Talk:GWSIG Constitution

International Game Developers Association

CB:

The following issues need addressing:

• We are talking about limiting the committee size to (hypothetically) 12 members including the exec. Is this a sensible amount?

[SJ: suggests 11]

[WD: (on the related issue of how people earn a place on the committee) Personally, I think volunteers should earn their place on the committee by being an active, helpful, star volunteer. We can't pay people for their work, so this seems like the only way we can give them some recognition for their efforts. Also, this could motivate volunteers to get involved.]

[AW: 12 as a number It's a biggish number, but you're never likely to get everyone there if the idea is to have people who are both a) volunteers and b) professionals. Professionals tend to be busy on occasion (due to being professional!) I think that keeping a high percentage of the exec as working profs is to be advised as it makes IGDA more relevant and the advice etc. it gives more informed/up-to-date. That's not to say ALL the exec should be as IGDA has a wide basis of membership and many people who are working their way in have done incredible things for the organisation.]

• We need to specify a quorum for a committee meeting to be 'legal'. Should this be a fixed amount, or a proportion of the current committee members?

[SJ: suggests percentage]

[BAD: We should always have at least one exec member there and then a proportion of the committee. This is particularly important with votes, rather than just open-ended discussion.]

[AW: The quorum number - Any chance someone could do a quick check of how many exec members have turned up at meetings over the last 24 months? That would give an idea of a working number to make things quorate.]

• How long does a committee member stand for?

[BAD: Academic cycles usually go in three year stints. It's good to rotate to keep things fresh, but that's for paid positions. In this case, infinite membership is appropriate. Since, jeez, we want to keep around people who have a history of game writing and this SIG.]

[CB: The trouble with infinite committee posts is that it means there will be no openings for fresh blood unless there is natural attrition - which there may be. If the attrition clears some posts, all well and good, otherwise I feel that we need a means for people to 'cycle out the back end', so to speak. :) How does one estimate the likely cost of attrition?]

• What mechanism exists to cause a commitee member to stand down?

[CB: Regarding stepping down, I wasn't looking for punitive issues - let's hope it doesn't come to votes on censorship and such nonsense - again, I was just looking ahead to the situation where we have a bright eyed volunteer, fresh from doing good work, and we have no gaps on the committee. What then?]

• We need to specify more precisely when the Executive elections take place

[WD: within a week or two of GDC] [CB: I favour this!]

[BAD: Shortly before the Fall season so we can look at the conference/event year ahead.]

• We need to specify how the voting for the Executive takes place. Do we want to create some form of 'secret ballot'? Might need to refer to Rudy/Jason for this.

[CB: Jason is willing to moderate a 'ballot by email]

Any thoughts?