The World Science Fiction Society

Minutes of the Business Meeting at Noreascon 4

Friday 3^rd to Sunday 5^th September 2004

Introduction

All three meetings were held in the H210 Room of the Hynes Convention Centre. The head table officers were:

Chair: Donald E Eastlake III

Deputy Chair: Tim Illingworth

Secretary in Memoriam: George Flynn

Secretary: Pat McMurray

Timekeeper: Alexis Layton

Tech Support: J Spencer Love

[Secretary: The debates in these minutes are not word for word accurate, but every attempt has been made to represent the sense of the arguments made. UK spelling is mostly used; because that's the way I spell. Names are deliberately chosen to be the informal versions. These minutes are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and recollection and are based on contemporary notes. Any other comments or notes I have will be marked in this fashion. Comments thus are purely informative and do not form part of the official text of these minutes.

Voting is done in a variety of ways in the course of the Business Meeting. The Mark Protection Committee members are elected on paper ballots, using the Australian ballot. Most voting in the course of the meeting is done by an uncounted show of hands or, less commonly, by voice vote or by acclamation. If a voice or show of hands vote appears close, a numbered serpentine vote is held.]

Friday

Preliminary Business Meeting

Podium Staff:

Chair: Donald E Eastlake III

Secretary in Memoriam: George Flynn

Secretary: Pat McMurray

Deputy Chair: Tim Illingworth:

Timekeeper: Alexis Layton

Technical Support: J Spencer Love

Meeting called to order at 10:07. Attendees as shown on sign-up sheet were 80.

Glenn Glazer: move to thank N4 for continuing coffee tradition. Motion passed by acclamation.

Tom Whitmore: Stephen Boucher who is a regular attendee cannot attend this year, so there is a card at the back of the room for people to sign.

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)

The Mark Protection Committee will meet at a time to be announced, probably on Thursday evening of the convention. A formal report is unlikely to be available until the Saturday Business Meeting at the earliest.

Ben Yalow gave a brief verbal report. MPC met at 18:30 on Thursday.

Moved that we adjourn in memory of George Flynn at all our meetings. Passed by acclamation.

Dealt with serious threat to marks – Richard Hugo House in Seattle

Negotiated with SF Museum

Have renewed most of marks in US.

Second MPC meeting will take place after Sunday BM or during Monday AM slot.

Nominations for the WSFS Mark Protection Committee are in order at the Preliminary Business Meeting. Nominees must accept nomination and indicate their current residence zone within one hour of the end of the Preliminary Business Meeting.

The members whose terms of office expire at this Worldcon are: Ben Yalow (East), Kevin Standlee (West), Tim Illingworth (RotW). Due to zone residency restrictions, we can elect at most two people from the Western zone, none from the Central zone, two people from the Eastern zone, and 3 people from the Rest of the World. Write-in votes are allowed, but write-in candidates must submit their consent to election by the close of balloting. (See the head table staff for a nomination acceptance form.)

Tim Illingworth nominated all three retiring members.

1.2. Nitpicking & Flyspecking Committee

Attached

Tim Illingworth: main difference from last year is that documents are now being held at smofs.org.

Committee thinks “published” means “published” in the sense it is used in copyright law, as in “fixed in tangible form” and applies to dramatic presentations and other non-print works. In short, the committee agrees with CH-2002-2.

Chairman: People interested in being on that committee should speak to Chairman of BM.

1.3. Worldcon Runners' Guide Editorial Committee

No report at this point.

1.4. Hugo Eligibility Rest of the World (HEROW) Committee

Attached

Kevin Standlee: Ed Green, HEROW Chair was unable to attend N4 and sends his regrets.

1.5. Formalization of Long List Entries (FOLLE) Committee

Report received - will be included in Saturday agenda.

2. Worldcon Reports

Currency conversion rates as of 31 August 2004

Don Timm: Think conversion rates are wrong.

Secretary: Will investigate.

2.1 Past Worldcons

2.1.1. ConAdian (1994)

Attached

Kevin Standlee: There was a CAD10,000 donation to Westercon. Conadian are aware of need to spend the funds and finish their reporting process.

2.1.2. L.A.con III (1996)

Final report attached

Mark Olson: Is this a final report?

Craig Miller: This is a final report for L.A.con III – all funds have been transferred to L.A.con IV for continued WSFS use.

Seth Breidbart: Is this pass along funds?

Craig Miller: No, it’s a transfer…

2.1.3. LoneStarCon 2 (1997)

Final report attached

Kevin Standlee: Is this the final report?

Bill Parker: This is the final report.

Lynn Anderson: Negative on funds.

Bill Parker: Negative funding, some transfers from other projects.

Seth Breidbart: What was Strategic Planning Session for?

BP: Future of their organization.

2.1.4. Aussiecon Three (1999)

Attached

2.1.5. Chicon 2000

Final report attached.

Tom Veal: Final report.

2.1.6. The Millennium Philcon (2001)

Attached.

Todd Dashoff: Additional funds have been passed along since last year.

Victoria Smith: Where to?

Todd Dashoff: Initial funds were passed to ConJosé, Torcon III, and N4. Funds were offered to three successive cons. ConJosé said they did not need the funds and requested funds were passed on directly to their successors. So funds were passed on to Torcon III, N4, and Interaction.

2.1.7. ConJosé (2002)

Attached (along with restatement of 2003 report.)

Kevin Standlee: Minor restatement.

2.1.8 Torcon 3

A report is attached, but financial statements have not been provided.

Larry Hancock: Current president of Torcon III.

Ben Yalow: Resolved, that; BM notes with regret the fact that the Torcon III financial report was not submitted.

Motion was adopted by a vote on a show of hands.

Rick Katze: When does Torcon expect to distribute pass along funds received from MilPhil?

Larry Hancock: Probably 4-5 months.

Bonita Misener: Why the delay?

Larry Hancock: Pretty much as stated in the report.

Robert Kline: Where will report be available?

Larry Hancock: Will be added to website and publicly announced.

Ben Yalow: Could secretary forward financial report to attendees of BM?

Larry Hancock: Will forward to secretary for distribution.

2.2. Seated Worldcons & NASFiC

2.2.1. Noreascon 4 (2004)

Attached

Mark Olson: Thank MilPhil, ConJose, Torcon and Chicon for pass along funds, which made a real difference.

Richard S Russell: Credit card and bank fees seem very high.

Mark Olson: 90% of memberships through e-commerce.

2.2.2. Interaction (2005)

Attached

Vince Docherty: Very much appreciate prompt pass along funds!

Victoria Smith: Do accounting conventions in UK differ?

Vince Docherty: Yes. This is an incremental report.

Raymond Cyrus: Any expenses involved in receiving the grants?

Vince Docherty: No, just terminology.

2.2.3 L.A.con IV

Attached

Craig Miller: How can we get a grant from Glasgow Council.

John Pomerantz: Can you detail the admin costs.

Craig Miller: Postage, credit card charges, etc.

2.2.4 CascadiaCon

Attached

Dennis Caswell: Can you give more details of hotel expense?

Glenn Glazer: It’s almost certainly the deposit.

3. Business Passed On from Torcon 3

The following Constitutional Amendment was approved at Torcon 3 and passed on to Noreascon 4 for ratification. If ratified, it will become part of the Constitution at the conclusion of Noreascon 4.

Chairman: We can only set time limits at this meeting on these items.

3.1 Short Title: Extended Distribution

Debate Time: 4 Minutes

Moved, to amend Section 3.7.2 of the WSFS Constitution to require committees to inform members of eligibility extensions by adding “and any applicable extensions of eligibility under Sections 3.2.3 or 3.4” at the end.

3.7.2: The Committee shall include with each nomination ballot a copy of Article 3 of the WSFS Constitution and any applicable extensions of eligibility under Sections 3.2.3 or 3.4.

3.2 Short Title: Moving Works

Debate Time: 10 Minutes

Moved, to amend Section 3.8.2 of the WSFS Constitution to restrict the movement of nominees between categories to specific works and to exclude the aggregation of nominations for people by striking out the second occurrence of “nominees” and inserting “works”, as shown:

3.8.2: The Worldcon Committee shall determine the eligibility of nominees and assignment to the proper category of nominees works nominated in more than one category.

3.3 Short Title: Default Rates

Debate Time: 4 Minutes

Moved, to amend Section 4.8.3 of the WSFS Constitution to make general the default supporting membership rate for all site selection elections conducted under WSFS sanction by inserting a new sentence at the end, as follows:

4.8.3: The proposed NASFiC supporting membership rate can be set by unanimous agreement of the administering Committee and all bidding committees who have filed before the ballot deadline. If agreement is not reached, the default fee shall be the median (middle value) of the US dollar fees used in the previous three (3) Worldcon site selections.

John Pomerantz: Question of privilege: Could meeting be instructed to set electronics to silent mode?

The Chair agreed and so instructed the meeting.

3.4 Short Title: Tied Races

Debate Time: 8 Minutes

Moved, to amend Section 4.5 and Section 2.6 of the WSFS Constitution to explicitly provide for procedures in case of a tied site selection election, as follows:

1. In Section 4.5.5, insert “or if two or more bids are tied for first place at the end of tallying,” after “If 'None of the Above' wins,”

4.5.5: If "None of the Above" wins, or if two or more bids are tied for first place at the end of tallying, the duty of site selection shall devolve on the Business Meeting of the current Worldcon. If the Business Meeting is unable to decide by the end of the Worldcon, the Committee for the following Worldcon shall make the selection without undue delay.

2. In Section 4.5.6, insert “following a win by ‘None of the Above’” after “Worldcon Committee”.

4.5.6: Where a site and Committee are chosen by a Business Meeting or Worldcon Committee following a win by ‘None of the Above’, they are not restricted by exclusion zone or other qualifications.

3. Insert new section 4.5.7: “Where a site and Committee are chosen by a Business Meeting or Worldcon Committee following a tie in tallying, they must select one of the tied bids.”

4.5.7: Where a site and Committee are chosen by a Business Meeting or Worldcon Committee following a tie in tallying, they must select one of the tied bids.

4. Insert a new sentence at the end of Section 2.6, as follows:

Section 2.6: Incapacity of Committees. With sites being selected three (3) years in advance, there are at least three selected current or future Worldcon Committees at all times. If one of these should be unable to perform its duties, the other selected current or future Worldcon Committee whose site is closer to the site of the one unable to perform its duties shall determine what action to take, by consulting the Business Meeting or by mail poll of WSFS if there is sufficient time, or by decision of the Committee if there is not sufficient time. Where a site and Committee are chosen by a Business Meeting or Worldcon Committee pursuant to this section, they are not restricted by exclusion zone or other qualifications.

3.5 Short Title: Back to the Future

Debate Time: 20 Minutes

Moved, to amend the WSFS Constitution at Subsection 4.1.1 by striking and inserting text as follows:

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 there shall be no Worldcon site selection election at the 2005 Worldcon, Interaction; and that the 2006 Worldcon, L.A.con IV, shall select the site of the 2008 Worldcon. Provided further that Interaction members will be entitled to vote in the 2008 Worldcon site selection, whether or not they are members of L.A.con IV, to prevent the disenfranchisement of a group of voters. Persons may cast only a single vote in the 2008 site selection.

Tom Veal: Like to propose 30 minutes.

Raymond Cyrus: One year.

The Chair ruled that debate time suggestions longer than the expected length of the business meeting were frivolous and out of order.

30 minutes set, by vote many to some.

4. New Business

4.1. Resolutions

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

4.1.1a Short Title: This Year's Model

Moved, To extend eligibility for all works that are allowed by a resolution under the following sections of the WSFS Constitution:

3.2.3: 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.

3.2.4: A work shall not be eligible if in a prior year it received sufficient nominations to appear on the final award ballot.

This motion extends eligibility for the Hugo Award; therefore, it requires a 3/4 vote.

Moved by: HEROW Committee

No debate.

Passed unanimously.

Chairman: Obviates 4.1.1b.

4.1.1b Short Title: Three Blind Mice Models…

If 4.1.1a passes, these three motions can be dropped. These motions extend eligibility for the Hugo Award; therefore, they require a 3/4 vote.

Hugo Eligibility Extension: The Cambridge Companion to Science Fiction

Moved, To extend for one year the eligibility of The Cambridge Companion to

Science Fiction, edited by Edward James and Farah Mendlesohn, a critical

guide to SF published in the UK in 2003 by Cambridge University Press, based

on limited availability, as authorised by Section 3.4.

Hugo Eligibility Extension: The True Knowledge of Ken MacLeod

Moved, To extend for one year the eligibility of The True Knowledge of Ken

MacLeod, edited by Andrew M. Butler and Farah Mendlesohn, a collection of

original essays on the writings of Ken MacLeod published in the UK in 2003

by The Science Fiction Foundation, based on limited availability, as

authorised by Section 3.4.

Hugo Eligibility Extension: Up Through an Empty House of Stars

Moved, To extend for one year the eligibility of Up Through an Empty House

of Stars, by David Langford, a collection of SF reviews and articles

published in the UK in 2003 by Cosmos Books, based on limited availability,

as authorised by Section 3.4.

Moved by Henry Balen and Renee Sieber

Perianne Lurie: Have these works been published in the US in the current year.

Pat McMurray: No.

Tim Illingworth: They are limited distribution works, unless they’re published in the US this year.

Chairman: Consider this is a substantive motion.

Ben Yalow: Limited distribution rule does allow us to pass these motions.

Glenn Glazer: Is this debate?

Chairman: This is discussion whether 4.1.1b is in order – and has moved to debate.

Glenn Glazer: Call the motion.

Question called many to few, by more than 2/3rds.

Motion passes by more than ¾ in favour.

4.1.2 Short Title: We Need Another HEROW

Moved, To continue the Hugo Eligibility for the Rest of the World (HEROW) Committee as previously charged, with a new Chair and members appointed by the Chair of the Business Meeting, and with the Chair of the HEROW Committee authorized to add additional members to the committee.

Moved by: HEROW Committee

No objection to this motion – those interested should contact Chairman of BM.

Kevin Standlee: Move to continue HEROW as currently constituted with Chair of committee allowed to supplement membership as his discretion.

Motion passed.

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 2003 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.

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 Noreascon 4 and ratified at Interaction. 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: BDP: Movies and Television

Debate Time: 14 Minutes

Moved, To amend portions of section 3.3 of the WSFS Constitution by adding words to clarify the intention of WSFS regarding the Dramatic Presentation Categories, as follows:

3.3.6: Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form. Any theatrical feature or other 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 90 minutes.

3.3.7: Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form. Any television program or other 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 90 minutes or less.

Moved by: Craig Miller, Kevin Standlee, Seth Breidbart, Linda Deneroff, Grant Kruger, John Lorentz, Cheryl Morgan, Mark Olson, Ruth Sachter, Tom Veal, Dalroy Ward, Ben Yalow

Discussion: The legislative intent of this amendment is to make it clearer that WSFS intends for most theatrical motion pictures to be considered Long Form and most television shows (except extremely long multi-part episodes and mini-series) to be considered Short Form. The running time values have a 20% leeway (section 3.2.10), and past practice in other “borderline” cases has been to defer to the judgment of the voters. A theatrical motion picture that is somewhat less than 90 minutes long should be considered Long Form, particularly if most of its nominations are in that category. A long "two-part" television episode with a running time somewhat over 90 minutes should be considered Short Form, particularly if most of its nominations are in that category. In general, the closer a work is to the boundary, the more reasonable it is to relocate it.

4.3.2 Short Title: Keep Movin', Movin', Movin', Though They're Disapprovin'

Debate Time: 14 Minutes

Moved, to add two new subsections in section 3.8 of the WSFS Constitution to clarify the movement of nominations between categories, as follows:

3.8.x: The Committee shall move a nomination from another category to the work’s default category only if the member has made fewer than five (5) nominations in the default category.

3.8.y: If a work receives a nomination in its default category, and if the Committee relocates the work under its authority under subsection 3.2.9 or 3.2.10, the Committee shall count the nomination even if the member already has made five (5) nominations in the more-appropriate category.

Moved by: Craig Miller, Kevin Standlee, Seth Breidbart, Linda Deneroff, Grant Kruger, Evelyn Leeper, John Lorentz, Cheryl Morgan, Mark Olson, Ruth Sachter, Sharon Sbarsky, Tom Veal, Dalroy Ward, Ben Yalow

Discussion: “Default category,” means that the work is within the category length limit as defined in the various sections of the Constitution. For example, a 7,350-word written fiction work is by default a Short Story even though the Committee is authorized to move the work to Novelette. An 88-minute dramatic motion picture is by default a Short Form work even though the Committee is authorized to move the work to Long Form. The Constitution implicitly recognizes that members might nominate works in an alternative category, and authorizes the Committee to resolve such situations in 3.8.2. The Committee is also authorized under subsections 3.2.9-10 to move a work from this default category to the adjacent category if they believe the work is more appropriately placed in the adjacent category.

This amendment clarifies that the committee may move a member’s nomination made in the wrong category to the correct category, but only if there is room on that member’s ballot in the correct category. If the member has already made five nominations in the correct category, then the nomination made in the wrong category does not count at all.

In addition, this amendment provides that should a committee exercise its right under 3.2.9-10 and move a work to a category it deems more appropriate, it must transfer the nominations made for that work from the default category to the other category. The Committee must count those nominations even if it means a member’s ballot thus has (for example) six novels and four novellas, or six long form and four short form dramatic works. In no case would a member’s nomination be able to count twice for the same work, even under a transfer as described here, per existing 3.8.4.

Beth Moursind: Request clarification of rule

Chairman: Restricts the transfer under some cases.

4.3.3 Short Title: Counting Votes (and Breaking Ties)

Debate Time: 14 Minutes.

Moved, To amend various sections of the WSFS Constitution to add explicit tie-breaking procedures to WSFS elections, moving the general counting rules to Article 6 and detailing the specific differences per election type appropriately.

Moved by Nitpicking and Flyspecking Committee.

1. Move most of existing Section 3.11.1 to follow existing Section 6.2, change ‘nominee’ to ‘candidate’ throughout, and add a new sentence to it as shown

3.11.1 Section 6.2A: Tallying of Votes. In each category, Votes shall first be tallied by the voter's first choices. If no majority is then obtained, the nominee candidate who places last in the initial tallying shall be eliminated and the ballots listing it as first choice shall be redistributed on the basis of those ballots' second choices. This process shall be repeated until a majority-vote winner is obtained. If two or more candidates are tied for elimination during this process, the candidate that received fewer first-place votes shall be eliminated. If they are still tied, all the tied candidates shall be eliminated together.

2. Move existing Section 3.11.3 to follow proposed Section 6.2A above, change “No Award” to “the run-off candidate” throughout, and insert text in it as shown.

3.11.3 Section 6.2B: Run-off. After a tentative winner is determined, then unless "No Award" the run-off candidate shall be the sole winner, the following additional test shall be made. If the number of ballots preferring "No Award" the run-off candidate to the tentative winner is greater than the number of ballots preferring the tentative winner to "No Award" the run-off candidate, then "No Award" the run-off candidate shall be declared the winner of the election.

3. In Section 3.11.1, substitute new wording for that moved to Section 6.2A.

3.11.1: In each category, tallying shall be as described in Section 6.2A. ‘No Award’ shall be treated as a nominee. If all remaining nominees are tied, no tie-breaking shall be done and the nominees shall be declared joint winners.

4. In Section 3.11.3 substitute new wording for the existing section.

3.11.3: “No Award" shall be the run-off candidate.

5. In Section 4.1.2, strike out “Section 3.11” and insert “Section 6.2A”.

4.1.2: Voting shall be by written ballot cast either by mail or at the current Worldcon with tallying as described in Section 3.116.2A.

6. In Section 4.5.3, strike out “the equivalent of ‘No Award’ with respect to Section 3.11.” and insert “the run-off candidate.”

4.5.3: "None of the Above" shall be treated as a bid for tallying, and shall be the equivalent of "No Award" with respect to Section 3.11 the run-off candidate.

7. In Section 4.5.4, strike out “normal preferential ballot procedures” and insert “Section 6.2A”.

4.5.4: All ballots shall be initially tallied by their first preferences, even if cast for a bid that the administering Committee has ruled ineligible. If no eligible bid achieves a majority on the first round of tallying, then on the second round all ballots for ineligible bids shall be redistributed to their first eligible choices, and tallying shall proceed according to normal preferential-ballot procedures Section 6.2A.

8. In Standing Rule 6.2, insert, “as defined in Section 6.2A of the WSFS Constitution. There shall be no run-off candidate” after “normal preferential ballot procedures”.

9. In Standing Rule 6.2, insert as the penultimate sentence: “In the event of a first-place tie for any seat, the tie shall be broken unless all tied candidates can be elected simultaneously.”

Rule 6.2: Elections. Elections to the Mark Protection Committee shall be a special order of business at a designated Main Business Meeting. Voting shall be by written preferential ballot with write-in votes allowed. Votes for write-in candidates who do not submit written consent to nomination and region of residence to the Presiding Officer before the close of balloting shall be ignored. The ballot shall list each nominee's name and region of residence. The first seat filled shall be by normal preferential ballot procedures as defined in Section 6.2A of the WSFS Constitution. There shall be no run-off candidate. After a seat is filled, votes for the elected member and for any nominee who is now ineligible due to regional residence restrictions shall be eliminated before conducting the next ballot. This procedure shall continue until all seats are filled. In the event of a first-place tie for any seat, the tie shall be broken unless all tied candidates can be elected simultaneously. Should there be any partial-term vacancies on the committee, the partial-term seat(s) shall be filled after the full-term seats have been filled.

Discussion: This provides explicit tie-breakers for elections, using the method specified in the parliamentary authority. As far as we know, they represent current practice.

There are actually three different tie-breaking rules for the three types of elections WSFS can administer (Hugo Awards, Site Selection and Mark Protection Committee). Hugos permit ties for 1st place, Site Selection does not, and the MPC permits them if there are enough seats left to fill. This moves the general rule into Article 6 from Article 3 and details the differences in each case.

The new sections are taken from the existing Section 3.11, and fresh text is underlined.

Ben Yalow: Perverse and unlikely situation, but 3.11.1 could lead No Award being tied with an item

Chairman: Will appoint small committee to discuss wording.

Chairman: Note that uncompleted business is not lost, but moved to the next day of Business Meeting.

Paul Anderson: Point of Order: No debate time on 4.3.3?

Chairman: 14 minutes.

Meeting was adjourned in honour of George Flynn at 11:28

5. Site Selection Business

5.1. Report of the 2007 Site Selection & Presentation by Winners

5.2. Reports by seated Worldcons & NASFiC

5.2.2. Interaction (2005)

5.2.3. L.A.con IV (2006)

5.2.4 CascadiaCon (2005 NASFiC)

NASFiC's are not required to report, but space is provided should they choose to do so.

5.3. Presentation by future Worldcon bids

5.3.1. Presentation by bidders for 2008

5.3.2. Presentation by bidders for years after 2008

6. Adjournment

6.1. Adjournment Sine Die

SATURDAY

First Main Business Meeting

Podium Staff:

Chair: Donald E Eastlake III

Secretary in Memoriam: George Flynn

Secretary: Pat McMurray

Deputy Chair: Tim Illingworth:

Timekeeper: Alexis Layton

Tech Support: Lisa Hayes, J Spencer Love

[Secretary: I found out later that the feedback we experienced at one point during the meeting was due to a loose microphone plug.]

Meeting called to order at 10:01. Number of attendees as registered on the sign up sheets was 134.

Kevin Standlee: Move to suspend the rules and take up 3.5 to be the first item, and make voting on it to be a special order of business at 10:30.

A 2/3rds vote was required - motion passed many to few.

3.5

Glenn Glazer: Parliamentary Inquiry: Are motions to extend debate and call the question allowed.

Chairman: Yes

Tom Veal: (A) Time is more than just a helix of semi-precious stones, it is a precious resource of Worldcons. I was chair of a Worldcon, which needed every moment of those three years. When you start a Worldcon without a committee already in place, there is a great deal to be done in staff recruitment that is time consuming. We’re going back to a future where you will deprive ordinary Worldcons of time they really need.

Committees that can’t get along for three years, can’t get along for two either – shorter periods don’t help there.

Worldcons are very complicated enterprises, almost the largest event in the world organized by volunteers and amateurs. Volunteers and amateurs, separate people every year, a new challenge, we need the time. This motion is very cocky.

Colin Harris (F): Two types of things that need to be done – those on day one after the bid, and those that need to be there on day one of the convention. We have found consistently that two or three years is enough for day one of convention. And the day one after the bid stuff has to be prepared before the vote. It is difficult to motivate and support people over that period of time, and it is hard to maintain momentum over that period.

Linda Deneroff (A): Need to look to the past to see the future. Facility problems – three years is better than two.

Janice Gelb (F): All years are not created equal. We do need lots and lots of time, but we need it in the last six months. The first of three can only burn out people, and waste time, and ideas. And members want to get involved straight away, but there’s nothing to get involved in! And nearly every previous Worldcon chair is in favour of this motion and they were the people with their feet in the fire.

Paul Haggerty (A): Against this, members need time to save money and vacation time for Worldcons.

Glenn Glazer (F): PWFC – challenge of working on three cons at once! Going to two year would reduce the pressure on these people.

Raymond Cyrus (A): Apologise for any offence I caused last year.

Move to amend: Sunset provision of 8 years.

Elspeth Kovach: Inquiry: What does this mean?

Scott Baxter: Call the question.

Motion to amend proposal failed on a show of hands.

Deb Geisler (F): I’m Chair of N4, and I’m damn tired. Very few deliverables in the first 30 months of running a Worldcon, very little real achievement, very little payback until the last six months. I urge you on behalf of myself and my committee, and on behalf of many future Worldcon chairs to vote for this motion.

Michell Zelig (A): If you’re tired, stop bidding.

Kevin Standlee (F): I will say something that very few fans will ever say before a Business Meeting. I was wrong. I supported two to three in 1988. And then I moved to extend the time to four years – fortunately I failed.

Have been involved in two Worldcons under the three year rule – neither running like crazy nor doing nothing for two years works. That extra year is a negative resource – doing more harm than good.

Largest Worldcon ever and one of the most successful was on two year lead time. Almost every chair of the three year worldcons is opposed to continuing with three years.

Richard Russell (A): Time horizons of major institutions. We should plan for the next 20-30 years, not just 3-5 years. NASFiCs are Worldcons in training, this motion will damage NASFiCs and give them inadequate lead time.

Motion to ratify constitutional amendment passed on a serpentine vote, 112-59.

Short recess was called until 10:42.

1. Committee Reports

1.1. Mark Protection Committee (Including Nominations for MPC)

Report was presented at the Preliminary Business Meeting yesterday.

The Mark Protection Committee will meet in room H210 of the Hynes Centre, either immediately after the Second Main Business Meeting on Sunday if there is time, or else on Monday at 10AM.

The members whose terms of office expire at this Worldcon are: Ben Yalow (East), Kevin Standlee (West), Tim Illingworth (RotW). Due to zone residency restrictions, we can elect at most two people from the Western zone, none from the Central zone, two people from the Eastern zone, and 3 people from the Rest of the World.

Mark Olson: Move to elect them by acclamation.

Seeing no objection, the three candidates were elected.

1.3. Worldcon Runners' Guide Editorial Committee

No report received.

1.5. Formalization of Long List Entries (FOLLE) Committee

The Long List committee has essentially completed its work on the Long List of Worldcons and is now in maintenance mode, correcting new entries as new data becomes available and slowly researching attendance and membership numbers. The current Long List my be found in the Noreascon 4 Souvenir Book and at http://www.nesfa.org/data/LL

We have made huge progress in developing a Long List of Hugos using data supplied by Dave Grubbs and the ISFDB and are now (slowly) working to perfect the entries. (N4 has somewhat diverted the chairman’s attention, but we’ll get back to work…) See the current working documents at http://www.nesfa.org/data/LL/Hugos

Corrections are solicited.

On a motion by the committee, the FOLLE Committee was continued for another year as currently constituted, Chaired by Mark Olson, and with the Chair authorized to supplement the committee's membership at his discretion.

William Keaton: Why aren’t documents on WSFS or Worldcon domain?

Mark Olson: This was the website we could get access to easily.

Chairman: meeting thanks NESFA for providing the space.

2. Worldcon Reports

All business was completed at the Preliminary Business Meeting yesterday.

3. Business Passed On from Torcon 3

The following Constitutional Amendments were approved at Torcon 3 and passed on to Noreascon 4 for ratification. If ratified, they will become part of the Constitution at the conclusion of Noreascon 4.

3.1 Short Title: Extended Distribution

Debate Time: 4 Minutes

Moved, to amend Section 3.7.2 of the WSFS Constitution to require committees to inform members of eligibility extensions by adding “and any applicable extensions of eligibility under Sections 3.2.3 or 3.4” at the end.

3.7.2: The Committee shall include with each nomination ballot a copy of Article 3 of the WSFS Constitution and any applicable extensions of eligibility under Sections 3.2.3 or 3.4.

Motion passed without objection.

3.2 Short Title: Moving Works

Debate Time: 10 Minutes

Moved, to amend Section 3.8.2 of the WSFS Constitution to restrict the movement of nominees between categories to specific works and to exclude the aggregation of nominations for people by striking out the second occurrence of “nominees” and inserting “works”, as shown:

3.8.2: The Worldcon Committee shall determine the eligibility of nominees and assignment to the proper category of nominees works nominated in more than one category.

Motion passed without objection.

3.3 Short Title: Default Rates

Debate Time: 4 Minutes

Moved, to amend Section 4.8.3 of the WSFS Constitution to make general the default supporting membership rate for all site selection elections conducted under WSFS sanction by inserting a new sentence at the end, as follows:

4.8.3: The proposed NASFiC supporting membership rate can be set by unanimous agreement of the administering Committee and all bidding committees who have filed before the ballot deadline. If agreement is not reached, the default fee shall be the median (middle value) of the US dollar fees used in the previous three (3) Worldcon site selections.

Motion passed without objection.

3.4 Short Title: Tied Races

Debate Time: 8 Minutes

Moved, to amend Section 4.5 and Section 2.6 of the WSFS Constitution to explicitly provide for procedures in case of a tied site selection election, as follows:

1. In Section 4.5.5, insert “or if two or more bids are tied for first place at the end of tallying,” after “If 'None of the Above' wins,”

4.5.5: If "None of the Above" wins, or if two or more bids are tied for first place at the end of tallying, the duty of site selection shall devolve on the Business Meeting of the current Worldcon. If the Business Meeting is unable to decide by the end of the Worldcon, the Committee for the following Worldcon shall make the selection without undue delay.

2. In Section 4.5.6, insert “following a win by ‘None of the Above’” after “Worldcon Committee”.

4.5.6: Where a site and Committee are chosen by a Business Meeting or Worldcon Committee following a win by ‘None of the Above’, they are not restricted by exclusion zone or other qualifications.

3. Insert new section 4.5.7: “Where a site and Committee are chosen by a Business Meeting or Worldcon Committee following a tie in tallying, they must select one of the tied bids.”

4.5.7: Where a site and Committee are chosen by a Business Meeting or Worldcon Committee following a tie in tallying, they must select one of the tied bids.

4. Insert a new sentence at the end of Section 2.6, as follows:

Section 2.6: Incapacity of Committees. With sites being selected three (3) years in advance, there are at least three selected current or future Worldcon Committees at all times. If one of these should be unable to perform its duties, the other selected current or future Worldcon Committee whose site is closer to the site of the one unable to perform its duties shall determine what action to take, by consulting the Business Meeting or by mail poll of WSFS if there is sufficient time, or by decision of the Committee if there is not sufficient time. Where a site and Committee are chosen by a Business Meeting or Worldcon Committee pursuant to this section, they are not restricted by exclusion zone or other qualifications.

Art Coolman (sp): Will the item at 2.6 be tidied from three to two years?

Chairman: Yes, there is a standing rule that allows the Secretary to do this.

Motion passed without objection.

3.5 Short Title: Back to the Future

Debate Time: 30 Minutes

Moved, to amend the WSFS Constitution at Subsection 4.1.1 by striking and inserting text as follows:

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 there shall be no Worldcon site selection election at the 2005 Worldcon, Interaction; and that the 2006 Worldcon, L.A.con IV, shall select the site of the 2008 Worldcon. Provided further that Interaction members will be entitled to vote in the 2008 Worldcon site selection, whether or not they are members of L.A.con IV, to prevent the disenfranchisement of a group of voters. Persons may cast only a single vote in the 2008 site selection.

[Secretary: This item had been dealt with earlier in this meeting.]

4. New Business

4.1. Resolutions

All business was completed at the Preliminary Business Meeting yesterday.

4.2. Standing Rules Amendments

All business was completed at the Preliminary Business Meeting yesterday.

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 Noreascon 4 and ratified at Interaction. 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: BDP: Movies and Television

Debate Time: 14 Minutes

Moved, To amend portions of section 3.3 of the WSFS Constitution by adding words to clarify the intention of WSFS regarding the Dramatic Presentation Categories, as follows:

3.3.6: Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form. Any theatrical feature or other 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 90 minutes.

3.3.7: Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form. Any television program or other 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 90 minutes or less.

Moved by: Craig Miller, Kevin Standlee, Seth Breidbart, Linda Deneroff, Grant Kruger, John Lorentz, Cheryl Morgan, Mark Olson, Ruth Sachter, Tom Veal, Dalroy Ward, Ben Yalow

Discussion: The legislative intent of this amendment is to make it clearer that WSFS intends for most theatrical motion pictures to be considered Long Form and most television shows (except extremely long multi-part episodes and mini-series) to be considered Short Form. The running time values have a 20% leeway (section 3.2.10), and past practice in other “borderline” cases has been to defer to the judgment of the voters. A theatrical motion picture that is somewhat less than 90 minutes long should be considered Long Form, particularly if most of its nominations are in that category. A long "two-part" television episode with a running time somewhat over 90 minutes should be considered Short Form, particularly if most of its nominations are in that category. In general, the closer a work is to the boundary, the more reasonable it is to relocate it.

John Andrews: Concern about definition of running time – ads etc.

Chairman: Running time does not include ads, etc. This was stated when original BDP motion was first passed.

Kevin Standlee: Noreascon 4 Souvenir Book P143, section 3.2.8 addresses this issue.

Paul Anderson: Move to amend. Complete running time in accordance with Section 3.2.8.

No seconder, motion failed.

Skip Morris: Does this conflict with Emmy rules.

Craig Miller (F): Attempt to prevent future argument about moving between the two categories. Long form is mostly movies, short form is mostly tv episodes – intended to be clarifying language.

Mark Blackman: Would this exclude plays?

Craig Miller: No, this would not exclude play.

Lew Wolkoff (A): Time issue doesn’t really clarify the problem. And what about other media, like record albums?

Chris Barkley (F): Don’t really see this conflict.

Richard Russell (A): Move to amend, by substituting 80 for 90.

Kevin Standlee: Point of order: Not germane.

Chair submitted the point of order to the assembly which judged that the amendment was not germane.

Gary Blog: Think this will create confusion. Should give the constitutional change some time to bed in.

Ben Yalow (F): Big fan of word or.

Richard Russell: Point of order – English language.

Doug Friauf (F): These categories apply to all media.

Jim Young (F): If people don’t pay attention to what the constitution says, there’s nothing you can do about it.

Linda Deneroff (F): It’s in English, we all understand it – common sense has to prevail.

The amendment passed on a vote by show of hands.

4.3.2 Short Title: Keep Movin', Movin', Movin', Though They're Disapprovin'

Debate Time: 14 Minutes

Moved, to add two new subsections in section 3.8 of the WSFS Constitution to clarify the movement of nominations between categories, as follows:

3.8.x: The Committee shall move a nomination from another category to the work’s default category only if the member has made fewer than five (5) nominations in the default category.

3.8.y: If a work receives a nomination in its default category, and if the Committee relocates the work under its authority under subsection 3.2.9 or 3.2.10, the Committee shall count the nomination even if the member already has made five (5) nominations in the more-appropriate category.

Moved by: Craig Miller, Kevin Standlee, Seth Breidbart, Linda Deneroff, Grant Kruger, Evelyn Leeper, John Lorentz, Cheryl Morgan, Mark Olson, Ruth Sachter, Sharon Sbarsky, Tom Veal, Dalroy Ward, Ben Yalow

Discussion: “Default category,” means that the work is within the category length limit as defined in the various sections of the Constitution. For example, a 7,350-word written fiction work is by default a Short Story even though the Committee is authorized to move the work to Novelette. An 88-minute dramatic motion picture is by default a Short Form work even though the Committee is authorized to move the work to Long Form. The Constitution implicitly recognizes that members might nominate works in an alternative category, and authorizes the Committee to resolve such situations in 3.8.2. The Committee is also authorized under subsections 3.2.9-10 to move a work from this default category to the adjacent category if they believe the work is more appropriately placed in the adjacent category.

This amendment clarifies that the committee may move a member’s nomination made in the wrong category to the correct category, but only if there is room on that member’s ballot in the correct category. If the member has already made five nominations in the correct category, then the nomination made in the wrong category does not count at all.

In addition, this amendment provides that should a committee exercise its right under 3.2.9-10 and move a work to a category it deems more appropriate, it must transfer the nominations made for that work from the default category to the other category. The Committee must count those nominations even if it means a member’s ballot thus has (for example) six novels and four novellas, or six long form and four short form dramatic works. In no case would a member’s nomination be able to count twice for the same work, even under a transfer as described here, per existing 3.8.4.

Beth Moursund: Inquiry – explain current situation.

Kevin Standlee: Currently it’s left up to the administrator – this is an attempt to provide some guidance.

John Lorentz: This motion describes what many administrators have been doing,

Perianne Lurie (A): Think it’s a good idea to codify the procedure – but the default category is not always obvious.

Craig Miller (F): Call me Ishmael. Purpose of this is to codify the commonest procedure of Hugo administrators. About when and how to move things, not anything else.

Paul Anderson (A): Two separate questions. I oppose the first paragraph and support the second. Move to divide the question.

Motion failed, no seconder.

Glenn Glazer (A): Concerned about ordering of moving stuff around – a cascade effect.

Kevin Standlee (F): It is impossible to draft wording which this group can’t find ways to break it – odd cases, degenerate situations. But these are not mathematical proofs!

Todd Dashoff: Inquiry. How exactly does this movement thing work?

John Lorentz: all the votes for a nominee are counted if possible.

The amendment passed on a vote by show of hands.

4.3.3 Short Title: Counting Votes (and Breaking Ties)

Debate Time: 14 Minutes.

Moved, To amend various sections of the WSFS Constitution to add explicit tie-breaking procedures to WSFS elections, moving the general counting rules to Article 6 and detailing the specific differences per election type appropriately.

Moved by Nitpicking and Flyspecking Committee.

1. Move most of existing Section 3.11.1 to follow existing Section 6.2, change ‘nominee’ to ‘candidate’ throughout, and add a new sentence to it as shown

3.11.1 Section 6.2A: Tallying of Votes. In each category, Votes shall first be tallied by the voter's first choices. If no majority is then obtained, the nominee candidate who places last in the initial tallying shall be eliminated and the ballots listing it as first choice shall be redistributed on the basis of those ballots' second choices. This process shall be repeated until a majority-vote winner is obtained. If two or more candidates are tied for elimination during this process, the candidate that received fewer first-place votes shall be eliminated. If they are still tied, all the tied candidates shall be eliminated together.

2. Move existing Section 3.11.3 to follow proposed Section 6.2A above, change “No Award” to “the run-off candidate” throughout, and insert text in it as shown.

3.11.3 Section 6.2B: Run-off. After a tentative winner is determined, then unless "No Award" the run-off candidate shall be the sole winner, the following additional test shall be made. If the number of ballots preferring "No Award" the run-off candidate to the tentative winner is greater than the number of ballots preferring the tentative winner to "No Award" the run-off candidate, then "No Award" the run-off candidate shall be declared the winner of the election.

3. In Section 3.11.1, substitute new wording for that moved to Section 6.2A.

3.11.1: In each category, tallying shall be as described in Section 6.2A. ‘No Award’ shall be treated as a nominee. If all remaining nominees are tied, no tie-breaking shall be done and the nominees excluding no award shall be declared joint winners.

4. In Section 3.11.3 substitute new wording for the existing section.

3.11.3: “No Award" shall be the run-off candidate.

5. In Section 4.1.2, strike out “Section 3.11” and insert “Section 6.2A”.

4.1.2: Voting shall be by written ballot cast either by mail or at the current Worldcon with tallying as described in Section 3.116.2A.

6. In Section 4.5.3, strike out “the equivalent of ‘No Award’ with respect to Section 3.11.” and insert “the run-off candidate.”

4.5.3: "None of the Above" shall be treated as a bid for tallying, and shall be the equivalent of "No Award" with respect to Section 3.11 the run-off candidate.

7. In Section 4.5.4, strike out “normal preferential ballot procedures” and insert “Section 6.2A”.

4.5.4: All ballots shall be initially tallied by their first preferences, even if cast for a bid that the administering Committee has ruled ineligible. If no eligible bid achieves a majority on the first round of tallying, then on the second round all ballots for ineligible bids shall be redistributed to their first eligible choices, and tallying shall proceed according to normal preferential-ballot procedures Section 6.2A.

8. In Standing Rule 6.2, insert, “as defined in Section 6.2A of the WSFS Constitution. There shall be no run-off candidate” after “normal preferential ballot procedures”.

9. In Standing Rule 6.2, insert as the penultimate sentence: “In the event of a first-place tie for any seat, the tie shall be broken unless all tied candidates can be elected simultaneously.”

Rule 6.2: Elections. Elections to the Mark Protection Committee shall be a special order of business at a designated Main Business Meeting. Voting shall be by written preferential ballot with write-in votes allowed. Votes for write-in candidates who do not submit written consent to nomination and region of residence to the Presiding Officer before the close of balloting shall be ignored. The ballot shall list each nominee's name and region of residence. The first seat filled shall be by normal preferential ballot procedures as defined in Section 6.2A of the WSFS Constitution. There shall be no run-off candidate. After a seat is filled, votes for the elected member and for any nominee who is now ineligible due to regional residence restrictions shall be eliminated before conducting the next ballot. This procedure shall continue until all seats are filled. In the event of a first-place tie for any seat, the tie shall be broken unless all tied candidates can be elected simultaneously. Should there be any partial-term vacancies on the committee, the partial-term seat(s) shall be filled after the full-term seats have been filled.

Discussion: This provides explicit tie-breakers for elections, using the method specified in the parliamentary authority. As far as we know, they represent current practice.

There are actually three different tie-breaking rules for the three types of elections WSFS can administer (Hugo Awards, Site Selection and Mark Protection Committee). Hugos permit ties for 1st place, Site Selection does not, and the MPC permits them if there are enough seats left to fill. This moves the general rule into Article 6 from Article 3 and details the differences in each case.

The new sections are taken from the existing Section 3.11, and fresh text is underlined.

Chairman: Committee was appointed yesterday.

Ben Yalow: Already incorporated in agenda.

Chairman: I have a question. Is the remaining candidate still declared a joint winner.

Ben Yalow: Yes

Mark Olson (A): Don’t really understand this. I would like to ask the people moving this to explain it.

Tim Illingworth: Created a subroutine to do runoffs, which you call when you need it.

Craig Miller: Point of Information: Joint winner with “No Award”…

Tim Illingworth: Go back to run off – “No Award” always beats itself – and I have a dislike of infinite loops.

Quinten Matthews (A): Why are we throwing out “No Award”?

Audience: We’re not.

Kevin Standlee (F): In case of a tie, we’re going to give a slight edge to the not-“No Award” candidate.

John Lorentz (F): Pertinent example. Tie breaking is key.

Linda Deneroff: Inquiry: Could we put a footnote to explain this?

Chairman: No

The amendment passed on a show of hands.

5. Site Selection Business

5.1. Report of the 2007 Site Selection & Presentation by Winners

5.2. Reports by seated Worldcons & NASFiC

5.2.2. Interaction (2005)

5.2.3. L.A.con IV (2006)

5.2.4 CascadiaCon (2005 NASFiC)

NASFiC's are not required to report, but space is provided should they choose to do so.

5.3. Presentation by future Worldcon bids

5.3.1. Presentation by bidders for 2008

5.3.2. Presentation by bidders for years after 2008

6. Adjournment

6.1. Adjournment in Memory of George Flynn

MPC will hold meeting tomorrow.

Adjourned in memory of George Flynn at 10:37.

SUNDAY NOREASCON 4

Second Main Business Meeting

Podium Staff:

Chair: Donald E Eastlake III

Secretary in Memoriam: George Flynn

Secretary: Pat McMurray

Deputy Chair: Tim Illingworth:

Timekeeper: Alexis Layton

Tech Support: Lisa Hayes, J Spencer Love

Meeting called to order at 10:02. The number of attendees as recorded on the sign-up sheets was 106.

5.1. Report of the 2007 Site Selection & Presentation by Winners

Pat Molloy: Acknowledge support of my staff, and the bidders for a good race.

Nippon in 2007 are declared winners.

Hiroaki Inoue:

昨日の開票により、私たちのコミッティが2004年、65th World Science Fiction

Conventionを開催することに決まりました。

日本からの初めての挑戦に応えてくれてありがとうございます。

すべての投票[Originally:登票=typo]をして下さった方にお礼申し上げます。

コロンバスのコミッティ、あなたたちがいたおかげで、私たちはがんばれました

どうもありがとう

Noreascon4のコンコミッティ、細やかな気づかいに感謝します。

初めての私たちを最大限にサポートしてくれました。

ペギー=レイ・サピエンツァ[Peggy Rae Sapienza]、私たちは彼女を「ペギーレイお

母さん」と呼んで

います。彼女の力強いあとおし[=後押し]が私たちをここまで走らせてくれました

エージェントをかって出てくれた、

アンドリュー・A・アダムス[Andrew A Adams]、ビンセント・ドカティ[Vincent

Docherty]、

私たちの北米メンバー、グレン[Glenn]、ボブ[Bob]、レネ[Rene]、ビル[Bill]他の

多くの人たち、ありがとう、あなたたちのおかげです

ここにいる日本のメンバー、ここに来ることができな

かった日本のメンバー、よくがんばった

1/2

--------

そして何よりも感謝をささげたい人は

柴野拓美[Takumi Shibano]さん、彼がいなければ私たちはワールドコンを開こうとは

考えませんでした

フォレスト・J・アッカーマン[Forrest J Ackerman]、彼は日本のファンダムを世界

にみちびきました。

最後にエレイン・ペルツ[Elayne Pelz]、ブルース・ペルツ[Bruce Pelz]、彼らのお

かげで

私たちはすべてをはじめることができました

心から感謝しいたします。

2/2

--------

正式名称　Nippon2007

日付 2007年8月30[日] ~ 9月3日　レイバー[Labor]DAY[Weekend]

場所 日本の、横浜市、パシフィコヨコハマ[Pacifico Yokohama]

GoH 小松　左京[Sakyo Komatsu]

ディビット ブリン[David Brin]

天野　喜孝[Yoshitaka Amano]

マイケル　ウィラン[Michael Whelan]

柴野　拓美[Takumi Shibano]

[Hiroaki Inoue-san's speech on Sunday, September 5, 2004 at Noreascon 4,

accepting the results of the voting at the business meeting]

Yesterday it was decided, according to the votes, that we will hold our

convention, the 65th World Science Fiction Convention, in 2007. Thank you

for responding so favorably to our first try at bidding for the convention.

We bow before you and thank all of those who voted for us. In addition, we

thank the Columbus Committee because due to their hard work it was a great

and noble fight.

To the Noreascon 4 Con Committee, thank you for your close attention to the

process. We were first-timers, yet you gave us your maximum support.

The mighty urgings of Peggy Rae Sapienza, whom we call "Mother Peggy Rae,"

caused us to run this race and come this far.

To Andrew A Adams and Vincent Docherty, who came out and spurred us on as

our agents, and to our North American members, including Glenn, Bob, Rene,

and Bill, we succeeded through you; thank you! To those members from Japan

who are here, and to those Japanese members who were unable to come, you

have done great work!

Above all, the people to whom we would most like to offer our thanks are

Takumi Shibano and Forrest J Ackerman. Without Takumi Shiano, we would have

never considered to try holding a Worldcon. Forrest J Ackerman guided

Japanese fandom to the world stage. Finally, thanks to Elayne and Bruce

Pelz, we were able to get everything off the ground.

From the depths of our hearts, we humbly and gratefully thank you.

Formal Title of Event: Nippon 2007

Date: August 30, 2007 through September 3, 2007, Labor Day Weekend

Place: Pacifico Yokohama in the City of Yokohama, Japan GoH (Guests of

Honor):

Sakyo Komatsu

David Brin

Yoshitaka Amano

Michael Whelan

Takumi Shibano

Translation by Sean Leonard

Pat Molloy: Move to destroy the ballots.

Motion passed by unanimous consent.

Tim Illingworth Question for Nippon 2007: Mark Protection Committee?

Yes, we shall move on.

Kim Williams: Congratulations, it’s been fun to bid against you. Wish you a good time in Japan in 2007.

Linda Deneroff: Inquiry: Where will NASFiC vote be held?

Chair: At NASFiC in 2005.

1. Committee Reports

All other business was completed at the Preliminary and First Main Business Meetings.

Announcement of HEROW and NPFSC memberships.

HEROW membership: Chairman: Pat McMurray. Cheryl Morgan, Tim Illingworth, Perianne Lurie, Ben Yalow, Todd Dashoff, Kevin Standlee, Gayle Surette, Paul Haggarty.

NPFSC membership: Chairman: Kevin Standlee. Tim Illingworth, Donald Eastlake, Pat McMurray

1.3. Worldcon Runners' Guide Editorial Committee

2. Worldcon Reports

All business was completed at the Preliminary Business Meeting yesterday.

3. Business Passed On from Torcon 3

All business was completed at the First Main Business Meeting yesterday.

4. New Business

All business was completed at the First Main Business Meeting yesterday.

5. Site Selection Business

5.1. Report of the 2007 Site Selection & Presentation by Winners

5.2. Reports by seated Worldcons & NASFiC

5.2.2. Interaction (2005)

Vince Docherty: Introduce Co-Chair Colin Harris. Have lost an important member of our founding committee, KIM Campbell.

Colin Harris: Many members from many countries. Accommodation opened on Thursday of this convention. 150+ staff.

Steve Francis: What will rate structure be in future.

Colin Harris: Current rates valid to 30^th November.

5.2.3. L.A.con IV (2006)

Christian McGuire: L.A.con IV is still on track. Contracts finalized with Hilton and Marriott.

Steve Francis: Housing process?

CMG: Between IA and year-end 2005.

Craig Miller: Lots of rooms.

CMG: Membership will rise on 12^th September.

5.2.4 CascadiaCon (2005 NASFiC)

NASFiC's are not required to report, but space is provided should they choose to do so.

Bobbie duFault: 8^th NASFiC in 30 years. Hotel sorted out – Radisson. Rate rise is 30^th November. Announce Anime Guest of Honour: Hiroaki Inoue

Robert Klein: Hotels

BDF: 21^st September

Voting for NASFiC 2007 will be at Cascadiacon. You have to be a member of Cascadiacon to vote.

5.3. Presentation by future Worldcon bids

Rick Zelig, St Louis NASFiC 2007 – Archon is bidding for NASFiC – either usual dates in October or early August.

5.3.1. Presentation by bidders for 2008

Kent Bloom: Colorado Convention Centre, Denver, CO 6-10 August 2008.

TR Smith & Vince Docherty: The Geneva Convention – don’t vote for us.

Dina Krause and Dean McCrory: Chicago in 2008

Steve Francis – Dates? Still negotiating on rates and dates.

5.3.2. Presentation by bidders for years after 2008

Linda Ross Mansfield and Rene Walling: Montreal in 2009

Margene Bahm and Jim Murray: KC in 2009. Presupport rates: $20, $50 for friend of library, $100 for patient.

Rose Mitchell, Australia in 2010 – Serious bid.

Todd Dashoff: Have you decided on location yet?

RM: No, we’re open to various suggestions and are not locked into anything.

What time of year?

RM: Usual time – spring

Rick Kovalchik: Please don’t always hold Worldcons in the same city.

TR Smith: Proto bid for DC in 2011.

Kevin Standlee: Announcement: All members of Interaction, whether or not they are members of LA con IV, will have a vote in LA con IV. There will be no site selection at Interaction.

1.3. Worldcon Runners' Guide Editorial Committee

No written report.

Will continue with present membership.

6. Adjournment

6.1. Adjournment in Memory of George Flynn

Meeting adjourned at 10:25

Announcement: Much of the discussion of the types of issues raised at this meeting, takes place between Worldcons on the Smofs mailing list. The Smofs mailing list is also the home for a great deal of discussion of general conrunning and Worldcon issues and is open to any fan who’s interested.

To subscribe, either

1. Send email to listserv@sflovers.org, and in the body of the message put subscribe smofs or

2. Email smofs-request@sflovers.org where a human being will respond to your request.

Report of the WSFS Nitpicking and Flyspecking Committee

Standing Rule 7.7: Nitpicking and Flyspecking Committee. The Business Meeting shall appoint a Nitpicking and Flyspecking Committee. The Committee shall:

(1) Maintain the list of Rulings and Resolutions of Continuing Effect

(2) Codify the Customs and Usages of WSFS and of the Business Meeting.

In accordance with object (1), the committee reports below the compilation of items from the 2003 Worldcon, together with the collected items from earlier Worldcons.

The committee has made its full cumulative reports available through the WSFS web pages at http://www.wsfs.org and will continue to do so.

In accordance with object (2), Tim Illingworth & Pat McMurray have completed the OCRing and correcting of the WSFS Business Meeting minutes for 1974, and 1979-1992. 1993-date are available elsewhere (through Saul Jaffe). Minutes for all Business Meetings from 1979 to date are now available to any interested party. The committee would be interested to hear of any minutes for Business Meetings in other years.

These minutes are currently held in Word 6 format, and are available from Tim’s web site (www.smofs.org). The 1979 minutes are a report constructed from Ben Yalow's copy of the agenda of the Main Meeting with contemporaneous annotations.

As an extract from these documents, a list has been prepared of all amendments to the WSFS Constitution and Standing Rules proposed since 1979, together with their amendment and disposal.

An update of the Annotated Standing Rules (originally prepared by the Standing Rules Working Group in 1996) has also been prepared. An Annotated Constitution has been prepared, and comments are sought for inclusion. All of these documents are available online at http://www.smofs.org/wsfs.htm

In accordance with the Committee’s wider interpretation of “the Customs and Usages of WSFS and of the Business Meeting”, Tim Illingworth has retyped George Scithers’ “Con Committee Chairman’s Guide” (the story of Discon, the 1963 Worldcon) and has made it available online at http://www.smofs.org/wsfs.htm with George’s permission.

Pursuant to BM-94-1, www.wsfs.org has been updated, and copies of documents have been supplied to Saul Jaffe for the SF-Lovers archive.

Pursuant to BM-2001-1, the committee has reminded Noreascon 4 of the requirement for legibility of badges, and hopes that Noreascon has noticed.

The Torcon Business Meeting passed a resolution directing the Nitpicking and Flyspecking Committee to examine the matter of whether "published" covers all Hugos"

It is the Committee’s opinion that, for the purposes of the Hugo Awards, "published" means "fixed in tangible form" for works to which such definition applies, or "performed publicly" for dramatic works that cannot be fixed in tangible form such as plays, speeches, and other live performances.

The committee is willing to serve for another year.

Don Eastlake, Tim Illingworth, Kevin Standlee and Pat McMurray

The NP&FSC recommends that the Business Meeting consider the following motion:

1. Short Title: Counting Votes (and Breaking Ties)

Moved, To amend various sections of the WSFS Constitution to add explicit tie-breaking procedures to WSFS elections, moving the general counting rules to Article 6 and detailing the specific differences per election type appropriately.

1. Move most of existing Section 3.11.1 to follow existing Section 6.2, change ‘nominee’ to ‘candidate’ throughout, and add a new sentence to it as shown

3.11.1 Section 6.2A: Tallying of Votes. In each category, Votes shall first be tallied by the voter's first choices. If no majority is then obtained, the nominee candidate who places last in the initial tallying shall be eliminated and the ballots listing it as first choice shall be redistributed on the basis of those ballots' second choices. This process shall be repeated until a majority-vote winner is obtained. If two or more candidates are tied for elimination during this process, the candidate that received fewer first-place votes shall be eliminated. If they are still tied, all the tied candidates shall be eliminated together.

2. Move existing Section 3.11.3 to follow proposed Section 6.2A above, change “No Award” to “the run-off candidate” throughout, and insert text in it as shown.

3.11.3 Section 6.2B: Run-off. After a tentative winner is determined, then unless "No Award" the run-off candidate shall be the sole winner, the following additional test shall be made. If the number of ballots preferring "No Award" the run-off candidate to the tentative winner is greater than the number of ballots preferring the tentative winner to "No Award" the run-off candidate, then "No Award" the run-off candidate shall be declared the winner of the election.

3. In Section 3.11.1, substitute new wording for that moved to Section 6.2A.

3.11.1: In each category, tallying shall be as described in Section 6.2A. ‘No Award’ shall be treated as a nominee. If all remaining nominees are tied, no tie-breaking shall be done and the nominees shall be declared joint winners.

4. In Section 3.11.3 substitute new wording for the existing section.

3.11.3: “No Award" shall be the run-off candidate.

5. In Section 4.1.2, strike out “Section 3.11” and insert “Section 6.2A”.

4.1.2: Voting shall be by written ballot cast either by mail or at the current Worldcon with tallying as described in Section 3.116.2A.

6. In Section 4.5.3, strike out “the equivalent of ‘No Award’ with respect to Section 3.11.” and insert “the run-off candidate.”

4.5.3: "None of the Above" shall be treated as a bid for tallying, and shall be the equivalent of "No Award" with respect to Section 3.11 the run-off candidate.

7. In Section 4.5.4, strike out “normal preferential ballot procedures” and insert “Section 6.2A”.

4.5.4: All ballots shall be initially tallied by their first preferences, even if cast for a bid that the administering Committee has ruled ineligible. If no eligible bid achieves a majority on the first round of tallying, then on the second round all ballots for ineligible bids shall be redistributed to their first eligible choices, and tallying shall proceed according to normal preferential-ballot procedures Section 6.2A.

8. In Standing Rule 6.2, insert, “as defined in Section 6.2A of the WSFS Constitution. There shall be no run-off candidate” after “normal preferential ballot procedures”.

9. In Standing Rule 6.2, insert as the penultimate sentence: “In the event of a first-place tie for any seat, the tie shall be broken unless all tied candidates can be elected simultaneously.”

Rule 6.2: Elections. Elections to the Mark Protection Committee shall be a special order of business at a designated Main Business Meeting. Voting shall be by written preferential ballot with write-in votes allowed. Votes for write-in candidates who do not submit written consent to nomination and region of residence to the Presiding Officer before the close of balloting shall be ignored. The ballot shall list each nominee's name and region of residence. The first seat filled shall be by normal preferential ballot procedures as defined in Section 6.2A of the WSFS Constitution. There shall be no run-off candidate. After a seat is filled, votes for the elected member and for any nominee who is now ineligible due to regional residence restrictions shall be eliminated before conducting the next ballot. This procedure shall continue until all seats are filled. In the event of a first-place tie for any seat, the tie shall be broken unless all tied candidates can be elected simultaneously. Should there be any partial-term vacancies on the committee, the partial-term seat(s) shall be filled after the full-term seats have been filled.

Discussion: This provides explicit tie-breakers for elections, using the method specified in the parliamentary authority. As far as we know, they represent current practice.

There are actually three different tie-breaking rules for the three types of elections WSFS can administer (Hugo Awards, Site Selection and Mark Protection Committee). Hugos permit ties for 1st place, Site Selection does not, and the MPC permits them if there are enough seats left to fill. This moves the general rule into Article 6 from Article 3 and details the differences in each case.

The new sections are taken from the existing Section 3.11, and fresh text is underlined.

Report of the Hugo Eligibility Rest of the World (HEROW) Committee

We believe an extra year of eligibility for works first published outside North America in English continues to be appropriate, but that market changes could render this unnecessary in the future. We recommend another one-year eligibility extension and continuation of the committee to monitor the situation.

The Worldcon will be in the UK next year. Some members of the committee think that an extension will not be necessary next year because more non-US members will be eligible to nominate. However, an eligibility extension is still appropriate this year, because it applies to work first published outside the USA before 2004 and first published in the USA in 2004. Without an extension, those pre-2004 works will not be eligible next year no matter how many people nominate them.

The Committee moves the adoption of the following two motions.

Short Title: This Year's Model

Moved, To extend eligibility for all works that are allowed by a resolution under the following sections of the WSFS Constitution:

3.2.3: 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.

3.2.4: A work shall not be eligible if in a prior year it received sufficient nominations to appear on the final award ballot.

This motion extends eligibility for the Hugo Award; therefore, it requires a 3/4 vote.

Short Title: We Need Another HEROW

Moved, To continue the Hugo Eligibility for the Rest of the World (HEROW) Committee as previously charged, with a new Chair and members appointed by the Chair of the Business Meeting, and with the Chair of the HEROW Committee authorized to add additional members to the committee.

08/04/04

LACON III FUNDS

==================

Chicon 2000

Final Statement of Financial Condition

Summary of Revenue and Expenses

Memberships $680,701

Dealers’ Tables 42,500

Art Show Revenue 18,666

Advertising and Sponsorships 34,204

Royalties 10,764

Investment Income 29,282

Contributions and Pass-Along Funds 33,154

Miscellaneous 4,051

TOTAL REVENUE $853,322

Administrative Expenses $97,351

Guest of Honor Expenses 28,087

Publications 94,401

At-Con Expenses 265,581

WSFS Activities 8,338

Staff Reimbursements 126,121

Facilities Charges and Labor 132,543

Miscellaneous Expenses 14,444

TOTAL EXPENSES $766,856

SURPLUS $86,466

Disbursement of Surplus Funds

WSFS Mark Protection Committee Contribution $1,467

Pass-Along Funds:

Millennium Philcon 6,000

Con José 6,000

Torcon 3 20,000

Noreascon Four 6,750

InterAction 9,500

L.A.Con IV 600

Other Donations:

Bucconeer [Student Science Fiction Contest] 8,100

ISFiC Press 8,200

ISFiC (in trust for future Chicago Worldcon bid) 4,450

Phandemonium, Inc. [Capricon] 4,100

DucKon 4,100

MSFFA [To Be Continued] 1,750

Voices for Illinois Children 1,300

Partial Refund of Bid Committee Dues 4,149

TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS $86,466

BALANCE ON HAND -0-

The Millennium Philcon

ConJosé, the 60^th World Science Fiction Convention
Report to 2004 WSFS Business Meeting

Restatement of 2003 Report

After making our report to the 2003 WSFS Business Meeting, ConJosé discovered a small number of errors and also incurred adjustments to its fiscal year ending June 30, 2003. The net change is only $287; however, in the interests of full disclosure, a copy of our restated 2003 report is attached.

2004 Report and Activity after June 30, 2004

A copy of our report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2004 is attached. We have attempted to differentiate convention-related activity from non-convention activity generated by our corporate parent, primarily consisting of grant payments. As of June 30, 2004, our remaining balance reportable to WSFS was $7,878. Since that time, we have issued a grant of $3,000 to purchase high quality shipping cases for the Worldcon historical exhibits (these cases should be available in time to pack portions of the exhibits at the end of Noreascon 4). We have funded two $500 scholarships to send two promising convention-runners from the San Francisco Bay Area to the SMOFCon conrunning convention in Washington DC this December. We also granted $600 to the online magazine Strange Horizons (http://www.strangehorizons.org/) to pay for web hosting fees, and we have issued a challenge grant on behalf of Clarion West and will match up to $1000 in donations to Clarion West, as we did for Clarion last year. These expenditures will appear in our report to the 2005 Business Meeting.

We believe that WSFS did not intend for Worldcons to hold onto operating surpluses indefinitely, and that the spirit of the rules regarding financial reporting implies that WSFS expects Worldcons to spend their surplus funds in a reasonably timely manner on projects beneficial to fandom. We continue to spend our remaining reportable balance on grants and other activities that we think meet that standard. Our current goal is to make our Final Report to either the 2005 or 2006 Business Meetings.

ConJosé Asset Management Committee

WSFS Constitution section 2.9.4 says, in part, that the “Worldcon or NASFiC Committee, or any alternative organizational entity established to oversee and disburse that surplus, shall file annual financial reports….” On July 17, 2004, ConJosé’s parent corporation, San Francisco Science Fiction Conventions, Inc. (SFSFC), discharged the ConJosé Worldcon Operating Committee, thanking it for its work. SFSFC then established a ConJosé Asset Management (CJAM) Committee and charged it with managing the remaining assets and residual responsibilities of ConJosé. For the purposes of section 2.9.4, the CJAM Committee of SFSFC is the “alternative organizational entity” responsible for future reports to WSFS regarding the 2002 Worldcon.

Send any questions regarding ConJosé’s financial reports to controller@conjose.org. Send questions regarding any other residual obligations of ConJosé to info@conjose.org. For information about requesting grants from SFSFC Inc., write to secretary@sfsfc.org. Our postal mail address for SFSFC and ConJosé is PO Box 61363, Sunnyvale CA 94088-1363, USA.

Kevin Standlee
Tom Whitmore
Cindy Scott
ConJosé Asset Management Committee

August 14, 2004

ConJosé

60^th World Science Fiction Convention

Income and Expense Statement Summary¹

For 12 Months Ending June 30, 2004

All amounts US$

Previous Reported Balance as of June 30, 2003 $60,516

Income

Facilities: Comp Rooms and Suite Sales $975

Advertising Sales $700

Transit Pass Refunds $210

Sales to Members² ($632)

Miscellaneous³ $214

Total Income $1,467

ConJosé Operating Expenses

Chair Division

Travel Expenses, Pre-Con Meetings⁴ $7,409

Travel Expenses, Extra Pre-Post Con⁵ $5,689

Staff Thank-You Gift $1,116

ASCAP/BMI License Fees $504

Other⁶ $443 $15,161

Hospitality Division

Thank You Parties $2,370

2003 Business Meeting Coffee $1,356

Other $371 $4,096

Miscellaneous

Post-Con Mailing to Supporting/No-Shows $4,673

Post-Con Exhibit Storage $2,895

Other⁸ $2,032 $9,600

Total Expense $28,858

Net Ordinary Income ($27,391)

Other Income/Expense

Interest Earned $370

Interest Transferred to SFSFC⁹ ($1,255)

Gain (Loss) on Currency Exchange $934 $49

Net Income Before Reimbursements ($27,343)

Membership Reimbursements¹⁰ $11,079