Business Meeting Papers Released
Aug. 9th, 2011 07:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kevin_standleeRenovation is starting to publish those reports and proposals that will be coming before this year's WSFS Business Meeting on their Business Meeting Page. Besides the current Constitution and Standing Rules, you'll find the 2010 Updates to the Resolutions of Continuing Effect, including for the first time resolutions passed by the Mark Protection Committee (MPC).
Also here is the minutes of the 2010 MPC Meeting in Australia, where a barely-quorate meeting managed to squeeze through a vote of 5 of the 14 total MPC members (8 present) that voted to prohibit MPC and MPC subcommittee members from being eligible for a Hugo Award. As I wrote last year, this resolution had the net effect of forcing Cheryl Morgan, the person who had done more work than anyone else on the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee, to decline nomination to the HAMC. It was, in my opinion, a slap in the face to her and indirectly to me, and I continue to be angry about this. I think that the rule is actually unconstitutional because it applies eligibility rules to MPC members above and beyond that defined in the WSFS Constitution. The rule passed by the MPC is numbered MPC-2010-1 and is not only in those minutes but in the Resolutions of Continuing Effect.
The deadline for submitting new business is about 5 PM on Wednesday of Renovation (two hours after the Official Opening, and the Opening Ceremonies are at 3 PM), but some people have smartly submitted business in advance, and those advance submissions are also posted. Of relevance to what I wrote above is a resolution overturning MPC-2010-1 (the Business Meeting is superior to the MPC and can override it) and ordering the MPC to not adopt rules more restrictive than those imposed by the Constitution. If you think the action of the MPC in disqualifying Cheryl (and anyone else who might be plausibly eligible for a Hugo Award) from membership on the MPC or the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee was wrong, please come to Thursday's Preliminary Business Meeting (10 AM, Convention Center A02) and vote for this resolution.
But wait, there's more: I rather expect that there will be a motion to write MPC-2010-1 into the Constitution. That's a constitutional amendment, so unless two-thirds of the people at the Thursday meeting vote to squash such a motion without debate, it will be debated and voted upon at Friday's Main Business Meeting. It would have to pass at Reno and then be ratified at Chicon 7 to take effect. If you agree with me that disqualifying people who want to work for WSFS on the MPC or any of its subcommittees from being eligible for a Hugo Award is a bad idea, then come to Friday's meeting to vote against such a proposal. (Or even better, vote to spike it when it first comes up on Thursday.)
Friday's meeting (10 AM, Convention Center A02) is also where the elections for the Mark Protection Committee will happen. Two of the five people who squeezed through that motion in Australia are coming up for re-election. I hope you will vote for candidates who reflect your views. I expect there will be more than three candidates in the field this year.
Of course, besides this little sideshow for the hearts and minds of WSFS, we have the proposals that got first passage last year and that are up for ratification:
I am in favor of all of these except the expansion of Hugo nominating to the follow year's members. On that proposal, I am neutral. I haven't been convinced one way or the other.
There will definitely be proposals dealing with Semiprozines, as the Semiprozine Committee Report has been published, and it's likely to generate a lot of debate, especially with four minority reports attached as alternatives.
I also foresee two competing proposals to deal with the so-called "Podcast Problem," including the Best Fancast proposal.
And that's just the stuff I know something about. There's usually at least one proposal that surprises me.
Also here is the minutes of the 2010 MPC Meeting in Australia, where a barely-quorate meeting managed to squeeze through a vote of 5 of the 14 total MPC members (8 present) that voted to prohibit MPC and MPC subcommittee members from being eligible for a Hugo Award. As I wrote last year, this resolution had the net effect of forcing Cheryl Morgan, the person who had done more work than anyone else on the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee, to decline nomination to the HAMC. It was, in my opinion, a slap in the face to her and indirectly to me, and I continue to be angry about this. I think that the rule is actually unconstitutional because it applies eligibility rules to MPC members above and beyond that defined in the WSFS Constitution. The rule passed by the MPC is numbered MPC-2010-1 and is not only in those minutes but in the Resolutions of Continuing Effect.
The deadline for submitting new business is about 5 PM on Wednesday of Renovation (two hours after the Official Opening, and the Opening Ceremonies are at 3 PM), but some people have smartly submitted business in advance, and those advance submissions are also posted. Of relevance to what I wrote above is a resolution overturning MPC-2010-1 (the Business Meeting is superior to the MPC and can override it) and ordering the MPC to not adopt rules more restrictive than those imposed by the Constitution. If you think the action of the MPC in disqualifying Cheryl (and anyone else who might be plausibly eligible for a Hugo Award) from membership on the MPC or the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee was wrong, please come to Thursday's Preliminary Business Meeting (10 AM, Convention Center A02) and vote for this resolution.
But wait, there's more: I rather expect that there will be a motion to write MPC-2010-1 into the Constitution. That's a constitutional amendment, so unless two-thirds of the people at the Thursday meeting vote to squash such a motion without debate, it will be debated and voted upon at Friday's Main Business Meeting. It would have to pass at Reno and then be ratified at Chicon 7 to take effect. If you agree with me that disqualifying people who want to work for WSFS on the MPC or any of its subcommittees from being eligible for a Hugo Award is a bad idea, then come to Friday's meeting to vote against such a proposal. (Or even better, vote to spike it when it first comes up on Thursday.)
Friday's meeting (10 AM, Convention Center A02) is also where the elections for the Mark Protection Committee will happen. Two of the five people who squeezed through that motion in Australia are coming up for re-election. I hope you will vote for candidates who reflect your views. I expect there will be more than three candidates in the field this year.
Of course, besides this little sideshow for the hearts and minds of WSFS, we have the proposals that got first passage last year and that are up for ratification:
- Raising the voting fee multiplier on site selection from 2x to 4x so that Worldcons could charge up to 4x the voting fee to convert from voting (supporting) to attending
- Clarification of the status of electronic voting for the Hugo Awards and Site Selection
- Allow electronic distribution of WSFS rules in lieu of paper distribution, when practical
- Expand Hugo Award nominating eligibility to include the members of the following year's Worldcon to nominate as well as the past Worldcon's members
- Technical Change: Clarify cross-references to "run-off candidate"
- Technical Change: Include the Hugo Award Logo and the design of the trophy rocket in the list of claimed service marks
I am in favor of all of these except the expansion of Hugo nominating to the follow year's members. On that proposal, I am neutral. I haven't been convinced one way or the other.
There will definitely be proposals dealing with Semiprozines, as the Semiprozine Committee Report has been published, and it's likely to generate a lot of debate, especially with four minority reports attached as alternatives.
I also foresee two competing proposals to deal with the so-called "Podcast Problem," including the Best Fancast proposal.
And that's just the stuff I know something about. There's usually at least one proposal that surprises me.
Many questions, sorry....
Date: 2011-08-11 06:10 am (UTC)2. Do WSFS Biz Mtgs tend to use up their full three hours (as much biz as can be done!), or do they sometimes stop early and table things for the next day? Just wondering, if I go, whether I should really expect 3 hour meetings, or if that's just a worst case scenario. ;-) (I realize this may depend on how full the agenda is...maybe a stupid Q, sorry.)
3. Re. running for committees, etc., are candidates (with statements, if any) announced ahead of time, or just when the elections happen?
No promises -- usually I'm waking up or rushing to something around then -- but I'm skimming the 10-1 stuff to see how things look.
Thanks!
Kendall
Re: Many questions, sorry....
Date: 2011-08-11 02:14 pm (UTC)2A. The Business Meetings have been known to use their entire three hour slot. Whether they will actually do so is variable. I would expect the Preliminary Business Meeting to last around two hours (with the rest of the time eaten up by the inevitable ad hoc committees formed during the PBM to hash out final wording having their meetings. I expect the Main Business Meeting on Friday to use nearly all of its three hours. The Saturday Site Selection Business Meeting may last less than an hour because if the Main Meeting manages to dispose of all the business on the agenda, all the Saturday meeting has to do is receive the site selection results and conduct Question Time for future bids. I don't expect a Sunday Business Meeting; we haven't held a fourth meeting since 1992.
2B. The reason the MPC meeting on Sunday is scheduled against the Business Meeting is that there hasn't been a last-day Business Meeting since 1992 and we only schedule the fourth meeting (Worldcon day 5) as an emergency overflow in case there's so much material on the agenda that we're unable to finish on Worldcon days 3 and 4. We're more likely to have full three-hour sessions on the previous days as people really don't want to have to use the last-day meeting on account of so many people are leaving that day — sometimes that morning. The MPC can't hold its meeting until all of the Business Meetings are over. They often meet right after the final Business Meeting, which means they sometimes hold their meeting on Worldcon Day 4 and not on the final day. But the nominal schedule is based on worst-case outcomes.
2C. The more typical short meeting on Worldcon day 4 for Site Selection is why we schedule the informal Worldcon Chairs Photo Shoot for about 11 AM at the same place as the Business Meeting. So many Worldcon chairs are apt to be at the Business Meeting anyway, as well as the people most interested in photographing them, that it's logistically easier to get them assembled there, and we usually anticipate a relatively short, pro-forma session. (Amazing meetings like we had at Westercon this year are highly unusual.)
3. Candidates rarely get announced that far in advance. Nominations are made at the Worldcon Day 2 (Thursday this year) Business Meeting, and election a Day 3 (Friday this year). Candidates sometimes (but rarely) make statements. I made a statement on my own behalf last year in Australia and was criticized for "politicizing" the process, which I find an absurd criticism, because of course it's a political process. There was a long run of years where nobody was really interested in serving on the MPC and the MPC didn't do anything at all, much to the detriment of Worldcon in my opinion. I intend to give a speech at Friday's meeting in support of selected candidates.
Yes, I know that committing to a potential nine hours of Worldcon time is a big deal, especially if you've been up late at night partying. But not showing up leaves the field to the others, and leaves the decisions to those people who do show up. There are no representatives, proxy votes, or anything like that. It'd direct democracy in action. Moreover, more than one first-time attendee has come to me after their first meeting and told me how surprised they were at how unexpectedly entertaining the debate can be.
Many thanks!
Date: 2011-08-12 07:55 am (UTC)I've been tempted to go to a Worldcon Business Meeting for a while now; it's one of the gaping holes in my con experience. But having seen small-scale local fen debate, I can only cringe at the thought of Worldcon-level debate. ;-) I'll make sure to bring my sense of humour, if I make it to any of this.
Thanks again,
Kendall