Giving You the (WSFS) Business

[kevin_standlee]

Back in that long and contentious discussion of the Hugo Awards, George R.R. Martin said a couple of things that I found interesting, but didn't comment on a whole lot at the time. I can't link to the specific comment because that blog doesn't have links to individual comments, but it's time-stamped 1:16 AM.

Just moving the business meeting to an early evening timeslot would greatly increase its size, I suspect. Since Saturday and Sunday are traditionally reserved for the Masquerade and Hugo Awards, maybe Friday would be a good night for the business meeting. Publicizing it more would help as well. Modern worldcons list "major events" separately from all the other panels and speeches -- shouldn't the business meeting be a major event?

In fact, the WSFS functions have been part of the Worldcon's Major Events division twice in recent history -- 1998 and 2005 -- although the conventions have not listed them among the "Major Events" and the division managers in charge have not pushed them to do so. I doubt that Worldcon managements are likely to consider the Business Meeting to really be as important as the Hugo Awards Ceremony. I wouldn't mind it at all, myself. In fact, I'm sorry I didn't think of it in 2005 when I might have been able to get it such enhanced billing. Heck, I was the division manager and didn't think it was something that people would equate with the Major Events.

I also wouldn't personally mind the Main Business Meeting being on Friday evening. It would make things more complicated -- we'd have to shorten the time between the Preliminary BM and the Main BM, and the Secretary's job would get even harder. Whether it would really increase attendance all that much, I don't know. I bet we'd get a whole lot of complaints that we were keeping people away from the Friday night parties, though.

And here's another idea that might make the process more representative -- let the whole membership have the opportunity to vote on proposed amendments and changes. You could keep the rule that two successive worldcons need to ratify any change, but broaden the franchise. Worldcon #1 passes a proposal, and that's step one. Then, the following year, any amendment that passed is sent out to the whole membership of worldcon #2, along with the Hugo and site selection ballots. So rather than having a second business meeting ratify the work of the previous one, all the members of both cons get to vote, in a referendum.

Actually, this is close to an idea I've quietly advocated for some time: Popular Ratification. Constitutional amendments would still have to originate out of the WSFS Business Meeting, but instead of being ratified at the following year's meeting, they would be submitted to a vote of the entire membership, probably along with the site selection ballot, including balloting on site through, say, the third day of the convention.

The major plus to this is that it expands the "legitimacy" of the WSFS governmental process, in that nearly ever member has a right to vote on a proposal even if s/he can't make it to the Business Meeting. The biggest minus I can see is that it would remove the existing ability to fine-tune an amendment at the ratification stage by reducing its scope. Since we don't require previous notice for constitutional amendments, the two-stage ratification process serves as a proxy for advance notice, giving people who care a year to think out the ramifications of the originally-passed text and to work out improvements.

Would it change the results of what gets ratified? Maybe. I'm not sure. It might make things less likely to pass, given that people who bother to vote tend to vote "no" on anything they don't understand, and a lot of WSFS constitutional amendments turn on fine bits of arcana that you need to study to realize their implications. OTOH, most people might just say, "Who cares?" and ignore it entirely. So we'd be imposing additional costs (ballots, mailings, people points to staff the polls) on Worldcons for how much gain?

Would the WSFS Business Meeting ever vote to go to change its procedures in the ways proposed above? I doubt it, which is one reason I don't go to the effort of bringing it up as a formal proposal. The BM has so little authority already that it seems unlikely to me that they would vote away another piece of it by giving up their right of ratification.

Comments

[twilight2000.livejournal.com]

How do you keep UP with the *volume* these people generate? Good God... Something like 1000 messages in the last week...

GAH

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm online a lot, which helps. Also, I have what amounts to informal filtering. Some of the most prolific posters have only a few sentences to get my attention, or they get filed very quickly. So I'm not reading every word posted, particularly by some people who need to make acquaintance with periods and learn how to quote properly.

[tkunsman.livejournal.com]

YEah, I also doubt that the BM would ever become a "Major Event" at a Worldcon. This past years (LA Con) BM was well attended, and people who care about what happens, attend the meeting - at least that is what I hope.

Of course, I am amazed at the number of people I overhear during an Worldcon saying something about why such an such Hugo is a category. When I try and explain that there is a BM, and that they have a voice in such matters - most people look at my with blank looks on their face.

Besides, isn't a future Worldcon supposed to print the current WSFS constitution, and all BM amendments that will be ratified at that Worldcon? Would this not constitute an "advance notice" to the attending members, who are of course members of WSFS, that some piece of legislation that they might be interested in will be taken up at the BM?

Besides, I kind of like the early BM times, as typically not much really happens in the early hours, so moving it to the afternoon would make it harder for me to attend the BM.

Tom

Publicising the Business Meeting

[nojay.livejournal.com]

EGO -- Eyes Glaze Over. People really don't want to spend valuable con time sitting in a meeting dealing with administrivia, on the whole. If there's something special on the docket, like the return to two-year bidding, word gets around in the strata of con-going fen and the meeting will get better attendance but it's difficult for non-plugged-in fen to hear the word, or to be interested anyways.

My suggestion to boost Business Meeting attendance would be to offer free coffee and doughnuts (I have a vague recollection this has been tried though). Dancing girls might help too. How about Business Meeting T-shirts? "I had a whale of a BM!" buttons, the marketing possibilities are endless...

Re: Publicising the Business Meeting

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

The people you have to convince of this are those who have it in their heads that we're deliberately scheduling things so as to exclude them from participating. No matter that I bend over backwards to try and make the meeting as non-frightening as possible to newcommers, people with no experience of it seem convinced that it's all an Evil SMOFfer Plot.

Heck, the first time the Business Meeting was in my jurisdiction, I moved it to Noon and nearly got my head handed to me. A few years later, a Worldcon scheduled it for 0830 and people got so angry that they passed a Standing Rule that requires that the meeting start between 1000 and 1300 local time, which suggests to me that the majority of regular BM attendees really want the meeting schedule to start at 1000 and end no later than 1300, preferably earlier.

Actually, since programming normally starts at 1000, there is a minor advantage for the BM head table staff in having the meeting start then, as it gives them plenty of time to set up at their leisure. I ask for a three hour block of time, planning to use about two hours of it, starting about ten minutes after the hour and allowing for a bit under an hour of tear-down and ad hoc committee meetings.

Re: Publicising the Business Meeting

[timill]

These days, coffee & danish are often provided by the previous Worldcon.

I wonder what Japan will do in Denver? Traditional Japanese breakfasts?

Re: Publicising the Business Meeting

[tkunsman.livejournal.com]

I wonder what Japan will do in Denver? Traditional Japanese breakfasts?

On my first trip to Japan in 1996, my host offered me traditional Japanese breakfast. That was the last time they tried that, and greatly 'Americanized' my breakfast the next morning. It was seaweed salad with chicken. Really.

Oh, if you make it to Japan, find a Baskin-Robins ice cream store, and order grean tea ice cream. Best stuff ever!

[thirdworld.livejournal.com]

I can't imagine everyone wanting to vote on things, never mind everyone at the BM. And what about the people points it would take to run every BM vote? Similar to site selection I'd imagine.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Yes, I think it would be about the same logistics as site selection, other than not having to deal with money, which would simplify things a bit. The format isn't difficult. It would be similar to how California (and other states, I guess) put constitutional amendments on the ballot for popular vote. So it would cost people points and some money. The question is how many people would vote. Maybe about the same percentage as vote on the Hugos?

[thirdworld.livejournal.com]

In other words getting everyone to vote is largely a waste of effort? How many more votes would that be more than those actually at the BM?

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Oh, compared to the BM turnout, it would be a considerable increase: probably a six- or seven-fold increase in the number of voters. Remember, only about 100-200 people show up for the Business Meeting. Hugo voting is around 700-1000 people.

All this would really do is remove a "plausible complaint." It probably wouldn't change a whole lot, other than removing the "you mean old SMOFfers won't let us play because you make your meetings too difficult to attend," argument.