GWSIG Monthly Meeting Minutes/Meeting14

International Game Developers Association

AquaJew: *dances in preparation*
AquaJew: hmm... everyone likes to be on time? :)
Steve Jacobs: all busy folks
AquaJew: Yeah, true. I guess that flags me as lazy...
Sande: hello T, Steve
AquaJew: Hey Sande. :)
Chris Bateman: Hi everybody!
AquaJew: Hi Dr. Nikolas!
Chris Bateman: Well, I make it time to kick off, so we might as well get going.
BenServiss: Afternoon everybody!
Steve Jacobs: hey folks
BenServiss: The meeting may now begin :)
Chris Bateman: Okay, Matters Arising.
Chris Bateman: A. Writers Book. This is with the publisher, and is being sorted out. There are some minor problems, but we should have the galley proofs before next month. That's all I have to say on that for now.
Chris Bateman: B. Job Listings on the Website. Wendy hasn't arrived yet so I guess we can come back to this.
Chris Bateman: C. Writing Book at Austin. Steve?
Chris Bateman: (Oh - update on the writing book... it seems the email that crashed our mail server is the pdfs of the galley proofs. I'll have to find a way to distribute these to everyone...)
Steve Jacobs: beth?
Steve Jacobs: I think she's gonna be point woman for the booth at this point
Steve Jacobs: I also think we're waiting to hear if charles river is going to exhibit or if there's going to be a bookstore
Steve Jacobs: I do have some stuff to discuss re our space in austin if this is the right time and place
Chris Bateman: I don't think Charles River is exhibiting.
WendyDespain: i thought we were going to let people order the book on amazon or something
Chris Bateman: That was discussed, certainly, but I don't remember what was decided.
Steve Jacobs: we mostly went around in circles. I think Wnedy's right and that we were going to try to get a copy or two to exhibit at booth and give away
Chris Bateman: We perhaps should be keeping notes on our plans for Austin on the Wiki somewhere...
Steve Jacobs: ok
Steve Jacobs: I'll be passing the Torch to Beth on this one so I'll send her some mail after the meeting if she doesnt make it today
Chris Bateman: Sure; can we leave any detailed discussions on Austin for a better attended meeting, perhaps, since we have an unprecedented five apologies for absence today.
WendyDespain: and I for one have a hard time planning four months in advance :-)
Steve Jacobs: agreed though there is one point we need to address sooner rather than later and that's the contract
Chris Bateman: Sure; what the issue?
Steve Jacobs: Mostly what we have to provide to get what we get
Steve Jacobs: Need to make sure we can deliver and its ok with folks
Steve Jacobs: Exec members should have a copy have y'all looked at it???
Chris Bateman: I haven't... looking for it now..
Steve Jacobs: Ok, can put it here
Chris Bateman: Thanks.
Steve Jacobs: Dunno if we've got an issue of the quarterly between now and Austin
Chris Bateman: I was wondering about that.
Chris Bateman: Ben?
Steve Jacobs: So might only get in one instead of 2
AquaJew: Um, there's a note over the entire conversation now...
Sande: How about just pre-confernce advertising on the Website?
Steve Jacobs: That's the first point of the three listed
Chris Bateman: The other issues there don't seem problematic.
Chris Bateman: Although four email blasts is a triffle aggressive.
Steve Jacobs: Yah. Thought so as well
WendyDespain: website stuff isn't a problem, and i'm sure we'll be talking up a storm about it on the mailing list
Steve Jacobs: One per month basically
WendyDespain: hrm
BenServiss: Ah yes
Sande: Yeah, I don't know if you'd have 2 newsletters before then
WendyDespain: oh, they get to write the copy. that will be funny. :-)
BenServiss: We're going to focus on the Austin issue for the next one
BenServiss: instead of putting out two lighter ones
Steve Jacobs: SO what's the "release daye"?
WendyDespain: what happened to the hollywood in games conference issue? not enough time?
Steve Jacobs: date
BenServiss: Not enough time and we never heard from the organizers
Steve Jacobs: Ok, so we need to be able to thell them we got one out for E3 and the next scheduled one is out before Austin, sometime in August
WendyDespain: Jason said he could pull some strings to get it out at the conference
Steve Jacobs: Can we legitimately tell them that?
Steve Jacobs: Available on web in August?
WendyDespain: we got one for E3?
Steve Jacobs: I thought we did
WendyDespain: GDC
BenServiss: We put one out for GDC, not E3
Steve Jacobs: The real issue here isn't 2 vs 1 as much as it is July or august rather than september
Sande: It's a quarterly newsletter, not a conference newsletter :)
BenServiss: It's a neat hybrid of the two ideas :)
WendyDespain: so they want pre conference interviews etc. - would that be enough new content to pad up another issue, Ben?
Steve Jacobs: July or August? Do I hear July or August???
Steve Jacobs: Interview Susan
Steve Jacobs: ???
WendyDespain: i'm not sure i like having a company dictate what our editorial is
Sande: Suan had an interview for GDC in the newsletter.
Steve Jacobs: Doesn't have to be content. Could be ad and coupon from what I see there
WendyDespain: "coverage" doesn't sound like "coupon" to me
Steve Jacobs: may include a conference preview, interviews with speakers or advisors, or special offers.
Chris Bateman: Yeah, they left the door open for that. I think they just want to be mentioned in two issues in any shape or form.
WendyDespain: do they have a special offer we can .... offer?
Steve Jacobs: We likely got to ask for it
WendyDespain: and what happens if we don't have 2 issues prior to the conference?
Steve Jacobs: I'm not as worried about two
WendyDespain: come back to your chat window, Ben. :-)
BenServiss: Just catching up, crazyness in the office
Steve Jacobs: They know we're a small organization and they didn't get this to us till june essentially
Steve Jacobs: If they had gotten their dates and speakers set earlier we could have done 2
Steve Jacobs: nudge nudge wink wink
BenServiss: This two-issue mentioning thing
BenServiss: This is the first I've heard of it
Chris Bateman: I think if we tell them there's only going to be one other quarterly issue before the conference it will be fine.
Steve Jacobs: Actually I sent this out about a week or so ago
Steve Jacobs: Agreed Chris
WendyDespain: sent it to who?
Steve Jacobs: 2 issues not a problem
Chris Bateman: I'm starting to get wary of the time being spent on this point. Do we have enough to proceed in some manner?
Steve Jacobs: If I know we will have 1 issue in july or august instead of september and if we don't mind 4 e-mails they dictate I can move ahead
WendyDespain: looks like we just need to ask them if we can have a special offer and let them know there will only be one more issue before sept.
Steve Jacobs: If we have issues with those then I need to know
Chris Bateman: I think it should be fine.
WendyDespain: 4 emails - not a problem
Steve Jacobs: ok
Steve Jacobs: I will handle the game initiative from here
Chris Bateman: C. Write Club on the website - Wendy?
Steve Jacobs: though a month from ben would help :-)
Chris Bateman: & D. ESRB info (also Wendy)
Chris Bateman: Thanks Steve! Appreciate it.
Steve Jacobs: ok must duck out for 10 minutes will read through what I missed when I get back
Chris Bateman: np
WendyDespain: write club - I'm waiting to hear who the winners were, if we have pictures, and if we have samples of their winning entries
WendyDespain: i'll nudge Ed about this again, but as I think he said he's in the middle of a cross-country move, I don't see it happening soon
WendyDespain: it's not urgent though. can wait till we get materials
Chris Bateman: Wendy: everything I have on it is here:
Chris Bateman: http://onlyagame.typepad.com/only_a_game/2006/03/gdc_write_club.html
Chris Bateman: No pictures, but I *do* have samples of the winners entries.
WendyDespain: As for ESRB, I wrote up an article which is currently caught in the website redesign
WendyDespain: you can take it off the agenda
Chris Bateman: Excellent. Well, excellent that there is an article. :)
Chris Bateman: OK, thanks.
Chris Bateman: (Shall I leave Write club on for now?)
WendyDespain: thanks for the url - i'm hapyp to hear someone got the write club entries - yeah, i'm done
Chris Bateman: F. Survey questions & timing: demographics, rates, focus - is Beth here disguised as AquaJew?
Sande: Survey of BG Writers is on Wiki
AquaJew: Sorry, I doubt she has my beard.
Sande: I sent some general comments to Beth, Wendy, and Andy
Chris Bateman: OK.
WendyDespain: it's in progress
Chris Bateman: Is there any action pending on this one?
WendyDespain: the committee seems to have formed and is moving along
Chris Bateman: OK. So we should just check on the progress on this one.
WendyDespain: right
Chris Bateman: We skipped over (B) Job listings on website - Wendy?
WendyDespain: i talked with Jason in depth about the job listings when i saw him at E3. He's wary of putting up fulltime job listings
Chris Bateman: Yes, I thought this might be an issue.
WendyDespain: but he's cool with putting up contract job listings
WendyDespain: and listing writers for hire
Chris Bateman: OK. Is there anything to stop this going ahead for now then?
WendyDespain: IGDA as a whole is revisiting the FT job listings issue, and writing jobs will be wrapped into that
WendyDespain: just the website redesign
WendyDespain: so no - it's resolved. you can take it off the agenda. :-)
Chris Bateman: Thanks!
Chris Bateman: It's my only pleasure as chair. :D
Chris Bateman: OK, that takes care of MA. Onto the agenda proper.
Chris Bateman: Slight change to the agenda that was in the Note box...
Chris Bateman: 1. Constitutional Amendment: Quorum, maximum committee size? (Chris Bateman)
Chris Bateman: I've become accutely aware that our constitution is incomplete. In particular, we haven't set a quorum - which means we don't know how many committee members need to be present for it to be a legitimate committee meeting.
Steve Jacobs: back
Chris Bateman: Also, we have to decide whether or not we need to set a maximum number of committee members.
Chris Bateman: And the consitution says 'annual elections' for the committee members but provides no mechanisms for doing so! The logistics of such an operation may make it untenable.
WendyDespain: exec board members
Chris Bateman: I don't think we can fix all of this now, but we *do* need to set a quorum.
Chris Bateman: Annual elections for the exec?
WendyDespain: the exec board members are supposed to be elected annually. yeah.
Chris Bateman: That's easy if that's the case, as the committee can vote on the eec.
Chris Bateman: Oh right, that's fine then.
WendyDespain: yeah, but the constitution doesn't say who votes :-)
Chris Bateman: It'll be all committee members.
Chris Bateman: But it should say that. :)
Chris Bateman: We need to make sure we have a set time for elections of it won't happen. It was supposed to be after GDC.
Chris Bateman: Do we want to schedule a vote on the executive 'now', or are we happy to amend the constitution to say 'exec election within one month of GDC' and have the first one next year?
Steve Jacobs: either works
WendyDespain: oh, i'm wrong. the constitution does say the committee votes
WendyDespain: http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/GWSIG_Constitution
Chris Bateman: Also, do we want to set a maximum committee size or not? At the moment we have (I think) ten committee members. We can certainly take a few more, but do we want to set a 'hard limit'?
Chris Bateman: We certainly have people like Beth and Sande who aren't on the committee but should be. Maybe Susan too, if she wants to.
WendyDespain: http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Game_Writers_SIG/Membership
WendyDespain: there are currently 7 on the committee
BenServiss: back from the void, apologies
Sande: I think attendance of the committee mtgs should be a requirement of the membership, although there can be some absences
BenServiss: That's more or less how it is now
WendyDespain: the constitution says you can't miss 2 meetings without apologies
Chris Bateman: Which everyone has more or less abided by thus far.
Sande: Is there a limit on apologies?
Chris Bateman: No. We have to be realistic; not everyone can make every meeting.
Chris Bateman: This also feeds into the other issue, which is:</b> when does a committee post "expire"?
Chris Bateman: We can't have life memberships for committee posts - it'd be insane!
Chris Bateman: Re: 7 on the committee... it's 7+3. The Exec are still on the committee.
WendyDespain: if we set a limit on the number of committee members, we can set an exact number for a quorum. otherwise, it's 2/3rds or something
WendyDespain: ah, I see
AquaJew: How many people are currently on the writer's SIG?
Chris Bateman: A few hundred?
Chris Bateman: We don't know is the short answer. :)
WendyDespain: the general mailing list has 187 members
Chris Bateman: Re: quorum size, 2/3rds will make several meetings invalid. Like this one!
AquaJew: I suggest 15 committee members then; good amount of representation, an odd number to break ties, not too many people so meetings can go decently, and when a few are out, you still have enough to discuss details (say a minimum of 11)...
Chris Bateman: Perhaps half the committe should be considered quorate?
Chris Bateman: I'm not sure how committee members will leave, to be honest. That's still unclear.
Chris Bateman: Hence half of the problems.
Chris Bateman: We've been rather cavalier about this until now, but it's starting to become and issue we can't ignore.
AquaJew: Every 3 years have a re-election?
Chris Bateman: Sadly, it's also an issue that may be too big to handle in this meeting alone.
WendyDespain: well, we have almost half of the 10 :-)
Sande: ah. obviously something that will need to be discussed.... I think half of committee is enough.
WendyDespain: we could take it to the committee mailing list
Chris Bateman: (And I apologise to Sande, because the next agenda point is the vote to co-opt her onto the committee...)
Chris Bateman: Steve: are you happy with 50% as quorum? Because as two members of the exec, we can ratify that right now.
AquaJew: In the US, you "re-apply" every 4 years, and can serve two terms back to back, then you need to step down for a minimum of one term (I believe).
Sande: and I think with 15, you'd have to go to a list and ask for people who are interested, and it would cause more scheduling headaches.
Sande: so, I would be in favor of 10 or less.
WendyDespain: 50% would make this meeting invalid
Sande: 50% of your current membership?
Steve Jacobs: 15's too big for any number of reasons
Chris Bateman: But Steve and I can still pass resolutions as the exec.
Chris Bateman: As long as two members of the exec agree, we can pass something - but we are then accountable to the committee for anything we ratify in this way.
Chris Bateman: It's supposed to be for "emergency powers"
WendyDespain: sure, you can. I'm just saying - if you pass it as exec members, we'd have to disband this as an official meeting :-)
Chris Bateman: And I guess, this isn't an emergency.
Steve Jacobs: "I GOt the Power!"
Sande: I'm counting 2 execs, 2 members, isn't that 4?
WendyDespain: we need 5
Chris Bateman: Perhaps we should schedule another meeting next week to discuss *just* the constitution, and committee members? It's a big issue, and we should get as many of the current committee involved in these decisions as we can.
AquaJew: I don't really count, I don't think. :)
Sande: but you have a odd number of members?
Chris Bateman: We have 10 on the committee, including the exec.
WendyDespain: i agree - we either need to schedule another meeting or take the discussion to the mailing list
Chris Bateman: Does anyone have an objection to scheduling a meeting next week to revise the constitution?
WendyDespain: no objection
Sande: no
Sande: just not on the 31st... might have a scheduling conflict
Chris Bateman: Thursday June 1st?
Sande: good so far
Chris Bateman: Steve?
AquaJew: I'll be happy; June 1st is payday. :)
Steve Jacobs: No Objections
Steve Jacobs: Except I caqnt make it :-)
WendyDespain: I'm not sure what my Thursday holds. I'd prefer earlier in the week, but again - the scheduling may need to happen on the mailing list
Chris Bateman: I think we should probably engage discussion on the mailing list to begin with, then we can tie it all together in a meeting.
Sande: Well, it might be a better discussion to do on the mailing list.
Chris Bateman: I'd prefer to have a clear 'end point' to the discussion, otherwise it will go on forever. Anyway, for the time being, let's commence discussion on the constitution on the mailing list.
WendyDespain: ok
WendyDespain: i'm fine with a meeting to tie up lose ends
Chris Bateman: I'm concerned that Steve can't make that date, but we can sort out scheduling on the list. For now, we should move on.
Chris Bateman: 2. Vote to adopt Sande Chen as a committee member (Chris Bateman)
Steve Jacobs: movin
Chris Bateman: I guess this should wait utnil we resolve the constitutional "crisis."
Steve Jacobs: second
Sande: Ah, then I vote for no constitution crisis :)
Chris Bateman: :)
Chris Bateman: Sande - is there any reason you need to be a ratified committee member this week?
Sande: I'd like to be because if you re-write the constitution, I may be precluded.
Chris Bateman: Well I'm keen that you and Beth should have your shot at the committee whatever happens.
Chris Bateman: And Susan too, if she wants the post.
AquaJew: Hey Beth. :)
Beth A. Dillon: As I'm late. Sick and dragging around at 10am.
WendyDespain: hey look, if we say Beth's name often enough she shows up :-)
Beth A. Dillon: I am being spoken of.... aaahhhh!
Steve Jacobs: Which Susuan?
Sande: I have been on the list since it began, and even before then, I was on Mark Barrett's CC list, which was the writers mailing list
Chris Bateman: That could be handy. And scary. :)
Beth A. Dillon: I am so barely functional right now. I can type, woo!
Sande: I think that I have been reasonably involved, and I simply did not ask for a committee membership.
Sande: When I asked Andy Walsh about it, he said he simply asked.
Sande: So if it was a matter of asking, then I'm asking.
Chris Bateman: Yeah, we co-opted him in an earlier meeting.
Chris Bateman: Well we basically have two choices:</b> either we grant Sande a post now, or we make all the committee members go thorugh some sort of selection process, along with any additional candidates.
Sande: I also am keeping connection with the WGA New Media Caucus
Chris Bateman: Does anyone have any strong feelings on how best to resolve this?
WendyDespain: as i recall, the committee was originally made up mostly of the poeple who showed up to the first meeting and expressed an interest. the meeting minutes are available on the wiki if anyone wants to check, though
Chris Bateman: Wendy - that is about the size of it.
BenServiss: What happened to the obstacle course I had to go through?
Beth A. Dillon: Hmm.
Chris Bateman: Ben:</b> that was a hazing. :D
Steve Jacobs: Then we as a committee voted who should be exec as I recall
BenServiss: I thought everyone had to scale the wall and run through the tires
WendyDespain: i just like to watch virile young men run
Beth A. Dillon: Heh heh heh.
BenServiss: Speaking of, hey Rich!
WendyDespain: hey look! Dansky! Perhaps he can resolve this
Chris Bateman: [This meeting is going to overrun - as de factor chair, I apologise for any inconvenience caused]
Chris Bateman: facto, rather
Steve Jacobs: have time
Dansky: Greetings from Shanghai, folks
Steve Jacobs: can run over
Beth A. Dillon: Is it okay if I speak for my "case"?
Chris Bateman: Please do!
Steve Jacobs: No :-)
Beth A. Dillon: Heh heh
Beth A. Dillon: If the Survey goes well, and the booth/conference coordination at AGC, THEN think of me for the committee.
WendyDespain: I take full responsibility for Beth not asking the committee as a whole sooner. she asked me how it worked and I steered her wrong. My bad.
Beth A. Dillon: Maybe there needs to be a certain number of tasks or steps one takes as a volunteer.
AquaJew: The ceremonial "Dance of the Drunken Llama" must be performed by all candidates as well....
Beth A. Dillon: Otherwise we just have inactive volunteers and several committee members. Rather than steering committee members and active volunteers.
Chris Bateman: Beth - I think this is one of many issues we need to resolve in theconstitution.
Beth A. Dillon: Hey with this NyQuil in me...
WendyDespain: now that Rich is here, we could vote to coopt both Beth and Sande onto the committee right now :-)
BenServiss: Personally I'm fine with how the setup is.
Steve Jacobs: beth, you're supposed to use the orange stuff for daytine :-)
Beth A. Dillon: If there is an -issue- with me coordinating projects at the volunteer level, then okay, we can talk further about that.
Chris Bateman: Wendy - I think we should do that, because it will simplify things. Rich and Steve - are you in accord on this?
BenServiss: Since for people to realize that they can get on the committee by just asking, they have to be regular contributors in the first place.
Chris Bateman: THEN we'll close the committee until the constitution is resolved. :)
Beth A. Dillon: Ha.
Steve Jacobs: no issue with you running austin booth as volunteer or committee member
Steve Jacobs: It was a function of an exec committee member only cuz I was goofy enough to take it on :-)
Beth A. Dillon: Ahhh okay
Steve Jacobs: and I happened to be both
WendyDespain: I vote to coopt both Beth and Sande onto the committee
Chris Bateman: I gleefully back this!
Dansky: I am in accord. As a side note, I would put forth that one of the efforts of the committee should be toward getting more volunteers who aren't on the committee.
Chris Bateman: Well if this meeting has shown us anything its that we've let the committee get into a complete tangled flower bed. We can fix it, though.
Beth A. Dillon: Heh, in agreement with Rich there.
Steve Jacobs: I keep trying to get one of my students volunteered to help with survey and/or rewriting white papers but no one responds  :-)
WendyDespain: I think your student needs to respond
AquaJew: I'll be coming to the meetings from now on (provided I get meeting info on time), if that helps any...
WendyDespain: as far as we know, he's a figment of your imagination :-)
Beth A. Dillon: Survey is okay.
Dansky: Poor sucker volunteered. He's ours now :-)
Steve Jacobs: Sorry, I must have missed the opportunity to get y'all in touch. I was waiting for a "Go Ahead Steve" and I musta missed it
Steve Jacobs: my bad
Chris Bateman: Steve: I just need consent from you to co-opt Ben and Sande.
Beth A. Dillon: THANKS CHRIS
Steve Jacobs: Ben??
Beth A. Dillon: Where's my kleenex?
Steve Jacobs: :-)
BenServiss: Note to self- change first two letters of name
Steve Jacobs: Ok Chris, I'll vote yes to that
WendyDespain: you are ours forever, Ben
Chris Bateman: OK. Done!
Sande: Yay!
Chris Bateman: Beth, Sande: welcome to the committee!
Chris Bateman: Sorry for making you wait!
WendyDespain: Chris - you did mean Beth, right?
Steve Jacobs: Will expect requisite bribe from new members any day now
Beth A. Dillon: And hurrah.
Beth A. Dillon: No worries, I'm patient.
Chris Bateman: I did mean Beth, yes. :)
WendyDespain: and Steve, you did too?
Chris Bateman: Just to close this point down, can we have a volunteer to introduce the constitutional issues to the committee list after this meeting?
Dansky: Sande, Beth, welcome to our merry little band.
Dansky: Seconded
Steve Jacobs: I hearby vote for BETH A. DILLON to assume her rightful place on the committee
Chris Bateman: :D
Beth A. Dillon: It sounds so official.
Steve Jacobs: Ben a Dillon and Beth a Serviss will need to wait tilo next year
Beth A. Dillon: Heehee
WendyDespain: thanks steve. :-) As keeper of the minutes I have to be like this sometimes
Chris Bateman: While I wait for a volunteer, we should press on....
Steve Jacobs: I bow to your recordkeepingness
Chris Bateman: 3. New Initiatives Launch (Chris Bateman)
Beth A. Dillon: Onward!
Chris Bateman: I have no idea what this is about, but I'm certain it has something to do with Wendy.
Chris Bateman: :)
WendyDespain: if no one else wants to volunteer to bring up the constitutional issues - I will do it
WendyDespain: ah, Chris. I do heart you so.
Sande: I'm adopting a wait and see on the constitutional issues, since I am no doubt will have to do the same with WIGI
WendyDespain: this is the #$%& list of innitiatives for the new year we were supposed to talk about after GDC
Chris Bateman: Yeah, I know. >:)
Beth A. Dillon: Heh heh
AquaJew: brb
WendyDespain: it's nice to know you're fully aware of how to drive me nuts :-)
Chris Bateman: Do you mind if we bounce it to the next committee meeting, since we are running so damnably late? Or is it now becoming an embarrasment?
WendyDespain: well, I'm embarrassed. But since nobody else seems to be it can be bounced.
Chris Bateman: Sorry about this - our meetings are getting to the point whereby 1 hour every month is insufficient.
Beth A. Dillon: Which is a good thing!
Chris Bateman: We need to try and spot those issues - like the constitution - which would be better dealt with outside of the meeting.
WendyDespain: it's possible we're not using the mailing lists to their full potential and putting everything off to the meetings
Sande: True
Beth A. Dillon: -Yes-
Chris Bateman: I am afraid of that, yes.
Steve Jacobs: Beth and I will do a bunch of Austin stuff via e-mail or phone and then notify the committee once we know what we wanna do and what we'll need from volunteers and such
WendyDespain: well, the first step in making a change is recognizing there's a problem.
Beth A. Dillon: And the meetings are often announced too late on the overall list for people to schedule in coming.
Sande: Perhaps a week's notice would be optimal.
Chris Bateman: The meetings are announced a month in advance - it just requires expert knowledge to find those details! :)
Sande: then a reminder :)
Beth A. Dillon: Right, like being on the committee list.
WendyDespain: or reading the minutes which are publicized to the list
Beth A. Dillon: And having access to the link.
Sande: I assume they are web-savvy...
WendyDespain: Steve, could we get you to add the link to the wiki?
Beth A. Dillon: New members won't have expert knowledge.
WendyDespain: so the agenda and the link are in the same place
Beth A. Dillon: Is the "get new members" part of the New Initiatives Launch, and if so, are we putting that off until next time?
Beth A. Dillon: Good plan Wendy.
Chris Bateman: Well to be honest, I'd prefer it if there was a "hurdle" to jump for people to get the link - because if 10% of the general membership came to a single meeting, we'd be incapable of doing any business. But I personally apologise to those like Sande and Beth who are involved in running things but have been cut out thus far. Sorry. :(
Chris Bateman: But looking on the wiki is a sufficient hurdle.
Beth A. Dillon: Maybe we need a general membership meeting and a committee meeting?
Sande: I just do a Google search, if I didn't know.
Beth A. Dillon: Just to make work sooo difficult for everyone.
Steve Jacobs: soryy
Steve Jacobs: sent it to chris
Steve Jacobs: Austin link you mean
WendyDespain: it looks like this chat system has a "stage" - the committee could go up on the stage and the 50 general members could watch from the audience
Steve Jacobs: Oh, Breeze
Sande: like a LiveMeeting?
Steve Jacobs: yah
Beth A. Dillon: Heehee
Chris Bateman: If that's easy to set up, that would be fine.
Beth A. Dillon: But we're looking for more volunteer involvement, right?
Chris Bateman: More volunteers would be good, yes.
WendyDespain: i have experience moderating - taking questions from the audience etc. if we need someone who can do that too
Beth A. Dillon: Yeah
Sande: Ideally, we'd have initiatives fronted by committee members and staffed by volunteers.
Steve Jacobs: Havent used that function yet Wendy, but can get support to check it out
WendyDespain: it's da bomb
Steve Jacobs: Must wander off to other meeting
WendyDespain: people on stage can only see the convo from other people on stage
Chris Bateman: Steve- before you go...
Steve Jacobs: Will post next meeting to web
Steve Jacobs: yah
Chris Bateman: Next meeting Thursday 22nd June?
Chris Bateman: Can you make that? What about anyone else?
Sande: I will be in New York!
Steve Jacobs: checking
WendyDespain: some of this involvement vs. too many people at the meeting can be resolved by using the mailing lists to better effect
Beth A. Dillon: I'll be there
AquaJew: I also have a lot of experience moderating...
Steve Jacobs: june 22nd good
Beth A. Dillon: I just have to say this...
AquaJew: I can make June 22nd.
Beth A. Dillon: "It's the Aquatic Jew!"
AquaJew: Hahaha. :) *bows*
WendyDespain: i don't have any currently scheduled conflicts on the 22nd
AquaJew: you forgot "for JUSTICE!"
Sande: I can not make June 22
Beth A. Dillon: Heeeheehee
Sande: but never mind me...
Sande: I can adopt Ben as a proxy :)
Chris Bateman: Sande - we always have some people that can make it. As long as most make it, we're usually okay.
Sande: yup
Chris Bateman: You just drew the short straw this time. :)
Chris Bateman: Okay, I'm going to try and tie this up.
Chris Bateman: One more point - it can be short:
Sande: I have announcement.
Chris Bateman: 4. Specific GDC session proposals (Chris Bateman). What I want to know is:</b> are we going to discuss this at all, or do we just want a free for all?
Chris Bateman: And in parallel, we can open the floor for AOB (any other business) - like Sande's announcement. :)
Steve Jacobs: I think we should discuss it
WendyDespain: what's the deadline for GDC proposals? with everything else going on we may not have time for much more than reminders.
Beth A. Dillon: So we're not sending in the same proposals.
Steve Jacobs: Though not now :-) Call's not out yet so we're in good shape for June I think
Sande: The New Media Caucus of the Writers Guild of American has convinced the Writers Guild to open up a category of Video Game Writing to be eligible for the Writers Guild Awards.
Steve Jacobs: nice
Chris Bateman: Cool.
WendyDespain: yay for awards
Beth A. Dillon: Cool!
Chris Bateman: OK, since some people want the discussion, we should set this in motion at some future date... I'll leave a note on the committee.
Dansky: I suggest we set up a clearinghouse for proposals - wiki,mailing list, whatever - so people can get feedback if they want it and there's no toe-stepping
Dansky: But that's just me, and I'm jet-lagged
Sande: Or if you want to form a panel....
Steve Jacobs: how bout toe dancing?
AquaJew: Will I still be allowed to attend the meetings?
WendyDespain: yay for the wiki
AquaJew: If we go to the more exclusive ones...
Chris Bateman: I think Steve has invited you as a crony, so no problem. :)
AquaJew: Uh oh.
WendyDespain: If I have anything to say about it, everyone will still be able to attend meetings - if the crowd gets too big we'll make use of technology to manage it then
Beth A. Dillon: Heh!
Steve Jacobs: now what am I being blamed for??
Chris Bateman: I agree that the wiki is a good place to record data on GDC proposals, but it might be best to kick off on the list so we can find out who is going to submit first.
Beth A. Dillon: Yeah
Chris Bateman: OK. That covers this point for now; it will recur in the next meeting, where hopefully we will have more room to maneuvre.
Chris Bateman: Any Other AOB?
WendyDespain: not from me
Chris Bateman: *sound of tumbleweeds*
Beth A. Dillon: Heh
AquaJew: Um, hi. :)
Dansky: I'll do a proposal type thingie on the GDC proposal review
Chris Bateman: Okay, thanks for your patience everybody, congratulations to Beth and Sande for being drafted onboard, and I declare this meeting adjourned.