both 2025 and 2026 Worldcons will be on display, courtesy of moi [*] at Eastercon 2025/Belfast-along with fliers for (mainly European-based) other cons coming up. In 2025 : eg World Horror Con (Stamford CT- mid June), Eurocon 2025/Aland (Baltic: late June), Octocon/Dublin (early Oct), Irish Discworld Con/Cork (Oct), Bristolcon (late Oct), WORLD FANTASY CON Brighton, UK (late Oct- early Nov), Novacon 54/Buxton (early Nov) and then in 2026 : Eurocon/Berlin. And at Belfast 2025, UK Eastercons will be decided for 2026 (probably Birmingham) and 2027 (probably Glasgow). Best wishes. [ * this is sometimes known at Cons here in UK/Europe, as the “Lally Wall” or “Lally Table”.. !!]
Any bankruptcy would be filed by a 501 c 3. In this case, SCIFI.
I’m not a lawyer, and know little to nothing about bankruptcy law, but I would have to think this might have repercussions that might effect the 501 c 3.
Which in turn effects a whole lot of other things SCIFI is involved with.
When WSFS members chose Chengdu as a Worldcon site, it was obvious that some fans and pros would never be able to travel to China because of concerns for their own safety. Others might not be allowed because of their jobs.
This didn’t stop the con from happening. Heightened concerns about traveling to the U.S. should not stop Seattle or Los Angeles from taking place. This is a shitty situation that would only be made worse with cancellations.
@rcade–I voted against Chengdu, and I see no effing reason to repeat the same mistake. Certainly not twice.
Also, much as it grieves me to say it, what the US is doing to citizens and non-citizens crossing our borders is worse than anything China did to fans or fandom during Chengdu, and the lead up and immediate aftermath. Granted the Uighur genocide is not being matched here, yet. Yet.
But no. There’s no way we can cancel or move the 2025 or 2026 Worldcons; that’s delusional. But we certainly shouldn’t have another one here, until we’ve ended this fascist abuse going on here.
@Gray on April 14, 2025 at 4:43 am said:
@ArbysMom:
I flatly disagree with you at least in part. “Thou must not criticize but instead ask how one can help” (which is, to be clear, how I read your remarks) is part of how we ended up with Chengdu getting where it did.
Gray, that is not what I meant with my remarks, so you read them wrong. First, I didn’t say not to criticize. I said “the infighting is disrespectful” and just because an internal row has happened before doesn’t make it right or good. We should always strive to be kind. What happened with Chengdu was different because (1) people knew before reservations could be made what the political climate was like, and what the potential risks were, whereas here things have changed dramatically, and in some ways, unpredictably (though of course there are some who would say “I told you so” as well), and (2) from what I understand, there wasn’t a threat to the personal safety of most attendees coming from outside the host country. Disclaimer: I’m not sure I followed everything about it, as I wasn’t an attendee in any capacity. Mistakes were made, and lessons should be learned, but I don’t think anyone thought it could be a huge risk to most international travelers. To go further on what I said initially, in my opinion (which is not fact but how I specifically feel), the people getting the “loudest” (as far as can be seen in a print medium) or maybe the most emotionally invested (?) are the ones saying the con should be cancelled or moved, despite the very risky financial consequences. I’m not stupid enough to tell them to calm down (despite my earlier mom comment), but I’m also not the only one who has pointed out those consequences, and that a virtual solution is in fact a solution, and may be the best one possible at this point. And again, as I said originally, adding full virtual attendance should be a standard option going forward, for varied reasons, including political, accessibility for those with disabilities, financial, and so on. We’ve had (at least) five years to work on this, and I would think that technology would have improved at least slightly in that time. All that said, I don’t have a horse in this race, as I’m not an attendee or even a voting member for the Hugos. I’m just a fan. I’m just frustrated and a little terrified at what the current US regime is apparently capable of.
@Alexia Hebel
I appreciate the sentiment but no one is moving anywhere it’s “unconstitutional” and people are constantly complaining how our US leaders don’t know the constitution. Our SF community should take the time to read our own
I totally agree! Well said. It really annoys me off that three Worldcons in a row have wilfully disregarded the constitution, and it pisses me off that SMOFs, not to mention WSFS officers (who will probably have a right moan at me) simply don’t seem to care about constitution governance.
http://www.concatenation.org/news/news4~25.html#worldcon25
Of course, I can understand this. SMOFcons attendance is largely (if not almost exclusively) composed of Worldcon-runners and staff members, and the last thing some of them might want is to be constrained by a WSFS constitution as voted for and determined by the greater, unwashed masses of average Worldcon attendees…
@Lis Riba
Moving from Seattle may not be possible this late in the game, but how much of the con could pivot to virtual, so members could attend from home without crossing borders
I concur. I gather from Seattle’s statement that they are planning to boost the virtual con.
To this end I hope Seattle’s conrunners note our reviews of the virtual Glasgow.
http://www.concatenation.org/conrev/worldcon-virtual-yon-2024.html
http://www.concatenation.org/conrev/worldcon-virtual-french-2024.html
(If friends of Seattle see this perhaps they could pass on links?)
@Mike
The 2023 and 2021 Worldcons weren’t held in the venues they bid for.
Exactly, 🙂 , but there being a precedent for constitution-breaking (assuming these case were and not acts of god etc) does not make further constitution-breaking right or acceptable.
@Alexia Hebel
There is nothing in the WSFS constitution that allows for a seated convention to have it moved for them
Not so sure? What about…
4.1.1: WSFS shall choose the location and Committee of the Worldcon to be held two(2) years from the date of the current Worldcon
4.6.1: To be eligible for site selection, a bidding committee must file the following documents with the Committee that will administer the voting:…
….(2) adequate evidence of an agreement with its proposed site’s facilities, such as a conditional contract or a letter of agreement;
4.6.2: The bidding committee must supply written copies of these documents to any member of WSFS on request.
4.6.3: For a bid to be allowed on the printed ballot, the bidding committee must file the documents specified above no later than 180 days prior to the official opening of the administering convention.
Taking these either independently or together (your choice) then it is constitutionally implicit that the Worldcon be held at the venue WSFS members voted on at site selection. The only exception would be an act of god – that is to say an external factor outside of the committee’s or venue’s control such as flooding, terrorism, pandemic, (venue bankruptcy?) etc.
The reason (the ‘spirit’ not the ‘letter’) of these provisions is because the site selection vote is so important that average WSFS members can make an ‘informed’ choice. Of course, if that doesn’t matter then why bother with a site-selection vote at all?
@Camestros Felapton
The problem is two-fold In and out….(Excuse my summarising.)
I agree, here we are both – US fans and rest-of-world fans – on something of a sticky wicket.
@Steve Green I am not sure (but am open to correction) that transiting through US would be an issue as most of the current reporting seems to relate to people being stopped at airports’ immigration. When I used to go to E. Europe a lot in the 1990s following the fall of the fall of the Iron Curtain, and when I went to the 2010 NZ natcon and Aus Worldcon, I transited in other countries and for my 2010 Australasia trip transited Singapore and Hong Kong, but I never had to go through immigration (hence also did not need a visa) – I remained in the airport’s international space. But Steve if, as you say, you were stopped, then this is worrying. It would be interesting to hear from non-US fans who recently transited (connected flights through) US airports without going through immigration to see if that was a current issue?
@Peer
So far Trump is obeying court orders. So far he is accepting the constitution.
Again, I am not so sure (but you US folk will know more of this than I). My impression is that Trump has refused to allow back a joint US citizen that was – according to a court – wrongfully expatriated. Also, he has expatriated folk against their will to countries not of their origin and I have a feeling that that might contradict UN human rights to which US has signed up… And Trump has said he wants Panama, Greenland and Gaza which I understand (though I may be wrong as I am far from expert in international law) is against international law if he followed through. And I understand he has mused about having a third term which would also be unconstitutional (if my possibly inadequate understanding of the US constitution is correct?) on at least two counts. He is also cutting governmental funding some of which had already been approved by Congress and its constitutionally elected members. Maybe I am a victim of the ‘fake news’ he keeps banging on about but, from a hemisphere away, I am not sure how much respect he has for your own constitution?
@various
There have been a number of helpful comments suggesting an enhanced ‘virtual’ (which I think Seattle may be hoping to try to do) and ‘satellite’ cons. So I wonder, what of full-blown ‘twinned’ Worldcons?
I’m trying to think out of the box here (possibly not doing that good a job but I throw this out there…)
Back in 1999 (at the Dortmund Eurocon) Romania was site-selection bidding for the 2001 Eurocon, but what they were actually bidding for was a joint or ‘twinned’ Romanian-Bulgarian Eurocon in venues in each country separated by a bridge across the Danube Sadly, this subsequently fell through due to the (an act of god) tragic death (road accident) of the convention’s chief operations organiser (though we still ended up with an interesting Eurocon on an island in the Danube UNESCO biosphere reserve at which I was privileged to be a Special Guest along with GoHs: the great Ion Hobana, Norman Spinrad and Joe Haldeman… but I digress). Meanwhile, back at the plot…
However, in these days of internet connectivity, could we not have a twinned Worldcon with one being in the US and one outside? If they were held in roughly (but not necessarily exactly) the same time zone then it would even be possible to hold a twinned Hugo ceremony!
Yes, there would be hurdles to overcome, but I don’t think they’d be insurmountable. I recall Live Aid (“give us your fu¢king money”) of the pre-internet 1980s that was held jointly in Britain and the US, but things are way more connected now, as Arthur Clarke foresaw.
Indeed, even the time lag thing might even not be that much a problem. A Hugo Ceremony Sunday night in Brighton/London/Glasgow/Hague would be afternoon in New York/Washington… but think of the whole-evening after-party New York/Washington would have!
So a North and South Worldcon (we can pretend Rogue Trooper) or and East and West Worldcon anyone?