The nominee with the smallest number of points shall be eliminated. Each of the remaining nominees shall start with zero points for a repetition of the process where the top two non-eliminated nominees from each ballot shall be used. This process shall be repeated until all but two of the nominees are eliminated. At that point, only those ballots that have both nominees rated shall be examined and divided into two groups based on which nominee is rated higher on each ballot. The nominee with the larger group of supporters shall be the winner of the award. The complete numerical vote totals shall be made public by the Worldcon Committee within ninety (90) days after the convention.

This motion was not properly filed. The Chair asked for unanimous consent of the meeting to accept the motion for consideration. There were several objections. The motion was not accepted for consideration. Blair moved to form a committee to discuss the motion. There was no second. Hillis moved that Blair be allowed 2 minutes to explain his motion. This was seconded and passed. Blair discussed his proposed balloting procedure for 2 minutes; he suggested that there were several new ways to do the balloting.

A) A motion to transfer the functions of the WSFS Mark Registration Committee to the new Standing Committee [assuming its ratification]. The motion passed by a majority. [Motion made by Don Eastlake for the committee; see the Mark Registration Committee report for the text].

B) A motion to add to the Standing Rules the following:

"The Business Meeting sessions shall not be scheduled for before 11 a.m. on any day except on the last day of the convention."

[Motion by Robert L. Hillis, Robert E. Sacks, Judith E. Bemis.] Hillis spoke in favor of the motion. He suggested a time period of 1 to 3 in the afternoon, implied that there would be better attendance for a later meeting, and stated that too few people were making important decisions. Katze spoke against the motion, stating that he did not feel that future cons should be limited against what might be future preference. Sacks supported the motion, stating that Worldcon is a party con and that no one is awake in the early morning. Yalow spoke against the motion, stating that if one wanted to party one could simply stay up for the meeting and then sleep. He stated that many of those desiring to attend were part of the con administration and that the meeting needed to be scheduled for their convenience when few other activities were occurring. The motion failed by a majority vote.

C) A motion to add to the Standing Rules the following:

"On any objection to consideration, the Presiding Officer will recognize one person raising the objection and the maker of the motion objected to ( or an alternate)for two minutes each to explain why the motion should or should not be considered."

[Motion by Hillis, Sacks, and Bemis] Hillis stated that the felt the current rule has been abused and used to get rid of personally offensive motions. St. Onge stated that the current rule is a way to get rid of trivial items and that he wants to keep it. Sacks, speaking for the motion, stated that he felt 2 minutes an appropriate time limit. Eastlake, speaking against, stated that the motion would lengthen meetings unnecessarily, and that he felt it would not be effective. Epstein, speaking for, stated that the current system does not really consider the content of the motion. The motion failed by a majority vote.

D) A motion to set the procedure for selecting members of the Standing Committee, should such a committee be approved. Eastlake spoke in favor of the motion, stating that he feels it necessary to have a procedure to elect a Standing Committee, and that he feels it is within the province of the Business Meeting to set this policy, and that if passed the motion would go into effect immediately. Sacks made a motion to amend, but the motion was not seconded. The motion passed by majority vote. -- The following should be inserted as Standing Rule #3 and all subsequent Standing Rules should be renumbered accordingly:

"Nominations from the floor for election to the Standing Committee shall be allowed at each Preliminary Business Meeting. All nominees must be members of the Society and give their consent in writing, which consent shall be submitted to the Presiding Officer. Elections to the Standing Committee shall be a special order of business at a Main Business Meeting. Voting shall be by written preferential ballot with write-ins allowed. The winning candidate shall be elected to the longest-term remaining vacancy and the ballots shall be recounted, with the winning candidate eliminated, if there are further vacancies. This process of selection and elimination shall be repeated until all vacancies are filled. Tied candidates shall all be considered elected if there are enough vacancies of the same length to accommodate them. Other ties shall be settled by drawing lots."

[Motion by Donald E. Eastlake, III, and Mike Glyer]

ITEM V: NOMINATIONS FOR STANDING COMMITTEE

The following persons were nominated and accepted nomination: Don Eastlake, Jim Gilpatrick, Brian Burley, William Siros, Yale Edeiken, Gary Farber, Rick Katze, George Flynn, Kent Bloom, Craig Miller, Ben Yalow, Gail Kaufman, Robert Sacks, Mark Owings, Lise Eisenberg, Robert Hillis, Devra Langsam, Candice Massey, Moshe Feder, Leslie Turek, Dick Smith, and Gary Feldbaum.

The meeting was then adjourned.

The meeting was called to order at 10:03 a.m. with Kent Bloom presiding. The Chair asked that members stand to be recognized and to state their names to the Secretary before speaking.

Part A: Business Passed On from Chicon IV. (The items were taken according to the order that they were published in the Program Book. The time limit for debate on each item is given in parentheses immediately after the item number.) [See above for the texts of these items.]

Item 1 (12 minutes) --Ben Yalow made an amendment to delete fanzine [sic; i.e. to eliminate the Fanzine Hugo altogether]. Sacks appealed. Flynn stated that he agreed with Sacks. The Chair ruled the amendment in order.

The Chair was overruled by the majority of the meeting, Yalow's amendment was [thus] ruled out of order. There was no further debate. The amendment [Item 1] was passed by a majority and adopted.

Item 2 (12 minutes) -- Epstein spoke against, stating that it is overkill and he wants something smaller and simpler. Sacks spoke for, stating that the current amendment replaces a 20-page draft. The amendment was passed by a majority and adopted.

Item 3 (3 minutes) -- Sacks spoke against, stating that this amendment is overkill. Ruh spoke for, stating that Worldcon is not over until the meeting is adjourned. The amendment was passed by a majority and adopted.

Item 4 (3 minutes) -- Veal spoke against, stating that it is not needed for clarity and that it draws attention to a problem that could hopefully be avoided. Miller made an amendment with more neutral language; Sacks seconded. The new text of the amendment to read:

"An author may withdraw a version of a work from consideration if the author feels that the version is not representative of what said author wrote."

[In Art. II, Sec, 2.] This amendment was passed by the majority. Epstein called a point of order, and was informed that this does not mean that the original amendment would need to be re-ratified. The question was called. The amendment as amended passed by a majority vote and was adopted.

Item 5 (10 minutes) -- Russell moved an amendment to the amendment. The Chair ruled that it had no substantive effect. Flynn stated that the amendment was silly and was becoming sillier. Sacks stated that he agreed with Flynn, Katze stated that he agreed with them both. The motion was called, voted on, and adopted. [The effect of this change was to delete the phrase "provided such publication precedes the English-language publication" from the second sentence of the proposed text.] The amendment [as amended] was then debated. Flynn spoke against, stating that it made no substantive change. The question was called. The amendment was defeated, and therefore is not adopted.

Part B: Amendments Proposed for Primary Passage at ConStellation. [see above; texts are given at appropriate places below.]

Item A: to hold site selection three years in advance instead of two years ([motion by] Don Eastlake, Ben Yalow, Jim Gilpatrick, and Wilma Fisher). (Debate time limit was 10 minutes.)

Eastlake spoke for, stating that more time would allow people to get proper facilities, although there is a problem with keeping committees together that long. Miller spoke against, stating that he is in favor but pointing out that the vote for the con three years away will be held in the same region [as that] to be voted on, providing an opportunity to cram the ballot box with walk-ins: he wants to amend the rotation plan to deal with this problem. Yalow stated that no one will try to run a con right after running one, and that most people vote by mail anyway, and that walk-ins would not front the extra money needed to vote.

J. Eastlake made a motion to amend; Katze seconded. Sacks objected and was ruled out of order. The wording of the Eastlake motion, to be added to Article 111. Section 6:

"A site shall be ineligible if it is within 60 miles of the site at which selection occurs. New York in ’89 is exempted from this rule."

Ruh made a friendly amendment that was not accepted. Sacks opposed the motion, stating that it is a personal slur since his bid and J. Eastlake's bid are in competition; he called it a dangerous and fractious motion. Zellich stated that it works for other organizations. Katze moved to extend time for debate by 1 minute; so moved [i.e., so voted]. Rico offered a friendly amendment that the motion not include New York in ’89; this was accepted by J. Eastlake. The new motion to read:

A site shall be ineligible if it is within 60 miles of the site at which selection occurs. [[Sic]]

A vote on the amendment was called: ayes 26, nays 21. The amendment was so amended.

[There is much confusion on this point. It is claimed by a significant number of people who were present at the meeting that the proviso exempting the New York in '89 bid remained in the motion upon its passage. It was felt that the minutes had to be followed in certifying the text of the amendment for L.A.con II publications; however, it is anticipated that there may be a motion at the 1984 Business meeting to alter the record.]

Debate returned to the main amendment; 4 minutes of debate time remaining. Flynn stated that there would be local advantages. Eastlake stated that most voting is done by mail. Sacks spoke against; stating that he is upset about the effect on closely located groups of fandom; he stated again that he was upset. Skene spoke for, stating that she feels the rotation will have to be changed later but that the benefits outweigh the problems. Dazzo spoke against, saying that local cons can and will influence the vote. Sacks moved to extend the debate time 6 minutes; Hellinger seconded. So moved [voted]. Hellinger spoke for, stating that a committee could be formed to look into the problems of 1) rotation/selection change and 2) whether or not three years was long enough or if four would be better; he was ruled not in order at this time.

Hilton spoke to amend the term "3 years" to "4 years" in the entire amendment; this was seconded and debated. Sacks spoke against saying that bidding committees are not ready for this so soon. Katze stated that this was not germane. Hawkins felt that no city should be excluded by a rule and that there was a problem of voting in the same district, giving the current discussion as an example of that problem; he feels that this amendment to the amendment will avoid the problem. Turek spoke against, stating 4 years is too long; no one wants to make commitments so far in advance. Carmody moved to table the amendment; he was ruled out of order. Owings called for a vote on the motion. The vote failed, and the amendment was not amended.

The debate returned to the main amendment. A vote was called. The ayes were a majority, and the amendment was adopted for ratification at L.A. con. The amendment to read as follows:[The underlined language was not in the original text:]

MOVED, to amend Article III of the WSFS Constitution as follows:

A) In Section 1, strike out "two(2)" and insert "three (3)" in its place.

B) Add to Section 6: "A site shall be ineligible if it is within sixty (60) miles of the site at which selection occurs."

C) Replace Section 9 with the following:

"With sites being selected three (3) years in advance, there are at least three selected current or future Worldcon committees in existence 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 closet 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."

PROVIDED THAT the three-year advance selection shall not take effect until the 1986 Worldcon, at which both the 1988 and 1989 Worldcons shall be selected.

[The text as distributed actually had "Worldcon" rather than 'Worldcons" in the proviso.]

Hellinger moved that a committee be formed as he had stated earlier, to report to L.A.con II. The motion was seconded and passed by a majority.

Item B: to change the method of site-selection for a NASFIC (committee report and substitute amendment). (20-minute default debate limit.) The committee to rewrite the amendment distributed the text of the new amendment. The committee was unanimous in its acceptance of the new wording, but stated reservations as to the substance of the amendment.

The revised text recommended by the drafting committee was as follows:

"MOVED, to amend the WSFS Constitution, Article III, Section 7, by replacing the last two sentences with the following:

Selection of the Continental Convention shall be by the identical procedure to the Worldcon selection except as provided below or elsewhere in this Constitution: (1) voting shall be only by written ballot at the current Convention taken after the Worldcon selection is complete; (2) bids are restricted to sites in the appropriate zone; and (3) the prospective Continental Convention voting fee can be set by unanimous consent of the prospective candidates that file with the current Worldcon Committee before the calendar year in which selection will occur."

Flynn spoke to amend the word "Convention" [in clause(1)] to "Worldcon". No second.

[I believe that the minutes are in error here, and that the change was in fact accepted without objection, just as a similar change in Item C (for uniformity of style with the rest of the Constitution) later was.]

Sacks spoke to amend the date "January 1" to "March 1" [i.e., to insert "March 1 of" after "before" in clause (3)]; seconded. Yalow spoke [against], saying the longer deadline might be necessary to meet PR deadlines. A vote was called on the motion to amend, and the motion was defeated.

The vote was called on the amendment. The amendment was carried, and adopted for ratification at L.A.con II. The text of the amendment is as follows: [see above].

Item C: to require that Worldcon bidders file an intent to bid at least one year in advance ([motion by] Mark Evans, Candice Massey). (6-minute debate limit. )

Evans, the original author, accepted substitutions from the committee [that redrafted Item B] This is now before the floor instead of the old amendment. Eastlake spoke to explain the changes.

The text recommended by the drafting committee, for consistency with Item B, was as follows:

MOVED, to amend the WSFS Constitution, Article III, Section 5, by adding the following:

The aforementioned rules and documentation of agreements, along with an announcement of intent to bid, must be filed with the Convention Committee that will administer the voting no later than the previous Worldcon for a Worldcon bid and no later than the end of the calendar year before the voting for a prospective Continental Convention bid.]

Evans spoke in favor, stating that the original idea was that there were no rulings on the deadline, it was set by the publications and by the chair. This lets everyone know the deadlines in advance.

Miller spoke, questioning the term "no later than the previous Worldcon"; he suggested this read "the close of the previous Worldcon". This was accepted as a friendly amendment.

Sacks spoke against, stating that [th]is is a move to close out bidders; it is anti-democratic; hotels do not like to commit without money, most require a year-long binder with no promises made. Kaufman spoke for, stating that earlier voting lets fans budget their own money and make plans.

Flynn offered a friendly amendment to change "Convention Committee" to "Worldcon Committee", and [the amendment] was accepted.

Ferree spoke, stating hotels will commit because they can always sell the space again. The question was called, and the ayes carried a majority. The amendment was adopted, and will be carried over to L.A.con II for ratification. The exact text of the amendment is as follows:

MOVED, to amend the WSFS Constitution, Article III, Section 5, by adding the following:

The aforementioned rules and documentation of agreements, along with an announcement of intent to bid, must be filed with the Worldcon Committee that will administer the voting no later than [the close of] the previous Worldcon for a Worldcon bid and no later than the end of the calendar year before the voting for a prospective Continental Convention bid.

[The words "the close of" do not appear at this point in the minutes, but the text above leaves no doubt that this amendment was in fact made. These words were therefore included in the text certified to L.A.con II and published.]

The meeting was adjourned.

The meeting was called to order at 10:06 a.m. with Kent Bloom presiding.

Balloting was as follows:

Australia in ’85 was declared the winner, and made a presentation

There were three written nominations. Eastlake moved (seconded) to close nominations. Nominations were closed. The three nominees were Detroit, Columbus, and Austin. The three bidders agreed in advance on a method of site selection, which was announced at this time to be by written ballot. Ben Yalow was appointed by the Presiding Officer to monitor the ballot counting. [See Appendix for the results]

Philadelphia, New York, and Atlanta made presentations.

Balloting was done [see earlier for the nominees], and Lalor, Ruh, and J. Eastlake volunteered and were accepted to act as tellers to count ballots. [see Appendix for results]

Stuart Hellinger was appointed to chair the committee. Mark Evans, Ben Yalow, Craig Miller, and Mary Morman were appointed to serve on the committee.

The meeting was adjourned at l0:25a.m.

To: Kent Bloom From: Ben Yalow

The final vote count for the NASFIC balloting is

This is agreed to by all the bidders.

The report of the tellers for the election of WSFS Standing Committee members is as follows:

Elected to 3-year terms: Don Eastlake, Leslie Turek, and George Flynn

Elected to 2-year terms: Ben Yalow, Jim Gilpatrick, and Kent Bloom

Elected to 1-year terms: Craig Miller, William Siros, and Rick Katze

To: ConStellation Business Meeting

From: Donald E. Eastlake, III, Chairman

Date: 31 August 1983

This committee was continued by a motion at the Chicon IV Business Meeting. Its purpose is to take action to protect the names in use by the Society, such as Worldcon and Hugo Award. All actions by the committee were taken by its chairman, who drafted this report.

1) Applications for registration of all six WSFS marks, as listed in the WSFS Constitution, were filed 24 September 1982 with the US Patent and Trademark Office.

2) First actions have been received on all six filings. All were negative but, except in one case, the response by the trademark examiner contained suggestions as to how to make the applications acceptable. The one serious difficulty was with "Science Fiction Achievement Award", which was rejected for registration on the Principle Register as being "merely descriptive". The opinion of our attorney is that this can be overcome by a proper affidavit of exclusive use for five or more years.

3) Amended filings are being prepared and should be submitted during September [1983]. If these are successful in achieving registration, registration should occur for all marks in December of 1983 or January of 1984.

MOVED, if the Constitutional amendment creating the Standing Committee of WSFS is ratified, to transfer all responsibilities, authority, funds, and records relating to WSFS marks and held by the Mark Registration Committee or by Donald E. Eastlake, III, to the Standing Committee; if said amendment is not ratified, to continue the WSFS Mark Registration Committee to report to the L.A.con II Business Meeting with the membership listed below, and to continue the authorization of Donald E. Eastlake, III, as an Officer of WSFS, to act to register and protect the marks in use by the Society.

Committee: Donald Eastlake; George Flynn; Rick Katze, Esq.; Craig Miller; Kent Bloom, Esq.; and a member appointed by the 1985 Worldcon.

Respectfully submitted, (s) Donald E. Eastlake, III

[The motion above is that referred to in the minutes]

To: ConStellation Business Meeting

From: Donald E. Eastlake, III

Date: 31 August 1981.

[[All figures in US Dollars]]

(S) Donald E Eastlake, III

[The following was not part of the minutes produced by the Business Meeting officers, but might as well be included here anyway.]

The WSFS Standing Committee elected at ConStellation held an organizational meeting at 10:01 A.M. on Monday, Sept. 5, 1983, in room 321 of the Baltimore Convention center. Present were Donald Eastlake, George Flynn, Willie Siros, Leslie Turek, and Ben Yalow (a majority of the elected members), with Craig Miller arriving a few minutes later.

Mr. Eastlake called the meeting to order, with Mr. Flynn acting as secretary. Nominations were solicited for Chairman: only Mr. Eastlake was nominated and the nominations were closed. Mr. Eastlake reported that a balance of $242 was being turned over to the Standing Committee by the WSFS Mark Registration Committee, and that all Worldcon committees asked to contribute had done so (except, of course, for Aussiecon).

The committee engaged in general discussion of its future activities and problems, including such matters as likely expenses, how to deal with violators of WSFS service marks, the possibility of registration in other countries, and whether "NASFIC" should also be registered; however, no action was taken on these matters. It was the consensus that no additional committee officers are needed at this time, with the Chairman handling all correspondence and finances. It was voted to acquire a post office box in the Boston area as a mailing address.

The meeting adjourned at 10:26 A.M.

George Flynn, Meeting Secretary

[As of 22 August 1984, the Standing Committee has held no further formal meetings. The mailing address mentioned in the minutes has been acquired: World Science Fiction Society, P.O. Box 12709 Kendall Square Station, Cambridge, MA 02142.]

[This edition [[the paper edition on which this electronic version is based]] of the 1983 WSFS Business Meeting minutes was completed on 22 August 1984. For additional copies, or copies of the minutes for 1980 through 1982, write to Noreascon II, Box 46. MIT P0, Cambridge, MA 02139.]

The Blair Hugo-Counting Motion, With Appendices.

MOVED, to amend the WSFS Constitution by deleting Article I [sic - should be II], Section 18, and inserting in its place:

Section 18: Tallying: Counting of all votes shall be the responsibility of the Worldcon Committee, which is responsible for all matters concerning the Awards. In each category, "No Award" shall be treated as one of the nominees. For each ballot, the top two choices shall receive a number of points determined by this table:

The nominee with the smallest number of points shall be eliminated. Each of the remaining nominees shall start with zero points for a repetition of the process where the top two non-eliminated nominees from each ballot shall be used. This process shall be repeated until all but two of the nominees are eliminated. At that point, only those ballots that have both nominees rated shall be examined and divided into two groups based on which nominee is rated higher on each ballot. The nominee with the larger group of supporters shall be the winner of the award. The complete numerical vote totals shall be made public by the Worldcon Committee within ninety (90) days after the convention.

Explanation: This method would have most of the advantages of the current system and the following additional advantages:

1. A person attempting to recruit voters for a specific nominee would have a harder time getting people to listen to him since he would have to tell them to read all the nominees or rank them without reading them.

2. A ballot with an unrated nominee would no longer be treated as though the nominee had been rated at the bottom.

3. The chance of prematurely eliminating a nominee with strong support in the second position would be reduced.

If 450 people vote like this (A), 500 vote like this (B) and 120 vote like this (C)