In the Wake of GDQ Stuff

So I have to say I'm really encouraged by the new transparency shown by GDQ and their staff (Coincidentally, earlier today I was thinking "Wonder if SGDQ submissions will open up soon"). While I'll wait to see if they actually get better about meeting deadlines, which we won't really know until April, I like what I see so far, and I'm willing to have faith that those deadlines will be hit, for a number of reasons. First, because despite what some people may think, I want to see the event succeed and get better, not fail (And I think most people who complain about various aspects of GDQs feel the same way). And second, because I do think the staff want it to get better and succeed as well.

A bit of background here: From 2011 to 2014, I was on the staff of the Electronic Gaming department for something called Connecticon. 2012 was probably the year I had the most fun on staff, but for whatever reason, it wasn't a great year for the convention as a whole, and the attendees let us know about it (As they should have). So the next year, everyone on staff worked hard to improve things. And that's where I got disillusioned.

2013 was much better for Connecticon. And I remember the majority of the feedback for that year being along the lines of SHOCK that we ACTUALLY LISTENED to the previous year's feedback and worked to improve. I asked some of my friends more plugged into the convention scene as a whole than I am (I don't go to any of the bigger conventions outside of MAGFest and Connecticon, and if you don't count GDQs as conventions, the last convention I went to at all was Connecticon 2014) if "convention listens to feedback and improves" was really that rare, and the answer was basically "yes, particularly in the for-profit convention world".

And that hurt. Not so much that it was rare, but that people's default reactions would be that we as convention staff don't care about making the event the best it can be (Sometimes in impossible circumstances, no less).

I think about that feeling periodically when I write up my periodic posts about GDQs. In the recent past, I've questioned whether the GDQ staff really want the events to improve and get bigger, or if they're content to rest on their laurels now that the "GDQ name" is more-or-less enough to guarantee 7-digit donation totals. The more I think about that, the worse I feel about it in light of the above. So consider this a sort of public apology. Given what I've seen so far in the wake of AGDQ 2016, I do think that the staff wants to improve on their previous performance, and are actually listening and getting stuff out on time/being more transparent/etc. I actually have hope that there will be a games list on April 3rd, and a schedule 2 weeks later.