Saturday Sasquan Business Meeting

Posted on by

Here’s a post where you can pin your liveblogging comments.

JJ: I am on the front left near the EPH guys this morning.

Discover more from File 770

Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.

171 thoughts on “Saturday Sasquan Business Meeting”

  2. Mike, my roommate snored really loudly all night, and I’ve barely slept. I’m going to miss today, but I’ll definitely be there tomorrow.

  4. If only. It just hasn’t happened yet: all that’s been done so far is Site Selection announcement.

  5. Business meeting started 19 minutes ago. Site selection now official. Helsinki in 2017. Sasquan now giving check for $23,000 to Helsinki, from MilPhil pass-along funds.

  7. GoHs. John-Henri Holmberg, Nalo Hopkinson, Johanna Sinisalo, Claire Wending, Walter Jon Williams

  10. Now moving on to address business left over from Friday. Constitutional amendments

  11. Ben Yalow appealing a ruling of the chair. It’s like watching Daniel Webster at work.

  12. The chair is sustained in ruling that the passed on text for A Story By Any Other Name is definitive not the typoed text in the minutes or agenda.

  13. Dr. Lurie moves to add Graphic Story to categories affected by rules change. Vote on whether this is a greater change that would require another year for ratification.

  15. A Story by Any Other Name — (audio and ebooks eligible for fiction awards) ratification succeeds , after a lot of wrangling about language

  20. Query about Worldcon 75 GoH – when I try querying Google, no hits for Claire Wending but hits for Claire Wendling (with added ‘l’) seem otherwise to match the available details. Typo somewhere?

  23. Maker of the motion says that Hugo voters have a reluctance to coordinate their ballots.
    Laughter in the room.

  24. Mover Stephen DesJardins argues 5% rule no longer needed. Ben Yalow argues against because low vote tallies are more like noise than signal.

    One jackass is singing his argument.

  28. Multiple Nominations now being considered. Proposed rule to prevent a work appearing in more than one category as a nominee.Jared Dashoff a coauthor explains it is proposed in relation to limit effect if Best Series passes.

  29. It was a filk to the tune of I’d Never do anything twice by Stephen Sondheim from The Seven Percent Solution.

    And yes, a jackass move. He did chew up all his debate time though.

  30. Kate Secor raises interesting question if a story appears as par of a podcast does that mean one must choose between the fiction and the podcast? No definitive answer. John Lorentz opposes motion because of addidtional burden on Hugo admin that causes real problems.

  31. Dave McCarty moving to amend to choose category based on number of nominations instead of consulting the author

  33. I have pretty good hearing and I had trouble discerning the lyrics, too. I’m glad Kevin Standlee preemptively discouraged more speeches like that.

    It was a pro-amendment speech and that’s about all I got out of it.

  34. Dave McCarty proposes to make the rule to move the nominee into the category where it receives the most votes rather than have to contact the nominee for a choice because this creates a decusion stacking problem with limited time to resolve.

  40. I see a possible problem with that in cases where the two categories have different nomination participation levels. I’d hate to see a work automatically moved into a category where it wouldn’t make the ballot, away from one where it would, just because of that.

  42. Thomas Monaghan moves to adjourn a second after chair explains such a motion would be in order.

  43. And here comes a puppy strategy: attempting to close the meeting before getting to further amendments.

  44. Parliamentarian overrules the chair because certain prior actions have rendred a motion to adjourn not in order.

  46. I’d hate to see a work automatically moved into a category where it wouldn’t make the ballot, away from one where it would, just because of that.

    I don’t think that’s possible. Part of the proposed language says “if the work receives sufficient nominations to appear in more than one category,” so a work that might be in one of two categories would have made the ballot in both to trigger this provision.

  47. I don’t think that’s possible. Part of the proposed language says “if the work receives sufficient nominations to appear in more than one category,” so a work that might be in one of two categories would have made the ballot in both to trigger this provision.

    Ah, of course. Duh. Thanks.

  48. Thomas Monaghan’s move to kill all further business was uncool. EPH is hardly rushed. It has been drafted for months and received more comments from the public than the rest of the proposals combined. It deserves a vote up or down on the merits.

  50. Thanks for all the info. So was this only a two-hour session? I thought it was going to be a three-hour session and something else might get taken up after all, but I guess not.

Comments are closed.