You're on the right track, but I suspect that you'd not get either version past the Business Meeting, since they'd find ways to poke holes in it and since it would defeat the known legislative intent of the BDP split. Save yourself effort and don't try to ban "two parters" from Short Form. I know for a fact that the legislative intent of the current rule is that "two part" episodes belong in Short Form and "three part" episodes and "mini series" belong in Long Form. So concentrate on making things that fit that.
Let me see if I can format your proposal into the proper redlining form:
Moved, to Amend Section 3.3.8 of the WSFS Constitution to prohibit multi-part televised dramatic works from the Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form category if they are longer than 90 minutes, by adding words as shown:
3.3.8: Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form. Any television program or other production, with a complete running time of 90 minutes or less, in any medium of dramatized science fiction, fantasy or related subjects that has been publicly presented for the first time in its present dramatic form during the previous calendar year. Two or more episodes of a TV show that are part of a story will be defined as long form if they exceed 90 minutes, and nominations of such story should be done in the long form category.
While you're at it, you should try striking out the 20% gray zone in the constitution as well, since you obviously don't believe in it. And be prepared to explain what you're going to do to absolutely determine the running length of a work, which would become critical for works that are right around 90 minutes. You may think it's simple; it's not. In fact, the main reason for that gray zone is that it's very difficult to determine running time (or word count) absolutely.
In short, you have a concrete proposal, but it has more holes in it that a block of Swiss cheese. (For example, there's a technical argument that you're amending Short Form but are referring to Long Form, so maybe it should be a general rule rather than written into a single rule. Except that you want to keep the words near the Short Form definition because you only want to look at rules in isolation, not in context.) This isn't likely to be obvious to you because you've not been through the wars on this, so I'm prepared to cut you some slack, but I warned you that it wouldn't be easy.
Your biggest problem with passing this, however, isn't technical: it's substantive. I can assure you that based on years of legislative history, WSFS doesn't want to kick "two part" episodes, even those that are slightly longer than 90 minutes, out of short form. You know how I know this? Because this isn't the first time that a >90-minute "two-parter" has been nominated in Short Form, and there's not been a squawk about it. The last time the issue was visited was when a theatrical motion picture of 87 minutes running length was nominated in Short Form when many (including me) think it should have been in Long Form, and we worked to add language to make it more likely that future similar films would be there.
Tinkering With BDP
Let me see if I can format your proposal into the proper redlining form:
While you're at it, you should try striking out the 20% gray zone in the constitution as well, since you obviously don't believe in it. And be prepared to explain what you're going to do to absolutely determine the running length of a work, which would become critical for works that are right around 90 minutes. You may think it's simple; it's not. In fact, the main reason for that gray zone is that it's very difficult to determine running time (or word count) absolutely.
In short, you have a concrete proposal, but it has more holes in it that a block of Swiss cheese. (For example, there's a technical argument that you're amending Short Form but are referring to Long Form, so maybe it should be a general rule rather than written into a single rule. Except that you want to keep the words near the Short Form definition because you only want to look at rules in isolation, not in context.) This isn't likely to be obvious to you because you've not been through the wars on this, so I'm prepared to cut you some slack, but I warned you that it wouldn't be easy.
Your biggest problem with passing this, however, isn't technical: it's substantive. I can assure you that based on years of legislative history, WSFS doesn't want to kick "two part" episodes, even those that are slightly longer than 90 minutes, out of short form. You know how I know this? Because this isn't the first time that a >90-minute "two-parter" has been nominated in Short Form, and there's not been a squawk about it. The last time the issue was visited was when a theatrical motion picture of 87 minutes running length was nominated in Short Form when many (including me) think it should have been in Long Form, and we worked to add language to make it more likely that future similar films would be there.