kevin_standlee (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
kevin_standlee) wrote2015-08-21 11:57 pm
kevin_standlee) wrote2015-08-21 11:57 pm
Entry tags:
WSFS Business: First Main Meeting Summary
The First Main Business Meeting had to pick up where the Preliminary Meeting left off, which meant dealing with the Resolutions first, and that, along with a discussion of the two Hugo-nominating-related proposals, meant that we only just barely got started on the actual constitutional amendments. Once again, you'll need to refer to the Sasquan WSFS Business Meeting agenda pages to follow this.
The three special committees (FOLLE, YA Hugo, and Membership Rates & Types) were continued with the same memberships.
The two Hugo Award eligibility extensions (I Remember the Future and Predestination) passed; these works are now eligible for the 2016 Hugo Awards.
The Hugo Nominating Data Request resolution passed, modified to extend the request to the 2016 Hugo Award Administrators as well. The 2015 Administrators have indicated that they will release anonymized nominating ballot data after the 2015 Hugo Awards ceremony; contact the 2015 Hugo Administration directly through the Sasquan website.
The Open Source Software resolution was rejected.
The WSFS Mark Protection Committee withdrew (with the meeting's consent) the MPC Funding resolution, in light of the crowded agenda and the fact that Sasquan has already set aside $10,500 as a donation to the MPC for this year. We'll discuss it further and resubmit a recommendation next year, possibly with less material to compete for the meeting's limited bandwidth.
The Nitpicking & Flyspecking (Rules) Committee was reappointed as currently constituted, as was the Worldcon Runners Guide Editorial Committee.
The meeting spent about 30 minutes in Committee of the Whole discussing the "technical" aspects of the 4/6 and E Pluribus Hugo proposals. The only recommendation that came out of the Committee of the Whole was that amendments to the 4/6 combinations should be considered at the Sunday Business Meeting by the method of Filling Blanks.
And after all of that, we finally got to debate and vote directly on a constitutional amendment: Popular Ratification. This proposal, which received first passage last year in London, would allow all members, supporting and attending, to vote on the ratification of constitutional amendments. After a spirited but polite debate, the motion was put to a vote and was defeated 69-99.
All other constitutional amendments (three pending from last year and seven remaining new items; Two-Year Eligibility was killed at the Preliminary Meeting) roll over to the Site Selection Business Meeting, except for 4/6 and EPH, which are scheduled for Sunday.
Anything we don't get to on Saturday goes on to Sunday. Anything that is still pending as of adjournment on Sunday dies. We do have a lot more time on Sunday, but I don't think the members really want to stay in session until 5 PM!
I am of course disappointed that Popular Ratification, which Warren Buff and I co-wrote, failed of ratification, but I'm not surprised. The Hugo controversy this year has given a lot of people the vapors about allowing anyone except the people physically present a chance to vote, and others are unhappy that it takes two years to amend the constitution now, let alone the three it would take under Popular Ratification. Oh, well, I tried. Don't expect me to try again anytime soon, though.
The three special committees (FOLLE, YA Hugo, and Membership Rates & Types) were continued with the same memberships.
The two Hugo Award eligibility extensions (I Remember the Future and Predestination) passed; these works are now eligible for the 2016 Hugo Awards.
The Hugo Nominating Data Request resolution passed, modified to extend the request to the 2016 Hugo Award Administrators as well. The 2015 Administrators have indicated that they will release anonymized nominating ballot data after the 2015 Hugo Awards ceremony; contact the 2015 Hugo Administration directly through the Sasquan website.
The Open Source Software resolution was rejected.
The WSFS Mark Protection Committee withdrew (with the meeting's consent) the MPC Funding resolution, in light of the crowded agenda and the fact that Sasquan has already set aside $10,500 as a donation to the MPC for this year. We'll discuss it further and resubmit a recommendation next year, possibly with less material to compete for the meeting's limited bandwidth.
The Nitpicking & Flyspecking (Rules) Committee was reappointed as currently constituted, as was the Worldcon Runners Guide Editorial Committee.
The meeting spent about 30 minutes in Committee of the Whole discussing the "technical" aspects of the 4/6 and E Pluribus Hugo proposals. The only recommendation that came out of the Committee of the Whole was that amendments to the 4/6 combinations should be considered at the Sunday Business Meeting by the method of Filling Blanks.
And after all of that, we finally got to debate and vote directly on a constitutional amendment: Popular Ratification. This proposal, which received first passage last year in London, would allow all members, supporting and attending, to vote on the ratification of constitutional amendments. After a spirited but polite debate, the motion was put to a vote and was defeated 69-99.
All other constitutional amendments (three pending from last year and seven remaining new items; Two-Year Eligibility was killed at the Preliminary Meeting) roll over to the Site Selection Business Meeting, except for 4/6 and EPH, which are scheduled for Sunday.
Anything we don't get to on Saturday goes on to Sunday. Anything that is still pending as of adjournment on Sunday dies. We do have a lot more time on Sunday, but I don't think the members really want to stay in session until 5 PM!
I am of course disappointed that Popular Ratification, which Warren Buff and I co-wrote, failed of ratification, but I'm not surprised. The Hugo controversy this year has given a lot of people the vapors about allowing anyone except the people physically present a chance to vote, and others are unhappy that it takes two years to amend the constitution now, let alone the three it would take under Popular Ratification. Oh, well, I tried. Don't expect me to try again anytime soon, though.