You can find a copy of the agenda here.
Hugo Study Committee report here.
The WSFS business meeting #1 liveblog will begin shortly in this space! I’ll update this post every 5-10 minutes.
1007: Five minute warning. Time for the instructional video about parliamentary procedure!
1016: Tim Illingworth is the chair of this business meeting. Staff are Don Eastlake (parliamentarian), Linda, Jesi Lipp, and Paul. Be aware that the business meeting will be recorded and posted later.
1019: Preliminary business meeting agenda: time setting, standing rule changes and resolutions, and MPC nominations.
1021: Kevin Standlee would like to call attention to as a proofreading error. Video crew (Lisa and Scott) will record in batches and there will need to be video breaks, and this year will not be livestreamed.
1022: Tim mentions one of the financial reports has the wrong year on it. All reports are accepted without objection with the acknowledgment that there is the incorrect year.
1023: Committee reports. First up is MPC.
1023: Kevin Standlee chair reports. MPC is the only permanent committee. Manages service marks. The written report is in the agenda. The only item called out is on page 35. Last year, the Flemish language portion of Belgian TV (VRT) launched a prize in honor of Hugo Claus, and were going to call it the “Hugo Award.” Nicholas Whyte made initial contact with them, and they agreed to rename the price the “Hugo Claus Trophy.” The committee believes that this was accomplished without attorneys is because “Hugo Awards” is one of the service marks owned by us in the EU, and this was a good use of money.
1026: Nominations for elections to the MPC…. except Tim didn’t ask for question.
1026: Question from Andrew Adams about Brexit and possible need to re-register marks in the UK.
1027: This has not been considered yet but will be.
1027: Nominations now. Judith Bemis asks to be nominated. Kevin Standlee asks for unanimous consent for incumbent members to remain and receives it.
1028: Terry Neill question – if we unanimously re-nominate the current members, is that the limit, or can we add more? We can have as many as we like. Means tomorrow we will have an actual election instead of “just a coronation.”
1030: Don with report from Nitpicking and Flyspecking committee. The committee recommends that item D2 be passed. The members of the committee are willing to serve another year. The committee is provided for in the standing rules.
1032: Jesi Lipp has a nitpick, which is that her last name needs to be corrected in the report.
1033: No one from the WorldCon Runners Guide committee to report. No one from the FOLLE committee to report. But there is one from the Hugo study committee. “Boy do they have a report.”
1033: Vince says he’s hopefully the outgoing chair of the committee. Report is included in the packet. Vince’s responsibilities for Dublin WorldCon mean that he can’t be chair next year.
1035: Question on how people can get on this committee. A new chair will be appointed who will be taking volunteers.
1036: Now we are on to standing rules changes.
1037: Tim proposes five minutes for everything but D5. I object and explain that after speaking with Marguerite Kenner, D4 needs more time.
1040: Tim tries again with 5 minutes for everything but D4 and D5, and then Terry objects because the Lodestar thing will need more discussion, which she’s probably right on.
1040: Kate Secor points out that when we went through items one by one we could object to consideration, etc. Can we do that if we’re doing them in a lump?
1042: 5 minutes for A1, Restricting Ratification of Amendments.
1043: Cliff Dunn on A1. Primary purpose of this is that there’s a tendency to try to amend things majorly at the ratification meeting. It would be better if members knew if big changes were coming. Concerns that business meeting could be ambushed by a small but dedicated crowd. Greater versus lesser change.
1044: No speech against. Voted on now. A1 passes.
1045: Martin Pyne with a parliamentary inquiry – can there be a motion to put it into effect immediately, when would that be timely? Tim says that in this case, then the person proposing the amendment would have had to do so two weeks ago, so it really doesn’t work.
1046: A2 Deadline for Submission of New Business gets 5 minutes. Kate Secor speaks for, because 2 weeks seems like too short of a time to let everyone deal with proposed business. A month out for new business would make things much easier for the staff and presumably if you have been working on your new business, you should have your ducks in a row that long.
1047: The standing rule changes will come into effect after this business meeting.
1047: Don Eastlake against. Didn’t think it was a problem when the deadline was actually at the business meeting. Simple things could work, complicated amendments proposed at the meeting usually went down in flames. If the deadline is too late for the secretary to get it into the agenda, then the maker of the motion has the burden of printing everything up and bringing it in.
1048: Linda Deneroff against. Having an earlier deadline works better for getting financial reports and such for the agenda. It would stop these last minute, sometimes trivial proposals that get made. An earlier deadline forces people to think what’s going to happen and what they want to accomplish, etc.
1050: Todd Dashoff moves to call the question. Seconded.
1050: Question is called, A2 is passed by majority.
1051: Time limits for business passed on.
1051: C1 What Our Marks Really Are gets five minutes. C2 The Reasonable Amendment gets 5 minutes. C3 Make Room! Make Room! gets 5 minutes. C4 Name That Award gets 10 minutes.
1052: 10 minute break time!
1109: We’re back!
1109: D1 Remote but Real. Five minutes proposed by Tim, ten by Kevin. Ten minutes it is.
1110: Andrew Adams proposes to refer D1 to committee. Point of Order from Kevin; the preliminary business meeting cannot refer to postpone anything beyond the main business meeting.
1111: Cliff asks if we could suspend the rules to do this?
1111: Dr Adams says no thanks, he’ll just do this tomorrow.
1112: Motion to postpone indefinitely, which is seconded. This is debatable at four minutes.
1112: For postponement: This is a complex issue, and we need time to figure it out, with or without a committee. This shouldn’t be taken up this year.
1113: Kate Secor: Agrees that the motion is missing some discussion. Urges not postpone indefinitely, but that we move it to committee tomorrow.
1113: Ben Yalow speaks against postponement as well. Can’t do this without discussing it, and we cannot form a committee by postponing it. Tomorrow when it comes to the floor and we can send it to a committee, let’s do that.
1114: Kevin Standlee thinks that this is a really bad idea in principle. We really don’t want to go here, and we don’t want to create an elected body separate from the business meeting.
1115: Terry Neill is broadly in favor of things that broaden WorldCon to serve more members and would like to see it thoroughly discussed.
1116: Parliamentary Inquiry from Seth. If the motion to postpone indefinitely, can there still be a motion to appoint a study committee to report back next year. Tim says that yes, we could do so.
1117: Motion to postpone indefinitely fails.
1118: Warren Buff with motion to suspend the rules and send this to committee.
1118: When would be the committee be expected to report? Next year.
1119: Point of Order from Kevin. This seems to have not come up before. There is a principle behind suspending the rules. Rules that affect the rights of absentees cannot be suspended. Members may take for granted that motions to create committees cannot be taken up until the main business meeting for that reason. Tim agrees, motion is out of order.
1122: Joshua Kronengold speaks for this motion; it is already known by absentees that a motion could be killed. A motion to move to committee is allowable because it is a lesser version of killing an item.
1122: Terry Neill says that we have a flow of the meeting that people expect. If we overrule the chair, we’re sticking a socket wrench in that expectation.
1123: Elspeth believes that assumption is incorrect.
1123: Seth with a PI. If we did overrule the chair, would it be in order for the main meeting to take it back from the committee and consider it. Tim doesn’t think so. Don says you can’t do by a normal motion, but can move to reconsider, etc.
1124: Kate Secor: there is a qualitative difference between the thought processes of killing a motion versus sending to committee. Not giving people a chance to know a committee is even being formed because they’re not here is pretty unfair.
1126: We vote on the appeal of the ruling of the chair, and that appeal is lost. D1 will proceed to tomorrow’s meeting and probably be referred to committee there.
1127: D2 Adding Series to the Series is given 5 minutes of time.
1127: D3 Counting Comics. 5 minutes proposed. 8 minutes proposed. 8 minutes is set.
1128: Dave McCarty (Hugo admin) to speak to the motion itself. This is not a technical fix; this is a substantial change to how we will count in this category. Moving to postpone indefinitely because he thinks it is ill conceived.
1129: Dr. Adams against the motion because he believes there should be a debate.
1129: Kate Secor this particular proposal is offensive to someone who nominates. She nominates what she nominates.
1130: David Brachman (former Hugo admin) says the reason for this is because this category has particular problems for administrators. There is ambiguity left, but in this case it should be clarified what will happen when they nominate something.
1131: He is still Ben Yalow and does not think this is guidance that should be given to Hugo admins, because this is not how things should be counted.
1132: John L (also a former Hugo admin) says the original rules were extremely nebulous, and this will clarify things.
1132: Terry Neill suggests we do with this what we did with D1 and take this on to tomorrow where it can be referred to committee.
1133: Kent Bloom says that whether it is postponed indefinitely or it goes back to committee, there is a committee already looking at these matters and it will be considered by them.
1133: PRK with PI. Would this prohibit the Hugo Study Committee if it was postponed? No, just the business meeting. The committee can consider it.
1135: Motion is voted… OH SHIT KIDS IT’S OUR FIRST SERPENTINE.
1137: More than two-thirds in favor of being postponed indefinitely, so D3 is toast. Tim remarks that the Hugo Study Committee should take note.
1138: Todd Dashoff points out that the remit of the Hugo Study Committee is section 3.2 and 3.3, and this is 3.8.
1139: Kate Secor points out that the language does not say it’s limited only to 3.2 and 3.3. So it can be considered by the committee.
1140: 10 minutes debate for D4 Best Podcast Hugo Award.
1140: Kate Secor moves to postpone indefinitely because people eligible for this award have expressed extreme concerns about this language. Better to postpone indefinitely so it can be reworked. Seconded, and postponed indefinitely by an overwhelming majority.
1141: D5 Professional and Fan Artist Hugo Awards. 20 minutes for debate.
1142: Ms. Dashoff points out that tomorrow the business meeting is set against the ASFA meeting, and proposes to postpone definitely until Sunday. (Kevin clarifies the motion should technically be to not be considered before 11 on Sunday.) Unanimous on that motion, so this will be considered at the WSFS meeting on Sunday.
1143: D6 Comic Books and Graphic Stories. 5 minutes for debate.
1144: D7 Notability Still Matters. 5 minutes for debate.
1144: Meeting stands adjourned until tomorrow morning! See you then.