[WorldCon] WSFS Business Meeting 2 Liveblog

Liveblog of the preliminary meeting here.

Liveblog of business meeting 1 here.

Summary of the meetings so far here.

The agenda is available here.

(Corina is still liveblogging!)

1011: Good morning all!  The Site Selection results are in, and our 2021 Worldcon will be DisCon III in Washington, DC. Please see DisCon3.org for more details. As usual, Minneapolis in ’73 got a few votes – I for one am looking forward to it.

1018: Standing ovation for DisCon III Fan Guest of Honor Ben Yalow. Congrats Ben!

1025: Reminder that the 2020 NASFiC was awarded to Columbus – Columbus2020NASFiC.org is the website.

1028: Quick presentation by CoNZealand. Housing opens in early December, next price rise is Oct 1. Program signups are available now. CoNZealand.nz is the website.

1030: Kevin Roche passes along some funds from Worldcon 76 to Dublin 2019, CoNZealand, and DisCon III.

Half hour recess for the Worldcon Chair photo, until 1100.

1100: Meeting called to order.

1114: Resumed with D8, No Deadline for Nominations Eligibility. There is an amendment to add a 2024 sunset clause by Martin Pyne, who argues for it as a case against self-promotion. Nicholas Whyte opposes it because either it is a good idea or it is not, and a sunset clause would be counterproductive. Elspeth Kovar speaks in favor because it is easier to not vote for something than to vote it down – we do not have to wait until the end of the time period to vote it down if we don’t want. Will give us a chance to test it. Joshua Kronengold calls the question on the amendment. Amendment fails. D8 proceeds unamended. Speech in favor – we should not be ruled by fear. As long as we have EPH and other measures to prevent slating, we should not hamper the ability of people to vote. Perrianne Lurie against as people will game the system. Terry Ash, speech in favor, we should not try to define “unworthy” and putting a deadline on membership does not magically make a work better. Kevin Standlee against, original reason for a deadline had no relationship to 2015 and there was an “entryism” problem which is why we had a Jan deadline. Moves to amend to reinstate Jan 31 as the deadline.

1120: Entryism is always a problem, and keeping members of the previous Worldcon helps to balance this. Jan 31 is a decent compromise and it will return us to where we were. Todd Dashoff against, doesn’t see the point of ping-pong between January and December. RIck Kovalchik, against, technology is not perfect so it is good to have time between buying a membership and nominating a work. Amendment passes. PRK moves to extend debate time by 4 minutes but it is not seconded. Or is it? A second is heard. However it is not extended. D8 passes.

1122: D13 is up next, Best Game or Interactive Experience. The maker of the movement will not be here tomorrow so we will take it up now.

1132: Ira Alexandre speaks in favor of a Hugo Award for games as it is viable, includes low-cost and free elements, and because it is a unique storytelling experience particularly related to speculative fiction. This would be the first media-inclusive award for games. GamesHugo.com for the full report. Perrianne Lurie motions to refer to committee to report back next year. Lisa Padol against the motion to refer, first because the committee has a lot of work and we don’t need to add to it. Second, there is a 60-page report with significant research. We could not do more. Rafe Richards for the referral to committee because he would like to reword or rework the proposal in committee. Alex Acks speech against (they will time themselves), echoes Perrianne’s sentiment and would say if there is a committee it should be its own specific one rather than the general committee. Kate Secor in favor bvecause the Hugo Study Committee is moving to a more direct forum for discussion and will make subcommittees so it would be OK to have it as part of the main committee. Also, there is so much discussion to be had that it should be in a format other than the Business Meeting.

1142: Martin Pyne motions to amend the motion to refer by having a dedicated subcommittee in the Hugo Awards Study Committee.  Perrianne Lurie against this amendment because having the same 9 people discussing the same thing will not be productive. Terry Neill in favor because the Hugo Study Committee can appoint others than just the same 9 people as well. Lisa Padol moves to call the question on the amendment. Passes. Back to the motion to refer to committee. Ben Yalow in favor of referring, because of technical issues with the wording of the motion due to category overlap, etc. and that a committee is better suited to cleaning these up. (Ira mentions these are explicitly addressed in the supplementary materials.) Question called on the motion to refer. Passes.  D13 is referred to committee/subcommittee to report back next year.

1147: Moving on to D7, Five and Five. Karl-Johan Noren in favor, wants to keep the reading burden on voters low and reduce strain on Hugo Ceremony, Reception Committee, Loser’s Party, and admins. We should trust in EPH as it is a better system. Rafe Richards moves to amend the motion so it does not subtract six or add five to 3.8.1. Head table consults as to what this would actually mean.

1159: Chairperson clarifies what this amendment would do – it would keep 6 but still get rid of the sunset clause. (Reversing the intent of the original motion.) The 5 and 6 was established as a motion against bad actors, and we should not dismantle these. The Worldcons can bear the financial burden, and if we are going to spend money on things, the Hugo Awards a re a good thing to spend it on. Mostly, this gives us more amazing works recognized that we can be exposed to. This is a great thing! Let’s keep it. Kathryn Duval against the amendment because it reverses the intent of the original motion, and for many of the same reasons stated earlier, because it does not respect the original intent of those who sponsored it. Lisa Hayes in favor because the bad actors are not gone. People can still submit fewer if they do not read all the things. In favor of increasing administrator pay if necessary. Chris Duval against because the amendment is unjust (going against the spirit of the original).

1202: Vote on the amendment (to keep 6, and to get rid of the sunset clause) passes. Back to D7, moved to call the question. Motion passes, keeping 6 and removing the sunset clause.

1207: B4, Suspend 5 and 6 for 2020, is up. Lisa Padol, it would be good information to test this out for data purposes since we are now considering keeping 6 permanently. Rafe Richards, let’s keep 6 for the exact same reasons as stated earlier. Moved to call the question. Motion fails, keeping 5 and 6 for 2020.

Ten minute recess to resume at 1217.

1232: Request to take up D11 now due to access needs. No objection. D11 is Clear Up the Definition of Public in the Artist Category Forever. Terry Ash in favor because too much is left up to the administrators as the only explicit definition is “convention art shows”. This means the Internet can be excluded. This would define “public” with more examples and give an expansive and inclusive definition in the constitution. Martin Pyne against, moves to refer to committee to discuss both this and the fan artist category. Reasoning is that the discussion should be holistic, and making piecemeal changes is not an answer. Cath De McMahaffee against moving it to committee as we are so currently dealing with it actively we should be moving more quickly than the committee, which did not even meet on this question last year. Ben Yalow in favor of moving to committee, as while the art committee failed to meet, the Hugo Study Committee did meet many times, so they can be trusted to discuss this and report back. Christopher Braithwaite against moving to committee, sees no reason not to do this as the study committee can still make changes in the future, this does not prevent them from doing so. Cliff Dunn, we should change both Fan and Pro Artist as part of the same motion rather than as two over separate years, so in favor of committee. Terry Ash, categories are borked however no reason not to fix for next year something that can be fixed now. Terry Neill, we have wasted a year, it was a grave injustice to disqualify a work because it was only displayed on the Internet, this is a message that the will of the body is to recognize the Internet as a viable medium for displaying art. Not moved to committee.

1133: Joshua Kronengold moves to call the question. Vote on D11 passes.

1136: We are going to reorder the agenda to take up B.5, Credit to Translators of Written Fiction, and an additional standing rule change, as they will take less time.

1243: B5 would award a Hugo to the credited translator of a novel, novella, novelette, and short story, when the original text is not in English. A translator’s contribution can make a great difference in preserving the quality of the original work, and this should be recognized. Kent Bloom against, confused about what this is trying to do – it is within the authority of the administering Worldcon or dealt with as a constitutional amendment depending on what they are trying to do, so is not appropriate as a resolution. Ben Yalow against, couple of technical issues – we award the Hugo to the work not the author, so we should not award it to the translator. Also, we do not award the editor, cover artist, etc. of a particular winning work as would be equivalent. Joshua Kronengold wishes to extend debate, but it fails. Resolution fails.

1257: B.6 Standing Rule Change, if you are making a written response to new business you must submit it 14 days before the business meeting so the origininators of the new business can have a chance to repsond in the same (written) fashion. Kate Secor appreciates the thought behind such written responses, but agrees with Nicholas Whyte that it is unfair that the originators are unable to respond in a similar fashion. This would give us a procedure to fall back on. Don Eastlake against, moves to refer to Nitpicking and Flyspecking for next year. Rick Falcheck against as hearing some more opinions would be great, however we have no time remaining for this.  Linda Deneroff against as secretary because it would negate the 30 day submission time that came in handy this year. Referred to committee.

12589: D9 and D10 to be considered tomorrow. Meeting adjourned for today.