Anthrocon runs Supersponsorship lottery for content

I respectfully disagree. The non-exclusive print rights to the work submitted is the consideration in this case.

The words "win" and "drawing" indicate to me that it is a game of chance. I considered using the word "raffle", but that word is commonly understood to mean to a drawing of numbered, usually cash-purchased tickets.

This post is not intended to be critical of Anthrocon's policy, which I feel promotes the creation of worthwhile material. I personally won a Supersponsorship in 2007 after submitting this article, so I appreciate its value.

Anthrocon is a not-for-profit organization and so the promotion of its games of chance is not subject to FCC regulation. Now I think of it, though, it's possible that the drawing itself is subject to state regulation; in particular, it may be a "raffle" under this law (such games shall include lotteries). I am not an expert on Pennsylvania gaming law, so you should take that with a grain of salt.

Flayrah's tradition of shoddy journalism continues

Awwww, pooooor baby, a little bit butt hurt because the largest convention you're on the Board of Directors for got exposed as a bunch of insular and controlling ninnies who ban people for exercising their civil rights completely outside of your convention?

Anthrocon's tradition of stubborn paternalism (thinking that they must protect and save the fandom), hypocrisy (con chairman behaving badly at other cons), and jack booted thuggery (who else are you going to ban for exercising a fundamental civil right?) continues.

I'd be using a lot more in the way of profane invective towards you and rest of the Anthrocon board, but I'd likely get banned from the site for it. When your convention stops acting like a bunch of bullying thugs intimidating and threatening furries against exercising their civil liberties throughout the Commonwealth and northeastern Ohio, let me know OK?

The use of FCC definitions for words seems like an unusual criterion for good journalism. The FCC has its own version of legalese with a bunch of very specific definitions for various words and phrases (any one with radio experience probably has seen some of that). Plus, in the end with many of their regulations, it often doesn't matter what you call it.

Even with non-FCC legal definitions of lottery being similar, I wouldn't call it poor journalism to use common language instead of legalese (outside of a legal or more esoteric publications). After all, dictionaries don't seem to require the payment as part of all definitions. I remember housing lotteries from undergrad, event ticket lotteries and parking space lotteries at my grad school, and sports draft lotteries, none of which required payment to enter.

Okay here are the three elements:

1) PAYMENT TO ENTER: A qualifying drawing- which will take TIME and EFFORT... which by the way, is a form of currency, and if you don't believe that maybe you should let your employer know (if you have one), I'm sure they would love to agree with you and have you work for free.

2) A SUBSTANTIAL PRIZE: Well, here I might agree with you, a membership to Anthrocon might not be all that big a thing... but it's got the word super in it, and substantial IS a synonym of the word super*, I guess I can't really say that the prize isn't...

3) A WINNER CHOSEN BY RANDOM CHANCE - " All well-formatted and released entries will count for the drawing"... should I say it slower?

I believe Mark Twain said it best, sir, "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Though to be original my quote would be "PeterCat's tradition of shoddy criticisms continues."

*(http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/super)