2001 Business meeting Minutes: Saturday Business Meeting
Saturday Business Meeting
Saturday September 2nd 2001
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 10:08 am.
1. Committee Reports
1.1. Mark Protection Committee (Including Nominations for MPC)
The Mark Protection Committee (MPC) meeting on Friday was inquorate. An emergency meeting was convened following the Friday Business Meeting but, due to lack of time, it was decided to defer all business until the second scheduled meeting of the committee on Sunday.
The nominees for the vacant MPC places are: Ben Yalow (East), Kevin Standlee (West), Tim Illingworth (Rest of World), Lynn Anderson (Central, write-in nomination made after close of Preliminary Business Meeting).
The election is to be held at this meeting. ‘Zanne Labonville, Rick Katze and Linda Deneroff were appointed tellers and distributed ballots.
1.2. Nitpicking & Flyspecking Committee
This committee’s report was dealt with fully at the Preliminary Business Meeting.
1.2.1. Short Title: 1776 And All That
This resolution was ruled out of order as dilatory at the Preliminary Business Meeting.
1.2.2. Short Title: Committees
This resolution was passed without objection at the Preliminary Business Meeting.
1.2.3. Short Title: Continue NP&FSC
This resolution was passed without objection at the Preliminary Business Meeting. The committee will continue as previously constituted.
1.3. Worldcon Runners' Guide Editorial Committee
Saul Jaffe presented his report. Most of last year was spent converting previous paper versions of the Guide to electronic versions, making HTML pages, a web site, indexing, and so on. Nothing is ready yet. Mr. Jaffe is hoping for a preliminary version in a month or two.
Mr. Jaffe was asked what the URL of the web site would be. He replied that this was not yet known as the site is moving from Rutgers University to sflovers.org. There will be a link to the Guide from WSFS.org.
Mr. Jaffe moved to continue the committee as previously constituted. This was passed without objection.
1.4. Hugo Eligibility Rest of the World Committee
1.4.1. Short Title: Throw a Blanket Over It
This resolution was passed without objection at the Preliminary Business Meeting.
1.4.2. Short Title: We Need Another HEROW
This resolution was passed without objection at the Preliminary Business Meeting. Persons interested in serving on the committee should contact the Business Meeting Chair. The make-up of the committee will be announced at the Sunday meeting.
1.4.3. Short Title: Perpetual Motions
Moved, To amend portions of Article III of the WSFS Constitution to regularize the current practice of extending an extra year of eligibility for the Hugo Award to works first published outside the USA, and to administer this change, as follows:
Delete the final sentence of section 3.2.2:
3.2.2: A work originally appearing in a language other than English shall also be eligible for the year in which it is first issued in English translation. A work, once it has appeared in English, may thus be eligible only once.
Insert the following after existing subsection 3.2.2:
3.2.x:The Business Meeting may by a 3/4 vote provide that works originally published outside the United States of America and first published in the United States of America in the current year shall also be eligible for Hugo Awards given in the following year.
3.2.y: A work shall not be eligible if in a prior year it received sufficient nominations to appear on the final Award ballot.
The debate time limit for this motion was set at 12 minutes.
No one asked to speak. The motion was passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
1.5. Best Dramatic Presentation Hugo Award Study Committee
The committee proposed the following amendment:
1.5.1 The Long and Short of It
Moved, To amend portions of Article III of the WSFS Constitution to have the effect of splitting the existing Best Dramatic Presentation category into two categories, Long Form and Short Form, to regulate the administration of such categories, and for other purposes, as follows.
1. Strike out existing Section 3.3.6, "Best Dramatic Presentation."
3.3.6: Best Dramatic Presentation. Any production in any medium of dramatized science fiction, fantasy or related subjects which has been publicly presented for the first time in its present dramatic form during the previous calendar year.
2. Insert the following section after existing Section 3.3.5:
3.3.x: Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form. Any production in any medium of dramatized science fiction, fantasy, or related subjects that has been publicly presented for the first time in its present dramatic form during the previous calendar year, with a complete running time of more than 100 minutes.
3. Insert the following section before existing Section 3.3.7:
3.3.x: Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form. Any production in any medium of dramatized science fiction, fantasy, or related subjects that has been publicly presented for the first time in its present dramatic form during the previous calendar year, with a complete running time of 100 minutes or less.
4. Insert the following section after existing Section 3.2.5:
3.2.x: The Worldcon Committee shall not consider previews, promotional trailers, commercials, public service announcements, or other extraneous material when determining the length of a work.
5. Insert the following section after existing Section 3.2.6:
3.2.x: The Worldcon Committee may relocate a dramatic presentation work into a more appropriate category if it feels that it is necessary, provided that the length of the work is within the lesser of twenty (20) minutes or twenty percent (20%) of the new category limits.
Two amendments to this motion were pending as follows:
In order to help members of the meeting decide upon the most appropriate time split to use, the Millennium Philcon’s Hugo Administration staff made available the running times of all of the dramatic presentations that received enough nominations in 2001 to qualify for being reported as nominees under WSFS rules. These running times are listed in the Appendix below.
A debate time limit of 20 minutes had been set.
The Chair pointed out that the motion to lay on table from Friday was not proper (see the Parliamentarian’s comments on the Friday meeting) but as it got a 2/3 vote the rules were effectively suspended to allow for it.
Ben Yalow spoke in favor, pointing out that Fantasia 2000 would not count as a movie with 20% flexibility. He felt that administrators would not abuse their power.
Chris Barkley said that a lot of debate went into deciding on 20%.
Zanne Labonville moved to consider the time limit first (thereby reversing Friday’s decision to consider the amount of leeway first). This was passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
John Pomeranz asked for a straw poll to get a sense of the level of support for specific time options. Opinion of floor appeared to be largely in favor of 90 minutes. Mr. Pomeranz then asked friends of the motion to forego perfection and support the majority view. He moved to call the question. This was passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
Votes were now taken to see which time limit would be chosen to fill the blank. The chair elected to begin with the greatest possible time limit.
100 minutes: failed on a show of hands;
90 minutes: passed on a show of hands.
Rick Kovalcik complained that we had not passed the amendment. The Chair explained that all we were doing was filling the blank and would vote on the amendment later. Debate then proceeded with further discussion of the amount of leeway to be allowed.
Linda Deneroff said that 20% was enough.
Tom Short said that we should not give administrators so much leeway that they are guaranteed to cause controversy.
Mr. Jaffe, speaking from experience as one of this year’s Administrators, said that the nominating public does strange things. Therefore Administrators need the most leeway possible.
Gary Blog said that moving to 40% could result in too much leeway and strange things being done.
Ms. Labonville said that she would like the Dramatic Presentation rules to be consistent with fiction categories, which use a 20% leeway.
Time expired on the amendment
Michael Mason moved to extend debate by 10 minutes. This failed on show of hands.
The amendment to change to 40% leeway was defeated overwhelmingly on show of hands. Debate on the main motion then resumed.
Mr. Kovalcik spoke against. He liked the concept of a split but disliked the method proposed.
Dan Kimmel said that if we pass the motion many more good productions would have a shot at a Hugo. We should give these things a chance.
Kent Bloom said that the amendment is fatally flawed because the same presentation can appear in both forms. For example, British and US versions of a TV show might have different length and be separately eligible.
Elizabeth Sladen said we will never get a perfect solution.
Louis Epstein said that the motion was a poor attempt to make a problem worse.
Tom Short said that media SF is growing. We need to recognize it. If we had this debate when considering written fiction there would be only one fiction Hugo.
Vicki Rosenzweig said that we need to make sure the proposed rules are right before making any changes.
DC Black, a writer of short screenplays, spoke in favor. She sees the two proposed categories as very different forms, which need different Hugos.
Don Timm said that he hasn’t heard a compelling reason why we need two Hugos. Where will it end? Will there be a role-playing game Hugo? An anime Hugo?
Alex von Thorn said that film & TV are radically different forms of media. He added that the danger of fitting into two categories exists for written fiction as well.
Mr. Blog said that TV shows have won the BDP Hugo before, so they don’t need their own Hugo. If we allow this there will soon be billions of different media Hugos.
Johnny Carruthers said that if we had one fiction category novels would almost always win.
Mr. Yalow reminded everyone that it should be an honor just to be nominated. He could not put together 5 nominees in the short form category from this year’s top nominees. That suggested that there was not enough of a talent pool to make a short form worth having.
Mr. Pomeranz pointed out that if there were insufficient nominations Hugo would not be awarded.
Mr. Jaffe moved to amend by adding "based on running times in the USA if there is more than one set of running times" after the running time specifications.
Mr. Kovalcik said we should use the original running time, regardless of where the production was first shown.
Mr. Yalow asked what would happen if a work was not released in the USA.
Mr. Standlee moved to substitute to add "Running times of dramatic presentations shall be based on their first general release" to end of 3.2.x (clause 4).
Rick Katze spoke against as Highlander had different times in the US and the UK for simultaneous releases.
Beth Mo asked if different length works could be nominated separately.
Tom Beck said he did not think that the amendment was necessary.
Rich Ferree said that in cases of "simultaneous release" UK versions will be shown before US versions because of the time difference.
Ms. Labonville said that the Administrators should be allowed to decide which running time to use.
The substitution was passed overwhelmingly by show of hands. The meeting then proceeded to a vote on Mr. Jaffe’s amendment (as substituted), which passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
Time expired on the main motion.
Dave Ratti moved to extend debate by 10 minutes. This failed on show of hands.
The motion passed on a serpentine vote: 67 for, 25 against.
Mr. Jaffe moved to request Hugo administrators of ConJosé to prepare a report for the BM on what effect this would have if the new rules were in effect.
DC Black said that this would not prove anything because if there is only one category on the ballot people will still vote as if there is only one Hugo.
Mark Olson said that there was no harm in collecting information: we can always ignore it if it is useless.
Craig Miller re-iterated that people will vote in expectation of there being only one category.
John Lorentz, who is one of the ConJosé Administrators, asked whether the request involved release of nomination counts. The Chair said no, all that was required was to know who the nominees would have been in the two categories, had the new Hugo been in force.
Mr. von Thorn said that the information would be useful and instructive.
Ms. Labonville said that people will vote for films as they always do.
Mr. Blog said that information is always useful.
The resolution passed on a show of hands.
Richard Russell asked whether Best Dramatic Presentation Hugo Committee was now discharged. The Chair said yes.
The Chair then ordered a short break while ballots for the Mark Protection Committee ballot were collected.
After the break Mr. Timm asked that it be noted in the minutes that many people came in to vote on Best Dramatic Presentation Hugo motion and then left after the vote. The Chair pointed out that it was their democratic right to do so and asked if anyone wished to move to reconsider the motion. No one did.
2. Worldcon Reports
Most of the required reports were presented at the Friday meeting. The following reports are still pending:
2.1 Past Worldcons and NASFiCs
2.1.7. Chicon 2000
A report was received that morning and will be in the Sunday agenda. A copy is attached below.
2.2. Seated Worldcons
2.2.1. The Millennium Philcon (2001)
Mr. Ferree presented the Millennium Philcon report. A copy is attached.
3. Business Passed On from Chicon 2000
The following Constitutional Amendments were approved at Chicon 2000 and were passed on to The Millennium Philcon for ratification.
3.1. Hugo Voting Clarification
Moved, to amend Section 3.10 of the WSFS Constitution as follows:
3.10.1: Final Award voting shall be by mail balloting in advance of the Worldcon, with ballots sent only to WSFS members. Only WSFS members may vote. Final Award ballots shall include name, signature, address, and membership-number spaces to be filled in by the voter.
This motion would clarify that is the intent of WSFS that balloting for the Hugo Awards is open only to members of WSFS (defined elsewhere in the Constitution as at least the Attending and Supporting members of the current Worldcon), and that balloting is to take place prior to the Worldcon.
A debate time limit of 4 minutes had been set.
Mr. Blog said that most of us are online, and online is good.
Mr Yalow said that the technology for online voting still fails too often.
Mr. Jaffe said that the motion just allows online voting to be tried if people want to.
Mr. Russell said something that the Secretary found incomprehensible.
Ron Tansky proposed to amend to say that mail would always be allowed. The Chair ruled that such an amendment was in order because it only mentions things that already happen.
Bruce Pelz said that "always" was too much and thus the amendment extended the original resolution; he therefore appealed the Chair’s ruling.
Kevin Martin said that all rules are binding until the Business Meeting rules otherwise.
On a serpentine vote of 34 for, 24 against, the Chair’s ruling was upheld and the amendment was therefore in order.
As the motion had been made from the floor, the Parliamentarian clarified the exact wording. The amendment was formally stated as:
Moved, to amend to insert in front of "only WSFS members shall vote" to say "Postal mail shall always be acceptable".
On a serpentine vote of 40 for, 33 against, the amendment passed.
Mr. Yalow moved to amend to remove the changes to first sentence of 3.10.1. and the inserted phrase. This would effectively remove all of the original changes. The Chair ruled that this was a lesser change and was therefore in order.
Time for debate expired. Mr. M. Olson moved to extend debate by 6 minutes. This passed on a show of hands.
Erik Olson appealed ruling of the chair that Mr. Yalow’s motion was a lesser change.
Adina Adler made a comment that was not relevant to the debate.
Mr. Yalow spoke in support of the Chair. He said that the amendment has two changes: specifying that only WSFS members may vote, and allowing non-mail voting. Amending to do one not two is valid.
Linda Ross-Mansfield said that the Yalow amendment would force people to use paper mail so must be a greater change.
Mr. Kovalcik asked whether chair had ever ruled that "mail" means only postal mail. He said that he had not.
Lew Wolkoff said that the change would increase ambiguity.
Elizabeth Sladen said that the debate on the Chair’s ruling was not about ambiguity.
The Chair’s ruling was upheld on show of hands; Mr. Yalow’s amendment is a lesser change.
Mr. Yalow’s amendment was defeated overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
The main motion passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
3.2. NASFiC Reporting
Moved, To amend the WSFS Constitution by replacing all occurrences of "Worldcon" in Sections 2.8 and 2.9 by "Worldcon or NASFiC" or effectively similar wording, as follows:
Section 2.8: Financial Openness. Any member of WSFS shall have the right, under reasonable conditions, to examine the financial records and books of account of the current Worldcon or NASFiC Committee, all future selected Worldcon or NASFiC Committees, and the two immediately preceding Worldcon Committees and the Committees of any NASFiCs held in the previous two years.
Section 2.9: Financial Reports.
2.9.1: Each future selected Worldcon or NASFiC Committee shall submit an annual financial report, including a statement of income and expenses, to each WSFS Business Meeting after the Committee's selection.
2.9.2: Each Worldcon or NASFiC Committee shall submit a report on its cumulative surplus/loss at the next Business Meeting after its Worldcon.
2.9.3: Each Worldcon or NASFiC Committee should dispose of surplus funds remaining after accounts are settled for the current Worldcon or NASFiC for the benefit of WSFS as a whole.
2.9.4: In the event of a surplus, the Worldcon or NASFiC Committee, or any alternative organizational entity established to oversee and disburse that surplus, shall file annual financial reports regarding the disbursement of that surplus at each year's Business Meeting, until the surplus is totally expended or an amount equal to the original surplus has been disbursed.
This motion would subject all future North American Science Fiction Conventions (NASFiCs) to the same financial requirements imposed on Worldcons, including requiring them to submit annual financial reports to the WSFS Business Meeting. It would not apply to NASFiCs held prior to the ratification of the amendment, even if such conventions still have a remaining surplus.
A debate time limit of 8 minutes had been set.
Perrianne Lurie moved to call the question. This was ruled out of order as no debate had yet taken place.
Mr. Pomeranz said "I think this is a swell idea" and looked pointedly at Dr. Lurie.
Mr. Yalow said that the NASFiC is a bad thing. We have to keep it to prevent other people getting hands on trademark, but let’s not have to talk about it too much. He then moved to call the question. This passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
The main motion was passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
The Chair called for a break to report the results of the Mark Protection Committee ballot. On the first count Mr. Yalow, Mr. Standlee and Mr. Illingworth were all clear winners. The tellers stated that the result was so overwhelming that they had not bothered to produce actual numbers. The meeting accepted the tellers’ report without objection. A motion to destroy the ballots was passed without objection.
4. New Business
4.1. Resolutions
4.1.1. Hugo Eligibility Extension: The Man on the Ceiling
This resolution was defeated 21-29 at the Preliminary Business Meeting.
4.2. Standing Rules Amendments
Items under this heading may be voted upon and final action taken by the Preliminary Business Meeting. Standing rules amendments take effect at the conclusion of the 2001 Business Meeting unless given earlier effect by specific provision and a two-thirds vote. In all amendments, new text is shown in underline type and stricken text is shown in strikethru type.
No such amendments were proposed.
4.3. Constitutional Amendments
Items under this heading have not yet received first passage, and will become part of the constitution only if passed at The Millennium Philcon and ratified at ConJosé. The Preliminary Business Meeting may amend items under this heading, set debate time limits, refer them to committee, and take other action as permitted under the Standing Rules.
4.3.1. Short Title: Scoring More Points
Moved, To amend the WSFS Constitution by adding the following to Article 2:
Section 2.10: Membership Badges. Each Worldcon shall provide each attending member with a name badge containing at least the member’s name and membership number. Pre-registered members’ names shall be printed on the badge in no less than 24-point bold type.
Moved by Bruce Pelz, Mike Glyer, Kathryn Daugherty and Johnny Carruthers.
This motion was amended at the Friday meeting to strike the words "Pre-registered" and "bold". The motion then read:
4.3.1. Short Title: Scoring More Points
Moved, To amend the WSFS Constitution by adding the following to Article 2:
Section 2.10: Membership Badges. Each Worldcon shall provide each attending member with a name badge containing at least the member’s name and membership number. Members’ names shall be printed on the badge in no less than 24-point type.
The debate time limit had been set at 12 minutes.
Mr. Pelz said "take a look at our badges."
Mr. Tansky said that the motion was insulting to the members of the Worldcon.
Althea McMarian complained that she could not read her own badge.
Mr. Yalow moved to amend by substitution to direct the Nitpicking & Flyspecking Committee to introduce this as a resolution each year. He said the motion should not be in the Constitution, and cannot be put in the Standing Rules. It is an important point to make, but his attempt to change it to a resolution failed yesterday. His new suggestion would serve the same purpose, and would remind Worldcons every year, without changing the Constitution.
Ms. Rosenzweig said that the Business Meeting doesn’t meet until after badges are printed.
Mr. Breidbart moved to amend by substitution to require the NP&FS to remind Worldcon committees that badges need to be in legible type, early and often.
The substitution passed overwhelmingly.
Mr. Standlee moved to refer all pending matters to the NP&FS.
Mr. Timm said that he wanted to have The Millennium Philcon’s error specifically mentioned in the Constitution so a vote should not be delayed.
Neil Rest said that the content of motion not appropriate for the Constitution.
Leslie Turek said that it is an important matter and we should vote on it.
Mr. Kovalcik said we should not be penalizing hard-working registration staff.
Mr. Yalow said that if we refer the question to a committee we will lose the seriousness of the matter.
Mr. M. Olson said that the objective was not to slap The Millennium Philcon, the objective was to find a way to get badges done right.
Mr. Bolg said that the amendment was the dumbest he has ever seen, and he wants to get it out of the way.
Ms. Rosenzweig said that we have been complaining for many years, we need to do something.
Lew Wolkoff said that the NP&FS will be responsible for the work so they be allowed to decide whether or not they wanted to do it. He moved that the NP&FS consider the matter and to report back tomorrow.
Linda Deneroff made a point that the secretary did not understand.
Mr. Lorentz said he wanted to have a vote here.
Mr. Russell argued that we don’t have an appropriate mechanism to ensure readable badges, we need to sit back and think about it.
Mr. Rest asked what the NP&FS thought about the subject. Mr. Illingworth had been unable to attend the convention and therefore could not comment. Mr. Eastlake, as Chair of the Business Meeting, was required to remain impartial. Mr. Standlee said he was trying to think of a way to make the motion workable.
George Flynn moved to call the question. This was not legal because there was less than 1 minute of debate time left.
The motion to refer to the NP&FS committee was defeated on show of hands.
Jim Briggs moved to postpone until tomorrow.
Ms. Turek asked to hear what the Parliamentarian has in mind. Kevin read his suggested wording and discussed it with Mr. Breidbart.
The motion to postpone was defeated on a show of hands.
The meeting then proceeded to vote on Mr. Breidbart’s amendment, which The Parliamentarian had rendered as:
Resolved, The NP&FS is directed to remind each future Worldcon, early and often, that the WSFS Business Meeting believes that membership badges be readable, with members’ names printed in no less than 24 point type.
The motion to replace Mr. Yalow’s wording with Mr. Breidbart’s wording (as modified by The Parliamentarian) passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
The vote to replace the original motion also passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
Finally there was a vote on the main motion, as amended, which also passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
5. Site Selection Business
5.1. Report of the 2004 Site Selection & Presentation by Winners
This item was scheduled for the Main Business Meeting on Sunday, September 2.
5.2. Reports by seated Worldcons
This item was scheduled for the Main Business Meeting on Sunday, September 2.
5.2.1. ConJosé (2002)
5.2.2. TorCon III (2003)
5.3. Presentation by bidders for 2005
6. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 11:54 am.