I'm glad that my electronic site selection voting amendment, though subject to vigorous debate on smofs last year, passed and seems likely to be ratified. I think it will greatly increase the voting.
As for the MPC amendment, they claim it's a ratification of existing, unwritten practice. But really, had it been tested at all? After all, the committee is fairly new. And I don't see their reasoning. If the MPC isn't eligible for the Hugo, then nobody at all in the entire WSFS division should be, including the people running the BM (such as the timekeeper). And since they can vote in new Hugos, nobody who attends the BM; which means the entire Worldcon membership. (Reducto ad absurdum...)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2011-08-15 04:06 pm (UTC)As for the MPC amendment, they claim it's a ratification of existing, unwritten practice. But really, had it been tested at all? After all, the committee is fairly new. And I don't see their reasoning. If the MPC isn't eligible for the Hugo, then nobody at all in the entire WSFS division should be, including the people running the BM (such as the timekeeper). And since they can vote in new Hugos, nobody who attends the BM; which means the entire Worldcon membership. (Reducto ad absurdum...)