Appendix E: Agenda for the Preliminary Business Meeting

AGENDA FOR WSFS BUSINESS MEETING

Preliminary Business Meeting, Friday, September 1, 2000

1 Committee Reports

Committee reports may include motions. Motions made by committees consisting of more than one person need not be seconded.

1.1 Mark Protection Committee (Including Nominations for MPC)

See the World Science Fiction Society Constitution, Sections 1.7 and 1.8, and Standing Rules 11 and 12. Zone residency of elected members is shown as follows: ^WWest; ^CCentral; ^EEast; ^RRest of World.

Officers: Randall Shepherd (Chairman), Tim Illingworth (Vice Chairman), Scott Dennis (Treasurer), Gary Keith Feldbaum (Secretary).

Membership: elected until Chicon 2000: Scott Dennis^C, Donald Eastlake III^E, Ruth Sachter^W; elected until the Millennium Philcon: Tim Illingworth^R, Kevin Standlee^W, Ben Yalow^E; elected until ConJosé: Stephen Boucher^R, Gary Keith Feldbaum^E, Sue Francis^C. Worldcon appointees: Covert Beach (Bucconeer), Randall Shepherd (Aussiecon Three), 'Zanne Labonville (Chicon 2000), Todd Dashoff (Millennium Philcon), Cheryl Morgan (ConJosé). NASFiC appointee: Vacant (Conucopia). Other (non-voting) officers appointed by the Committee: Mark Olson, George Flynn (Postal Officers), Kenneth Smookler (Canadian Mark Registration)

Postal address: P.O. Box 426159, Kendall Square Station, Cambridge MA 02142 USA.

E-mail: mpc@wsfs.org

The committee is to report and the positions currently occupied by Scott Dennis, Donald Eastlake, and Ruth Sachter are up for nomination. The election, if necessary, will be held at the Main Business Meeting on September 2. Due to zone residency restrictions, we can elect at most two people from the Western zone, two people from the Central zone, one person from the Eastern zone, and three people from the Rest of the World.

1.2 Nitpicking & Flyspecking Committee

The 1986 WSFS Business Meeting voted to create a special committee to research and codify all resolutions of the WSFS Business Meeting that are still in force. This committee has submitted reports to Business Meetings since 1987, and has each year been continued to report to the next Business Meeting. Written report attached.

Membership: Donald E. Eastlake, III (Chairman), Tim Illingworth, Kevin Standlee.

Postal address: 140 Forest Ave., Hudson MA 01749

E-mail: dee3@torque.pothole.com

1.3 Worldcon Runners' Guide Editorial Committee

This committee was established by the 1989 WSFS Business Meeting, and has been continued ever since.

Membership: Saul Jaffe (Chair), Sharon Sbarsky, and Ben Yalow

E-Mail: crg@sflovers.rutgers.edu

I regret to say that the committee has not done much over the last year. I won’t make excuses. All I will say is that is my personal opinion that fandom has had too much of illness and death this past year.

At last year’s Business Meeting, we said we wanted to make the guide available on the web. We’ve converted it from Word format, into HTML and there’s a working copy currently available on the Internet at http://sflovers.rutgers.edu/wcrg.

This copy will be updated, and expanded and, hopefully by next year’s meeting, if this committee is continued, be ready for publication as a full website.

There have been no contributions to the guide in the last year, and only one request for a copy of the guide. Questions, contributions, and requests can be sent to the committee’s email address: crg@sflovers.rutgers.edu.

The WRGE Committee moves the adoption of the following motion:

Short Title: Continue WRGEC

Moved, To continue the Worldcon Runners Guide Editorial Committee as previously constituted, and to instruct the committee to report to the 2001 WSFS Business Meeting.

1.4 Rest of the World Hugo Eligibility Committee

At the 1999 WSFS Business Meeting, a constitutional amendment intended to extend the eligibility of works first published outside of the USA was referred to a committee consisting of Vincent Docherty and such other persons as he may choose to appoint to the committee. (Report attached.)

2 Worldcon Reports

2.1 Past Worldcons and NASFiCs

2.2 Seated Worldcons

3 Business Passed On from Aussiecon Three

There is no Business Passed On from Aussiecon Three.

4 New Business

4.1 Resolutions

Items under this heading may be voted upon and final action taken by the Preliminary Business Meeting.

Moved, To extend the eligibility of The Sky Road, a novel by Ken MacLeod, for a year, based on limited availability, as authorized by Section 3.4.

Discussion: The novel appeared in 1999, but only as a UK hardcover. The UK paperback, and the US publication, all took place (or will take place) in 2000. Since UK hardcover print runs are often so limited, as compared to US print runs, or UK paperback print runs, this book meets the criteria set out for extending eligibility.

Moved by Ben Yalow and Jim Mann.

This motion extends eligibility for the Hugo Award; therefore, it requires a ¾ vote.

Moved, To extend the eligibility of issue 9 of the dated periodical STET, based on limited availability, as authorized by Section 3.4.

Moved by Mark Olson and Ben Yalow.

This motion extends eligibility for the Hugo Award; therefore, it requires a ¾ vote.

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 2000 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.

Moved, to amend Standing Rule 4 as follows:

Rule 4: Scheduling of Meetings. The first Main Meeting shall be scheduled no less than eighteen (18) hours after the conclusion of the last Preliminary Meeting. No meeting shall be scheduled to begin before 10:00 or after 15:00 local time.

Moved by Kevin Standlee and Tim Illingworth.

Moved, to amend Standing Rule 2 as follows:

Rule 2: Preliminary Business Meeting(s). The Preliminary Business Meeting may not directly reject, pass, or ratify amendments to the Constitution; however, all motions adhering to a Constitutional amendment are in order if otherwise allowed. The Preliminary Business Meeting may not refer a Constitutional amendment to a committee unless the committee’s instructions are to report to the Main Business Meeting. The Preliminary Business Meeting may not postpone consideration of a Constitutional amendment beyond the last Preliminary Business Meeting. The Preliminary Business Meeting may not amend a Constitutional amendment pending ratification. The Preliminary Business Meeting may consider any business not expressly forbidden to it by the Standing Rules or expressly reserved to the Main Business Meeting.

Moved by Tim Illingworth and Kevin Standlee.

Discussion: This would prevent a Preliminary Business Meeting changing an amendment that has already been passed by the previous year's Main Business Meeting. This preserves the Main Business Meeting as a superior house over the Preliminary Business Meeting, and will also help people know which meetings they need to attend.

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 Chicon 2000 and ratified at The Millennium Philcon. 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.

Moved, To Amend Section 4.1.1 of the WSFS Constitution to shorten the lead-time for selection of future Worldcons from three years to two years, as follows:

4.1.1. WSFS shall choose the location and Committee of the Worldcon to be held three (3) two (2) years from the date of the current Worldcon.

Provided that this amendment shall not take effect until the conclusion of the 2004 Worldcon; that there shall be no Worldcon site selection election at the 2005 Worldcon; and that the 2006 Worldcon shall select the site of the 2008 Worldcon.

Moved by Vincent Docherty, Kent Bloom, and Mark Olson.

See below for maker’s argument for this motion.

This item and the next two items all affect the Dramatic Presentation Hugo Award. The Preliminary Business Meeting may take action to choose between these items and only allow one of them to be considered at the Main Business Meeting.

Moved, To Amend portions of Article III of the WSFS Constitution to create a new Hugo Award Category "Best Television Series" and related purposes, as follows:

3.2.4: Works appearing in a series are eligible as individual works, but, except in the "Best Television Series" category, the series as a whole is not eligible. However, a work appearing in a number of parts shall be eligible for the year of the final part.

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. An individual episode of a television series is eligible in this category but the series as a whole is not.

3.3.X: Best Television Series. A series of programs of dramatized science fiction, fantasy or related subjects that have been publicly presented on television for the first time in their present dramatic form during the previous calendar year.

Moved by Richard S. Russell and Hope Kiefer.

Discussion: More people get their regular fix of SF from TV than from any other source. Yet, when it comes to the Hugo Awards, we continue to suffer from literary snobbishness -- 5 separate categories for written SF and only 1 for every other medium combined.

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.

Moved by Chris Barkley and Lew Wolkoff.

Discussion: This amendment has a three-fold purpose:

Moved, to substitute for the entire text of the motion titled "The Long and Short of It," the following:

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, Non-Episodic and Episodic, 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, Episodic. Any production in any medium of dramatized Science Fiction, Fantasy, or related subjects that formed a single episode from a regularly scheduled ongoing production.

3. Insert the following section before existing Section 3.3.7:

3.3.x: Best Dramatic Presentation, Non-Episodic. Any feature film, short subject, television mini-series, live theater production, or any other production in any medium of dramatized Science Fiction, Fantasy, or related subjects, not eligible for the Episodic Best Dramatic Presentation Hugo Award.

4. Insert the following sentence at the end of Section 3.2.4:

3.2.4: Works appearing in a series are eligible as individual works, but the series as a whole is not eligible. However, a work appearing in a number of parts shall be eligible for the year of the final part. A multi-part episodic or non-episodic dramatic production shall be eligible for the year in which the final part is first publicly performed.

5. Insert the following sentence at the end of Section 3.2.6:

3.2.6: The Worldcon Committee may relocate a story into a more appropriate category if it feels that it is necessary, provided that the length of the story is within the lesser of five thousand (5,000) words or twenty percent (20%) of the new category limits. The Worldcon Committee may relocate a dramatic presentation work into a more appropriate category if it feels that it is necessary.

Moved by Skip Morris and Cris Shuldner.

Discussion: As an individual who as run numerous convention film and video programs over several decades I feel qualified to comment on the main motion and my amendment. While I feel it is a worthwhile goal to expand the Best Dramatic Presentation Hugo, splitting the award by length does not best represent the differences in movies vs. television episodes. There are many films I've shown at SF cons whose length is close to an hour. (The shortest one I remember is "La Jette", the basis for the film "12 Monkeys" which ran about 30 minutes, or Hugo winner "The Capture" which was a slide show running about 20 minutes.) Many TV show episodes likewise are multi-parters running 2 or 3 hours. (Several Star Trek and Babylon 5 episodes come to mind.)

5 Site Selection Business

5.1 Report of the 2003 Site Selection & Presentation by Winners

This item is scheduled for the Main Business Meeting on Sunday, September 3.

5.2 Reports by seated Worldcons

This item may be combined with items in 2.2 above

6 Adjournment

Item 4.3.1: Return to 2-Year Bidding

The Worldcon is currently selected on the basis of section 4 of the WSFS constitution, specifically: "4.1.1 WSFS shall choose the location and Committee of the Worldcon to be held three (3) years from the date of the current Worldcon." 3-year bidding was implemented during the 1980's in order to make it easier to obtain suitable sites, in a world of increasing competition for them. The first Worldcon selected under the current 3-year rule was Noreascon Three, 1989, selected in 1986. The 1986 Worldcon selected both the 1988 and 1989 Worldcons.

Experience since then has shown several deficiencies with 3-year bidding:

1. Any improvements in availability of sites have been relatively minor, since the large events we mostly compete with for space, tend to book 8-10 years in advance. They have the financial resources to pre-empt a Worldcon booking, and have done so. Most of the time, therefore, if a site is available three years out, it is still available two years out, (and moving to a longer bidding period would not help at all).

2.The three year period requires a Worldcon committee, (all volunteers), to be kept together for a long time, which is hard to do, on top of the bidding period.

3. In the first year after winning there are few activities that need to be done by a Worldcon committee that add value to the convention.

4. There are extra costs in having to produce more publications, pay admin/tax/legal fees etc.

I [the maker of the motion, Vincent Docherty] can speak from experience, particularly around point 2, that the long gap in the first year, when there is little that must be done (except some basic activities which would still need to be done with a 2-year bid), is very counter-productive in terms of generating enthusiasm in the new committee. A 3 year stretch is a long period in anyone's life and it is difficult to persuade people that they should help out, and those already helping can feel it as a 'long slog' and may have difficulty focussing on the convention 3 years away. A 2 year gap after winning is much easier to manage and to sell. The convention organization can begin with a reasonable rolling activity program and the post-selection 'dip' is minimized.

Another advantage of a 2-year bid concerns hotels - if the space is still available two years out, the hotel is much more desperate to fill it, and therefore often willing to offer better terms.

A number of counter-arguments against this proposal were raised at or since the Business Meeting in 1999:

1. Loss of franchise.

It was argued that the constitution enfranchises WSFS members with certain 'rights', including the right to select a future Worldcon. Debate then focussed on possible ways to keep this 'right' by, for instance, giving a 'transferable' supporting membership, or perhaps for the administering Worldcon to compensate WSFS members in some other way.

However no such 'right' is in fact granted, because:

A) The constitution says that the duties of the Worldcon committee include: 2.1.2:"administering any future Worldcon or NASFiC site selection required". Since in the year that misses a site selection no such duty is 'required' then there is no loss of franchise. All Worldcons will still be selected by members of WSFS.

B) In Section 1.2: Objectives, the functions of WSFS include:

"1.2.2 To choose the locations and Committees for the annual World Science Fiction Conventions
1.2.3 To attend those Worldcons.
1.2.4 To choose the locations and Committees for the occasional North American Science Fiction Conventions (hereinafter referred to as NASFiCs)."

However the wording is not clear that these functions are compulsory for every Worldcon (which would be needed for there to be a 'right). For instance, supporting members are members of WSFS but cannot attend, which could be argued to conflict with the strict wording of 1.2.3. Similarly, NASFiCs are not required to be selected at every Worldcon (hence the word 'occasional' in article 1.2.4). Therefore section 1.2 does not unambiguously imply a 'right' that can be disenfranchised by this amendment.

Since no 'right' is granted there is no loss of franchise.

2. Impact on existing bidders.

Announced Worldcon bids have built their plans and budgets around the existing bidding cycle. If this amendment is passed and ratified then they would be forced into an unexpected additional year of bidding, at a different administering Worldcon than they had planned for. This would significantly add to the costs of their bids and to the strain in keeping their committees together.

I accept this as an issue and therefore propose a proviso that delays the effect of implementation of the main amendment. This would take the form of a 'grandfather' provision as was done with the 'no-zone' proposal in 1999. There are currently announced bids up to 2007, so the proviso would delay implementation till 2005 at the earliest, which would therefore not hold a site selection for Worldcon. The 2008 Worldcon would then be selected in 2006.

3. A year to settle-in is useful

It was argued that for inexperienced committees the extra year gives necessary time to build their teams and generally prepare. However several recent Worldcon chairs said that in their experience the extra year consumed more than it gained - it was too exhausting. (My own personal experience from 1992-1995 supports this.)

4. This is too much change on top of 'no-zone'

It was argued that with the ratification of the 'no-zone' amendment in 1999, another major site selection amendment would be too much change in a short time.

The 'no zone' amendment will not come into sole effect until 2003 (with elections in 2000, 2001, and 2002 being conducted under both the new and old rules) and with the 'grandfathering' of this amendment it would not come into effect until 2005 at the earliest.

5. Impact on NASFiC selection.

There would be no need to change the reference to NASFiC bidding since the timing is specified in relative terms. (See article 4.8.1 - "Voting shall be by written ballot administered by the following year's Worldcon, if there is no NASFiC in that year, or by the following year's NASFiC, if there is one, with ballots cast at the administering convention or by mail, and with only members of the administering convention allowed to vote.") Note that NASFiCs would be selected on a 1 - year ahead basis.

In conclusion I believe that there is ample reason to change the current site selection procedure from a 3-year to a 2-year basis and that the experience of several recent Worldcon chairs back this up. I also believe that the counter-arguments have either been dealt with or can be handled by the proviso to 'grandfather' the amendment. I therefore propose this amendment to the members of the WSFS Business Meeting for their consideration.

"World Science Fiction Society", "WSFS", "World Science Fiction Convention", "Worldcon", "NASFiC", "Hugo Award", and the distinctive design of the Hugo Award Rocket are service marks of the World Science Fiction Society, an unincorporated literary society. You can contact the WSFS Mark Protection Committee at <mpc@wsfs.org>.