Active Entries
- 1: Letting Her Drive
- 2: Concierge for Lisa
- 3: Slow Recovery
- 4: Declined Nominations: WSFS MPC and Trial Committee
- 5: London-Denver-Reno: The Longest Day
- 6: Trees, Trains, Burritos, and Hotels
- 7: Exploring Carmarthenshire With Cheryl
- 8: Graduation Aftermath: A Tale of Two Trains
- 9: Graduation Day in Exeter
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 07:37 pm (UTC)It happens that I agree with this wholeheartedly. During site selection in 2001, we refused to allow the site selection voting fee/supporting rate to rise, as our competitors had insisted it should. Had it been possible, we would have insisted that it *decline.* And at no point after we won did we ever increase the supporting membership rate.
I have watched the rapid ascent of the rate with no little annoyance, and I would *happily* decouple the rate from the initial attending rate.
However, I do not believe that the rate should be viewed as the rate to vote in the Hugo Awards. Voting for the Hugos is one of the rights of a member of the Worldcon. If people aren't interested in Worldcon, I'm not interested in improving their ability to vote.