I will just point out that, legalities aside, there seem to be two general leadership models with furry cons. The first being 'The con chair serves at the pleasure of the board, but does not have any direct control over the board'.
This way is a bit rarer in furry conventions. It usually means the con chair changes fairly regularly. It often means many at the event probably don't even know who the con chair is nor does it really matter much from the attendee standpoint. They are there as head manager of the staff, not as head entertainer to the masses. Should one quit on short notice in convention run this way, it's far more likely the event could go on with little or no noticeable disruption on the part of those attending. My personal opinion is this is the more stable way of doing things long term.
The second (and seemingly a LOT more common in furry conventions than other fan conventions that I've seen) 'The board serves at the pleasure of the con chair who effectively has total control over what the board does or even who sits on the board.' It's not hard to figure out if a convention is being run like this. If you think of a convention and immediately associate it with a particular chairperson who's been chairperson for as long as most can remember it's one of these regardless of what the bylaws may say
The thing that surprises me the most isn't that a couple of conventions run this way have shut down, but that only two have. I'm not even sure I count FCN here since the founders had a specific plan for how many years they were going to have the event and more or less stuck with that plan. That most of those attending didn't know of the plan doesn't change this.
I don't know how FurFright was set up. Whatever board it had were either powerless to question the chairpersons decision to end the convention or chose not to. I find it hard to believe the convention name wasn't owned by the parent corporation if there was such a corporation. Given there seems to be another event rising from the ashes, it's obvious it wasn't a unanimous decision. Hopefully some things will have been learned if a new event happens.
I will just point out that, legalities aside, there seem to be two general leadership models with furry cons. The first being 'The con chair serves at the pleasure of the board, but does not have any direct control over the board'.
This way is a bit rarer in furry conventions. It usually means the con chair changes fairly regularly. It often means many at the event probably don't even know who the con chair is nor does it really matter much from the attendee standpoint. They are there as head manager of the staff, not as head entertainer to the masses. Should one quit on short notice in convention run this way, it's far more likely the event could go on with little or no noticeable disruption on the part of those attending. My personal opinion is this is the more stable way of doing things long term.
The second (and seemingly a LOT more common in furry conventions than other fan conventions that I've seen) 'The board serves at the pleasure of the con chair who effectively has total control over what the board does or even who sits on the board.' It's not hard to figure out if a convention is being run like this. If you think of a convention and immediately associate it with a particular chairperson who's been chairperson for as long as most can remember it's one of these regardless of what the bylaws may say
The thing that surprises me the most isn't that a couple of conventions run this way have shut down, but that only two have. I'm not even sure I count FCN here since the founders had a specific plan for how many years they were going to have the event and more or less stuck with that plan. That most of those attending didn't know of the plan doesn't change this.
I don't know how FurFright was set up. Whatever board it had were either powerless to question the chairpersons decision to end the convention or chose not to. I find it hard to believe the convention name wasn't owned by the parent corporation if there was such a corporation. Given there seems to be another event rising from the ashes, it's obvious it wasn't a unanimous decision. Hopefully some things will have been learned if a new event happens.