2008 February 10th general meeting

[JeffT]

The February general meeting will be held on Sunday, February 10 from 1pm-5pm at Clark Community College.

1933 Fort Vancouver Way
Vancouver, WA 98663

Campus Map
Google Maps

The room will be determined and updated closer to the meeting.

Like all general meetings, it is open to the public. General meetings are intended for potential and current staff and volunteers. There will be department reports and news updates, and breaking into groups where people can meet and plan.

Full details will be kept up-to-date at the main web site calendar entry.

[Washougal_Otaku]

Well I feel kinda silly; I just posted this huge amount of stuff about the meeting that I didn't even see this.

I don't really wanna type it all over again, so I'll just do this.  It'll be in Foster Auditorium, those of you driving will wanna park in the Red 3 area.  Here's a link to a map.

http://www.clark.edu/maps/parkingMap.pdf

Those taking public transportation will want the C-Tran bus info for route #4.  Here's they're website.

http://www.c-tran.com

[MichaelEvans]

Motion to follow this procedure for Remote Voting:

We shall follow this procedure for remote voting verification until the Membership passes a new procedure or a set of Bylaws are installed which provide a remote voting verification process.

Remote Votes:
Shall be accepted for this meeting in two written formats.

• 1) A non-ambiguous vote-by-vote reply from the Staff member's known account to either the current meeting's announcement thread, or optionally a more appropriate thread if defined during the meeting before voting.  Such a definition shall be included in the minutes.
• 2) A hard copy of the same information as #1 that is signed by the Member, and mailed no less then 3 business days from the meeting to the following: The Secretary, The President, and the Publicity (Communications) directors.

Votes are subject to Membership review, and contention by the Staff member in cases where they believe they may have been tampered with.

During the meeting, for ease of tally the following shall occur:
A count of all votes from Members within the room.  The tally of all votes types and abstentions shall be recorded in the minutes.
A verbal or text reply in whatever remote session is occurring, which shall be recorded, including the Staff member's name, and what their vote is.

The decision shall be valid instantly if there is a clear passing level within just the Members in the room, and after all remote votes have been tallied or declared invalid due to failure in communications in all other cases.

[MichaelEvans]

Unless anyone spots obvious defects, here is a second, much longer, motion I intend to bring forth at the meeting.  Sorry for making such a huge post and such a big deal over what are hopefully not exploited loopholes.  This is also a separate post so that Edits will be noted for either alone.

Motion: Set a Bylaws review mandate deadline for all current versions of Bylaws drafts, official or not, published within the Bylaws! thread of the Kumoricon forums by 2008 - 02 - 25.

Reasons: The current bylaws have many flaws, and the official Bylaws committee appears to be operating without a known deadline (from the view of an average Staff member).

The staff were not allowed to provide commentary, background, and discussion for any of the board elected positions; since no substantial discussion occurred within the forums and no other venue was provided.

The staff were not allowed to participate in the discussion of recent punishments or director removals.

The Chair is currently allowed to shut down motions.

The Board may still, by unanimous vote, dissolve the convention without even consulting the staff.

The last year's Bylaws Committee never released a draft.  This year's Bylaws committee is heading down the same path.  They should have had access to all of last year's data, and a good three months to work.  Staze, who seems to be on it, has admitted in a forum post (Last meeting's minutes thread), that they do not even have anything in consideration for release of yet.

The Staff elect the Board, except for some positions elected by the Board to the Board.  In my mind, the Staff should have the right to remove any Board member, if elected by proxy or not.  The current bylaws do not provide this.

The current board is keeping an unusually tight hold on virtually every level of discussion relating to anything involving them.  The current bylaws provide no real means for requesting documents, forcing us to use the default procedures outlined in ORS65.

The current Bylaws do not align our views of who should be members with the requirements ORS65 says 'Members' must meet.

The current Bylaws do not provide for using an existing set of rules (For example, Roberts Rules of Order), or outline a basic set of procedures for a meeting.  This means that a meeting may be practiced in any unfair way imaginable.

The current Bylaws do not mandate that the Membership have access to key documents, such as the exact disciplinary action reasons and results.

The current Bylaws do not provide alternative procedures to route around deadlocks, inaction, or corruption; nor do they ensure that the Staff always have a say in important matters.

Review Requirements and Process:
The Board shall review all current versions of Bylaws drafts, unofficial or not, that have been posted by Monday the 25th of February 2008 in the Bylaws! thread of the Kumoricon forums.  The Board  may optionally also review any other drafts posted not less then 7 days prior to the next Membership meeting.

Each draft's review shall include a Two-Thirds requirement Vote for replacing the existing Bylaws with the draft under review.

Each draft that passes may have comments for the record and for the Membership to review in their consideration.

Each draft that fails to pass must have comments describing exactly what is wrong with the document in each board member's view.

The results of each Vote (tally at minimum), and all comments from each member for all the drafts shall be published to the Bylaws! thread in a timely manor.

Membership Votes:
At the next Membership Meeting, any Bylaws drafts that have passed the Two-Thirds Vote by the Board shall be subject to a Two-Thirds vote by the Membership.  The Membership may also, if a motion is brought and passed by majority vote, choose instead to voice their dis-satisfaction at the quality of all current drafts and extend all current deadlines by one meeting.  The Membership may at any time also, by two thirds vote, choose to abandon this set of directions and deadlines.  The preceding statements shall be included in the Minutes and serve as proper notice for the next meeting(s).

In the event that the Board and Membership votes result in more then one draft set of Bylaws passing (by Two Thirds vote in each body) the following resolution method shall determine which set of Bylaws, if any, are to be used.

1) The Membership shall vote on instructing the finalist Bylaws drafters to work together to produce a draft to be reviewed in public by the next Membership Meeting, which the Board shall have already had a Two-Thirds Vote on.  If this passes by majority vote, then step 2 shall be delayed until the meeting after the meeting this vote occurred during, also the new draft shall be voted upon first thing at the next meeting.

2) The membership will hold a most popular choice vote among all drafts which passed both the Board and Membership votes.  The choice with the most votes (plurality winner) shall be the set of Bylaws adopted.  In the event that there is a tie for that position a runoff vote of all ties for that position shall be repeated until there is a single plurality winner.

Board Direction: In the event that the Membership cannot direct the Board to complete these reviews, or Vote on given matters, all such conditions shall be considered Extremely Strong Recommendations by the Membership, with the backing force of the only authority they would thus have left.  A removal vote on all Board Members elected by the Membership.

[Lily]

Today was...educational and illuminating.     Seriously, all, I'm excited to be here and am looking forward to working with you. I look forward to seeing the materials from the last Con suite manager, and I have some ideas about vegan and food allergy avoidant options for those that need them. Con staff does not live on Ramen, Ramune and Pocky alone.

My goal for Con Suite is to have it be an island of sanity and tranquility during the swirl of madness.  And I'm told that I give a pretty good shoulder rub, if that's called for.

Peace, everyone.

Deena

[demonotaku]

Glad to help run the meeting for you guys and am looking forward to working with you guys on staff for the viewing rooms ^_^

[MichaelEvans]

Unofficial (Semi-complete) meeting notes for February 10th, General Meeting (Before I forget the short-hand in my notes completely).

Meeting start ~13:30

Relations:
Confirmed Guests (Spelling for all entries): Tommy Yune, Bato from GITS (SAC?), Kirk Thorton, Slants.
Need general staffing for liaisons to guests, minions.  Also Auction Coordinator.
Q: How many guests are we still negotiating with?  A: We're 50% done. (implied of complete list)

Programming:
Need misc. support staff.
Guy: AMV cutoff Mar 31st "28-July-08" "31-Mar-08 is the final date for RULES (especially Category Definitions) to be changed or adjusted.". Possible opening ceremony video, wants evening timeslot.
Rules Update: ?
Cosplay minions
Cosplay cont. this week.  (I'm not actually sure what my notes mean here...)
Also, art show (is under major consideration).

Publicity:
Posters are in; Flyers should have been ready and we will have early this business week.
Sakuracon table swap.  Two day event in Eugune: Dawn: Stagetime: 10-8 sat, 10-6 sun.
Uwajamaya (sp) in April.  Badge Info?

Ops:
(Dense-format PPT, hard to read even on massive screen.  Lots of data.)
Consuite and Staff Preservation under Vice (Later data Brownie is now both?)
Managers reported, Policy Manual in progress.
Jaz: contact for Volunteers (to get and/or to register)
Yojimbo: 30 Requested.
Patrick (AV/etc): On job for 3-4 weeks, no info yet, is in the process of fixing.
A: The PPT will be included with the minutes, though sensitive task items will be censored. (I assume this means something like line replacement with “Censored” instead of actual data.)

Treasurer:
Funds status this month since 2005 presented (Fast, no format hint, so I got first and current numbers only...) 2005: ~12000   2008: ~35000
April 25-37: Depoe Bay OR Staff Retreat (Damn, that's my long weekend... and I'm already taking too much time off for all the other things that hit Sat's on my long weekends...)
Hotel Addendum Signed last Ths.   105 room nights instead of 35 staff rooms.  $85/night for staff rooms.  Catering Prices? Parking is $5/24h, $3 for day pass.
Q: Interwebs A: ask more info at hotel@kumoricon.org
Q: Weapons Policy?  Q: Masks?
Contact Dawn to register your room for Staff discount (if staff).

Secretary:
Has Assistant now.
47 currently registered staff.

Q/A?  Prior Hotel Staff comments.

Timestamp 14:20

Vice Chair:
Dance broke even.  'Good' attendance, photos back from professional.
Eugune table thanks to Copic - awesome.
Several things in early planning stages, will post in to staff area of the forums when ready.

Chair:
Outreach to Kalamat Falls (sp) Oregon Institute of Technology Anime Club
Further Outreach wanted
Future Mini-Events (Q/A: No Mini-Con this year, these instead.)
PSU Anime/Game/Karaoke (near May)
Something in (June/July)
Swing Dance (May/June)
Lane Community College

Various beating about the bush discussion for a while, passing through digging for hard facts.  The following important points can be summarised:

Meg is not, and has never been, on any red or black list for AE/Kumoricon.

Timestamp Around 14:35
The one clear example given of why Rian was removed is that he sat in the audience at the last meeting.

Timestamp Around 14:45
A written report on exactly why Rian was removed from Facilities Liaison will be written/published by a 'month' from now. (Next general meeting or a literal month?)

Dawn has found us a parliamentarian.

15:00 PM - Guys tabled discussion from last meeting on meeting recording going in to the forums this time...  Vote at next meeting?

Ratification of last meeting minutes with the correction of Guy's motion to remove 'official' from the noted text of his motion.

Michael's first motion, Remote Voting, deferred for discussion (in the forums?), and vote at the next meeting.

Removal of Ryan Stasil – Deferred for forum discussion and vote at next meeting.

Nominations for Facilities Liaison open for 1 month.
Nominated thus far:
Meg: Accept, Rian: Defer, Brownie: Accept, Tom: Decline, Chris, Accept.

15:45  Initial setup for Motion for Bylaws Deadline (Michael's #2)
15 min recess called.
16:10-16:15 Recess ends.
No seconds for the giant thing.

Motion by Michael for the Bylaws Committee to produce A draft before the next meeting.  (Not the exact motion language... but close enough.)  Failed at 1:2 for Vs not.

Meeting motioned for close and seconded.

-- Edit Info --
Bolded Unofficial
Corrected Guy's info per post.

[BigGuy]

Timestamp Around 14:35
The one clear example given of why Rian was removed is that he sat in the audience at the last meeting.

I Believe the clear point given was that Rian was Uncooperative and diffucult to work with tho the detriment of the con.
 At least that's what I took from it.

[MichaelEvans]

Timestamp Around 14:35
The one clear example given of why Rian was removed is that he sat in the audience at the last meeting.

I Believe the clear point given was that Rian was Uncooperative and diffucult to work with tho the detriment of the con.
 At least that's what I took from it.

That was the claim, but the only (provided) example backing it up was the one listed above.

[melchizedek]

Sorry, I planned on coming but I layed down to take a nap and it was night when I woke up 

[superjaz]

Timestamp Around 14:35
The one clear example given of why Rian was removed is that he sat in the audience at the last meeting.
I Believe the clear point given was that Rian was Uncooperative and diffucult to work with tho the detriment of the con.

thats what they said at the meeting but i wished they had just said that was the reson of his removal in the first place, instead of saying he wasnt doing his job, i think a lot of the rummor mill could have been avoided if that had happend

I heard Rian say the reson he likes to sit in the audence was because he found it hard to get reconized to speak at meetings, and while i know we need the board up front so we can reconize them, I noticed at this meeing that it took a while for board mebers to get reconized by mike cuz he couldnt see them, it was up to peeps in the audence to say when mike called on them to speak to say "Dawn was waiting to speak before me"

[Prinz Eugen]

31-Mar-08 is the final date for RULES (especially Category Definitions) to be changed or adjusted.

The SUBMISSION DEADLINE (as in, when the AMVs have to get to ME) is 28-July-08.

thnx

- G

[staze]

Please note, whatever is posted in this thread are NOT official minutes. There is a separate thread for that.

Thank you.

[MichaelEvans]

Please note, whatever is posted in this thread are NOT official minutes. There is a separate thread for that.

Thank you.

That is indeed the case.  However after looking back I can understand some slight confusion.  I'll add bold tags to that.

Also, sorry Guy, I was trying to get the right date down, but didn't.  I'll correct my unofficial version now.

Timestamp Around 14:35
The one clear example given of why Rian was removed is that he sat in the audience at the last meeting.
I Believe the clear point given was that Rian was Uncooperative and diffucult to work with tho the detriment of the con.

thats what they said at the meeting but i wished they had just said that was the reson of his removal in the first place, instead of saying he wasnt doing his job, i think a lot of the rummor mill could have been avoided if that had happend

I heard Rian say the reson he likes to sit in the audence was because he found it hard to get reconized to speak at meetings, and while i know we need the board up front so we can reconize them, I noticed at this meeing that it took a while for board mebers to get reconized by mike cuz he couldnt see them, it was up to peeps in the audence to say when mike called on them to speak to say "Dawn was waiting to speak before me"

(Sorry this is long, but it's pretty much my entire opinion on the matter.  Thank you in advance for reading it fully to understand my point of view.)

It's my view that all of this stems from two factors.  One is errors in communication, possibly but not always or inherently the distorted interpretation of what's said as always being the worst possible context.  The other is related to something Mike said to me after the January meeting, I don't remember the exact words as I was dead tired, but it was something along the lines of trying to avoid drama.

The problem is, drama is bread by secrecy among other factors.  Drama is bread by injustice, and even perceived injustice.

After the elections there was that whole thing that started with what looked like a clear ethical breach (Presented here 'spam' thread), either by Meg and Rian for the fabrication of the email (Which I think many agree with me is far fetched and unlikely, for the exact same reason (IIRC it was Dawn that said it) Dawn stated in this meeting she was obviously not slandering anyone.  That is, wouldn't they do a better job of it?) or for Ryan for implying such a thing in any context.  After all, what has he been saying to others, especially if he effectively says that to Rian's face?

Then, we the Staff and Membership, saw at the November meeting that both received the same punishment.  Believing everything was behind us, at the very next meeting, Rian announces that he's going to appoint Meg as his assistant.  I don't think anyone only Staff or Membership in the room that day thought anything ill of that move.  However we hear exactly a week later that he's suddenly no longer Facilities Liaison.  That timing could hardly be more poor.  The reasons given then, and to this point have been insufficient for anyone to realistically believe that they were the soul reason he was removed.

Which leads to a clear void of information.  The feeling that improper things may be happening, and in the lack of proper context, anything could be true.  That allows any suggestion that sounds plausible to be considered.  The better informed will weigh every suggestion they hear, no matter how far fetched, and form their own personal opinion.  The less logical and less informed will probably side with whatever group of friends they happen to have.  The critically under-informed will have fear, confusion, doubt, and even misplaced blame.

All of which, inevitably, leads to escalation of drama.  The path to minimal drama is being extremely courteous, polite, truthful, but correct.  Utilizing clear logic to build a case in the one court every matter eventually reaches.  The court of public opinion.  OJ's not in jail, but he'll NEVER live a real life now because almost no one believes his innocence, at least not without a doubt.  Yet the drama involved was short lived.  Once the bloody trial ended things seemed to quell quite quickly.

We've never had a proper view of the real facts, the real reasons behind things.  Nor have we been encouraged to properly present our own views to the mix, or help individuals learn from past mistakes and grow beyond them.


I firmly believe that the drama at the last meeting is the real reason my motion for a bylaws deadline died.  However that's done and gone, and I'll still work on getting mine up to spec, as well as helping anyone else that I can, publicly or within the realm of joining a committee.  However -if- I do so, given the desire they seem to have for secrecy, we should probably sit down, and quickly go over our goals for such containment of information, so that there is a common-sense NDA/contract for that.


I also look forward to the proceedings of the shadow-court finally coming to light.  I consider all of that information the same way it is considered in my Bylaws draft, something that at the very least the staff must know, and may only then have the option, the choice, of Agreeing to keep it secret.

There is still nearly a month until the deadline that has been set for their report.  Then, we can finally begin to put this drama behind us, clean up the mess, and move forwards once more.

-- edit history --
Added clarification a link to the information I am citing which isn't so easily found anymore.
Note about it: At root, instead of bringing forth a proper question of impropriety among peers for open discussion, he implicitly convicts them of it, and twists it in to character defamation and assassination.  Deliberate, unintentional, or forged, that is what is presented.

edit #2, Fixed a 'spell check is not grammar check' issue.

[staze]

Michael,

First, let me ask about the comment about fabrication of email, election, something. I didn't quite grok any of that, or how my name is tied to it.

Mainly though, let me say that this might be the first time I wholeheartedly agree with you. It's a logical argument, and rationally presented (not that your others aren't either).

And lastly, I think your bylaws motion passed because a LOT of people left the meeting during the "drama outburst". I think the final count was between 10-17. I know the recess didn't help either, but there was a genuine need for people to get up and blow off some steam (heck, I went out in the hall and arm-wrestled Brownie. =P).

Thank again. =)

[MichaelEvans]

I was under the impression that it had failed, getting like 6-8 votes for it, 10-12 against, and the rest of the ~30 votes abstaining.

[staze]

The official count in the minutes would be: 6 for, 12 against, 8 abstain. A lot of people had left at the point when this came up. =/

[Mr_Phelps]

I'll post this apology here first to the people that are following this thread.  I'm going to try and work up something a bit more elegant over the next few days.

I have never been a person that is comfortable running meetings or following rules like Robert's or Sturgis.  I certainly am not the best at handling the kind of confict that errupted during the general meeting.  I have a rather unique internal moral compass that I make every effort to follow.  One of the core tennants of that compass is "praise publicly, criticize privately".  I firmly believe that castigating someone in public before thier peers is the worst possible way to try and resolve any issue.  It is why I stopped and tried to reign in my anger and hurt.  I am sorry that I let the meeting devolve to that and hope that all of you will help me as we go forward.  Maybe we could get a giant clue bat and every time I drift from proper format ya'll can beat me with it.  (Giant PLUSHY bat that is... )

I will never stop saying that our con's staff is awesome.  If any group of people can work through this I have faith that it is you, the staff of Kumoricon.

[MichaelEvans]

I suggest that your moral compass is quite idealistic, but lacking some resolution.  Specifically the gradient of the gray area between choices that so often is required in life.  It is absolutely fine in a peer to peer environment to follow such advice.  However when decisions are being made in official capacity: those effected by such decisions, their peers and subordinates will assuredly want, even demand, to know why.

In that case, you are actually doing more then criticizing, you are performing something entirely different, more akin to a judgment.  Which to be fair must be known to all those effected, without distortion, or filtering.

Thus far we have seen the results of the judgments, but not the logic behind them, the reasoning that lets us know why they are fair.  In particular one quite heavy judgment result, which is the one that was in question at the last meeting.

It does not look good when it was so recent and yet you cannot properly list anything more then a single summary point backed by a single very weak example that seems completely harmless to most listening.  It makes me personally worry that such a judgment was completed rashly, or at least without proper documentation.

However reconstructing a complex mental process takes time.  I understand this quite well.  Now that we have been given a deadline of more or less a month/the next Membership meeting; I hope that all involved in that judgment use the time provided by such a generous window to produce a well supported argument for the judgment's necessity.  I do not think it reasonable for any to insist that you release any earlier then promised, unless you are quite clear you have reached a completed version.  There may very well be other things that get in the way of working on it, and those could be personal matters you already had planned, I expect such things to have been factored in to the deadline selected.

[staze]

On a personal note:

I'm not sure it's appropriate to question someone's "Moral compass" in a public forum. That really should be done directly to that person.

But then, I guess I'm touchy on the subject. =/

[BigGuy]

Mike it was clear to almost everybody that you were upset during that meeting. If you handled the best you could that's all you can do. I'm saddened by the way things have been going recently, it'a a dark day when anime fans who all have a shared love of something turn on each other.  I'm still pretty upset myself about the things that happened and what was said.
 So I'm now formally asking for EVERYONE to try to put the past behind them and if not get over the personal grudges and vendettas at least try to act civil to each other at the meetings and on this board. Listening to all the conventions that have failed and disappeared due to infighting and backstabbing among staff made me very sad. I'd hate to see Kumoricon go the same way.
 Please remember the con absolutely can't run without it's staff and please remember that the Board of Directors and the Department heads are staff also.
 Sorry for rambling but this Con has literally changed my life for the better and I can't stand the thought of it failing and going away.

[Mr_Mustash]

I first want to apologize to Staze. I met my motion as no attack on your character. You have been very easy to work with online and at the Masquerade Ball. I'm also very grateful you for what you've done. You were one of the founding members of a convention that literally changed my life. If it wasn't for K-con I'd still be that geek that hid out in his room and didn't have any social contact. K-con has changed that and has made me a better person.

I would like to next apologize to everyone at the meeting. I know the things I said really may have caused lots of contention and animosity. I’m sorry if everything on the directors list of things to do didn’t get accomplished because of it.

Thank you,
Patrick King

[Pezzer]

I first want to apologize to Staze. I met my motion as no attack on your character. You have been very easy to work with online and at the Masquerade Ball. I'm also very grateful you for what you've done. You were one of the founding members of a convention that literally changed my life. If it wasn't for K-con I'd still be that geek that hid out in his room and didn't have any social contact. K-con has changed that and has made me a better person.

I would like to next apologize to everyone at the meeting. I know the things I said really may have caused lots of contention and animosity. I’m sorry if everything on the directors list of things to do didn’t get accomplished because of it.

Thank you,
Patrick King

Respect.

[superjaz]

yes very much Patrick i make you cookies any time

[BigGuy]

speaking of cookies, did people like the rice crispy treats I made? it was my first time using flavored cereal for the multi-colored ones. Any suggestions for next meeting I can make all kinds of things.

[Mr_Mustash]

speaking of cookies, did people like the rice crispy treats I made? it was my first time using flavored cereal for the multi-colored ones. Any suggestions for next meeting I can make all kinds of things.

OMG!!! I wanted to eat them all! But I didnt...

[superjaz]

they were good!

i hope every one liked the valintines i gave out, i know some didnt 

[Lily]

Dedicated to all those at the meeting Sunday, with tongue firmly in cheek

http://www.uclick.com/client/wpc/rl/

[staze]

reminds me of the Mike Judge movie Idiocracy. =P

[Washougal_Otaku]

Sorry, I planned on coming but I layed down to take a nap and it was night when I woke up 

Oh, I hate it when that happens!  That happened to me last Tuesday.  I was planning on dying my hair black again!  I slept so late, it was 2 i nthe morning on Wednesday!

P. S.  In case anyone is wondering, yes, the hair dye plan is for my Ranma costume.  I'll be cosplaying for a presentaion I have to do about fiction.