Discussions with 2010 KOTESOL National Candidates

Discussions with 2010 KOTESOL National Candidates
October 3, 2010

Candidates for KOTESOL National Council (in order of appearance)
00:20  Stafford Lumsden, Conference Co-chair
17:40  Doug Huffer,  Nominations & Elections Chair
37:00 Aaron Jolly, 2nd Vice President
55:45 Peadar Callaghan, 1st Vice President

KOTESOL 2010 Candidates
Online Voting October 4~14
Onsite Voting at the International Conference Oct. 16~17
More informatin about elections & candidates at: http://kotesol.org/?q=elections

Post-show Roundtable Discussion Here

Chat Log
06:51:43  craignl ->  Good evening
07:05:32  craignl ->  Good evening Peadar
07:05:46  peadar ->  evening
07:15:15  peadar ->  hi room
07:16:54  craignl ->  Evening all
07:17:23  peadar ->  I believe if anyone has questions please speak up
07:20:02  saradavila ->  Question for Conference Chair and Co-Chair: This year conference acceptence/rejection process was handled in a manner I felt was very unprofessional. I'd like to know how the conference will address this issue in the future to make the process more personal, and show more respect for all canidates submitting papers for the call.
07:21:56  Jeff ->  http://shomuni.blogspot.com/
07:24:32  chosunbimbo ->  @Sara I think you have to take into consideration there were in excess of 300 proposals received by the program team - While they were form letters that people received they were professional and in line with any other rejection or acceptance letter you might have received from any other organisation
07:25:55  chosunbimbo ->  This will be the first year in A LONG TIME there have been contests for various positions
07:26:05  chosunbimbo ->  Am I the only one here?
07:26:06  chosunbimbo ->  Hello
07:26:12  chosunbimbo ->  Is this thing on?
07:26:21  peadar ->  its here
07:26:22  chosunbimbo ->  *tap* *tap*
07:27:07  peadar ->  I can however say having recieved one of those letters it was not inline with what was sent to me last year
07:27:20  chosunbimbo ->  rejection letter?
07:27:36  peadar ->  was rejected last year and accepted this year
07:30:08  chosunbimbo ->  interesting - I got one - but being on concomm I knew the same day that the mail went out and paid it little attention - what did it say
07:31:08  peadar ->  it required you to download and check a full list of accepted proposals to see if you had ben accepted or rejected
07:31:52  craignl ->  I find Paedar's comment on rejection/acceptance from year to year interesting. As someone who participated in the vetting process, I was somewhat concerned that there were no clear guidelines for vetting proposals. Having been part of Conference planning teams, both international, that's one area the Conference Committee might consider for improvment (sorry that I'm veering a bit off topic).
07:32:52  craignl ->  Sorry, the last sentence should read '...both international and national'
07:33:06  peadar ->  its a great point I just worry that the way the notifications were handeld this year might discourage presenters in the future
07:33:49  saradavila ->  I've been a presenter at the international for about five years. The acceptance/rejection process this year was much different form last year.
07:34:05  saradavila ->  This year to find out if you were accepted or rejected you had to read a list of accepted proposals.
07:34:18  saradavila ->  Last year a form letter was sent to presenters who had been accepted.
07:34:37  saradavila ->  A seperate letter to presenters who had been rejected, thanking them for time and encouraging them to resubmit.
07:34:48  craignl ->  Yes, usually when I have made proposals to other international conferences I have usually gotten a message courteously but clearly saying 'Yes' or 'No'
07:35:35  chosunbimbo ->  Ah I see - I didn't realise it was just one email to everyone who submitted a paper...
07:35:59  saradavila ->  When I received the letter and was asked to see if I was on the list of accepted proposals, I have to say, I was insulted. Going through that list I didn't even see my name the first time as I was so upset. There is impersonal and then there is just unprofessional. I'm sorry, the way it was handled this year was unprofessional.
07:36:40  MattinDaegu ->  is there any particular reason why they changed the process?
07:37:13  saradavila ->  For submitters who were putting in proposals for the first time, I can't imagine the let down for those that were accepted. I mean, really, just a moment to get that letter, even a form letter, that says "Congradulations, your paper made it" is an achievement. I remember the first one I got, I still have it.
07:37:44  craignl ->  I wonder if the pressure of time caused a certain 'cutting of corners' - not to excuse what happened, but to explain
07:38:11  saradavila ->  Those presenters who were accepted for the first time this year lost out on that experience, and I for one, am rather offended that an organization and large as KOTESOL, with a conference fielding as many proposals as we have, would use this particular method.
07:38:43  saradavila ->  Being an experience EXCEL user it would take four minutes to set up two seperate lists for accepted and rejected proposals.
07:38:53  saradavila ->  experienced
07:40:07  craignl ->  This may lead on to a larger issue - for an international conference like ours, I've begun to think having a daedline for proposals being as close to the Conference date as it is, especially when compared to other conferences, is not a good thing. Anyone else with thoughts on this?
07:40:28  saradavila ->  As I recall the deadline was May 31st for proposals.
07:40:40  craignl ->  I believe it was extended
07:41:02  chosunbimbo ->  5 months - is not all that short....
07:41:03  saradavila ->  Further, if there are no clear guidelines in the vetting process I have to wonder about whether or not new presenters are truly being considered as presentations.
07:41:28  MattinDaegu ->  for an international conference, particularly for presenters from outside of Korea, I would say they need a little more time to make plans, books tickets etc.
07:41:49  saradavila ->  I've also been rather unhappy with the scheduling process. At the moment my presentation is scheduled in clear conflict with the available times I submitted to present. I am not the only presenter who has expereinced this problem.
07:42:00  chosunbimbo ->  I'm interested in what you say Craig - my understanding (not my dept) as that there was a much more thorough vetting process this year
07:42:05  saradavila ->  @Jeff, EPIK show, absolutely.
07:42:56  peadar ->  does anyone have any opinions on the proposed then unproposed changes to the constitution
07:43:04  MattinDaegu ->  is the vetting process codified in the bylaws?
07:43:05  chosunbimbo ->  Yes many
07:43:11  saradavila ->  If we are recieving so many proposals I am curious about the need to extend?
07:43:19  Jeff ->  http://www.koreabridge.com/kotesol/busan04/
07:43:29  chosunbimbo ->  We won't hold he fact that he's Australian against Aaron
07:43:38  peadar ->  @ chosun please raise the issues
07:43:45  saradavila ->  Considering the push during last years election for communication I find the lack of presentaiton to all members of proposed changes telling.
07:43:55  peadar ->  its a good place to discuss them
07:44:33  chosunbimbo ->  See now, where was this lack of communication? I got the draft, read the changes, and am happy to cast my vote having made up my mind...
07:45:21  chosunbimbo ->  Yay! More Chapterr Conferences! i want to go to Jeju!
07:46:57  peadar ->  @chosun I know of two seperate drafts of the changes that were sent out
07:47:06  chosunbimbo ->  On the tabling of the amendments - it now means that the new term of National Council will start with some members not being able to vote - i.e. the o-Chair, who, because of precedent usually has a voting seat on Council, but whose vote is not set in stone as it were in the constitution
07:47:08  saradavila ->  I have not received a draft.
07:47:18  craignl ->  @chosun - The 'lack of communication' refers to the proposed changes to the Constitution and Bylaws?
07:47:33  chosunbimbo ->  Web presence - Hell Yes
07:48:32  MattinDaegu ->  just reading the charter...it states that the proposed changes must be sent out to all members at least 30 days prior to the vote...I never got a copy, Sara hasn't...
07:48:48  MattinDaegu ->  I'm sure we're not the only ones
07:48:55  craignl ->  Sorry I was just checking some things - well, the fact is that two versions of the proposed changes, unalike, went around to the membership. Members were not in possession of the same set of proposed changes
07:49:00  dhuffer ->  Vote is not occuring right now. 
07:49:06  chosunbimbo ->  OK some people didn't get it, I'm not saying there is an element of malfesence, but it leaves council in a position where a) status quo remains (and i believe one "bloq on council wants this) and b) the same bloq is threatened by another bloq who might vote against them because they doin't have the numbers
07:49:22  chosunbimbo ->  That and some general ineptitude in getting the info out to everyone
07:49:26  craignl ->  True, and a good decision was made to delay the vote on this.
07:50:37  chosunbimbo ->  Yay! More kotesol Journal!
07:50:39  peadar ->  why is it a good decision to not manage to propose something that has been worked on for 8 months
07:51:02  chosunbimbo ->  indeed - By Laws can be voted for at the ABM on Sunday
07:51:09  peadar ->  do to "some general ineptitude"
07:51:17  chosunbimbo ->  As can the change in the constitution according to one reading of the rules
07:52:08  craignl ->  I'm sorry - what reading is that?
07:52:14  MattinDaegu ->  will they be listing what said proposed changes are in full at the conference?
07:52:36  dhuffer ->  I think they're still discussing the changes
07:53:08  MattinDaegu ->  will they be taking the opportunity presented by the international conference to discuss the changes with regular members?
07:53:08  peadar ->  call sig
07:54:07  dhuffer ->  I was told they'd be taken up at the next national council meeting - I think that's the leadership retreat in Dec or Jan
07:54:46  peadar ->  sadly this will not have a membership voting opportunity
07:55:21  saradavila ->  As for the KTT it would be great to see a bit more compesntation for preparation and travel.
07:55:31  MattinDaegu ->  but there is a great opportunity to at least show what the proposed changes are at this conference...why won't they be taking advantage of it...even to just have them on display...
07:56:22  craignl ->  Well, if the changes are properly hammered out at the next Council, they will have to be properly sent out, 30 days for perusal/debate, and then an electronic ballot can be taken
07:56:40  saradavila ->  Waves!
07:56:44  saradavila ->  It's that Sara.
07:57:24  saradavila ->  As to the journal it would nice to see grants reinstated to encourage research.
07:57:38  peadar ->  or publicity about it
07:57:58  MattinDaegu ->  ok, but my point is, why aren't regular members being consulted, even in a broad sense, at an international forum which would be a perfect opportunity...and the issue raised by Chosun about bloqs could be made clear to the general members who would then be better able to choose appropriate leadership
07:58:33  chosunbimbo ->  @Matt - come to the ABM on Sunday and ask The National Council - They'll be there.
07:58:53  MattinDaegu ->  I'm already planning on it!
07:58:57  dhuffer ->  I agree
07:59:22  dhuffer ->  But I don't think they have proposals close enough to discuss.
07:59:37  chosunbimbo ->  @Matt - I think we're all aware of the bloqs aren't we...?
08:00:12  chosunbimbo ->  3...2...1...
08:00:41  MattinDaegu ->  no, I've never been to the national conference before...as a poli-sci major, they'll probably become evident quickly enough but the point being I think not every member will be so aware, and they need the opportunity to observe their leadership
08:00:51  saradavila ->  Finally video....Wee...
08:00:57  dhuffer ->  echo
08:01:19  chosunbimbo ->  Sorry - no video from me...winnie the pooh jimjams not so flattering
08:02:05  MattinDaegu ->  is everyone using video?
08:02:10  saradavila ->  Winnie makes everything flattering.
08:02:17  dhuffer ->  just Peader
08:02:20  chosunbimbo ->  @Sara heeheehee
08:03:09  saradavila ->  Will there be no discussion of by law issues at the National Conference, or is this the Saturday of the National Conference?
08:03:34  chosunbimbo ->  The Annual Business meeting will be the opportunity to bring it up Sunday 4pm
08:03:45  chosunbimbo ->  Floor is open to all members
08:03:56  MattinDaegu ->  that's irritating...I have to work in Daegu on Sunday...can't be there
08:04:05  dhuffer ->  You can bring it up, but they'll probably sandbag
08:04:30  saradavila ->  Communication has definately been an issue this year.
08:04:43  chosunbimbo ->  Well i am one of about 4 people I know who have yet to receive a reply from Bob Caprilis after i wrote him this week on the subject
08:04:58  saradavila ->  There have been a number of meetings and events this year that have not been well announced to the general members.
08:05:01  chosunbimbo ->  Other things - no council minutes being distributed
08:05:09  dhuffer ->  he sent out mass email.  I think that was your reply
08:05:11  chosunbimbo ->  who knows what they're up to....
08:05:15  chosunbimbo ->  heeheehee
08:05:24  dhuffer ->  and where's the budget been?
08:05:31  MattinDaegu ->  world domination by the cunning use of bylaws
08:05:37  saradavila ->  Is the budget out yet? Are we still running without a budget?
08:05:46  chosunbimbo ->  see Matt - you do know the bloqs
08:05:49  MattinDaegu ->  lol
08:06:06  dhuffer ->  I saw one on FB Concerned Members group.  But nothing official from KOTESOL
08:06:08  saradavila ->  Suncheon Outreach Workshop, represent!
08:06:15  saradavila ->  Great group of teachers yesterday!
08:06:52  saradavila ->  I was there as a KTT invited speaker, good time.
08:08:02  MattinDaegu ->  IX. Amendments. The Bylaws may be amended by a majority vote of members provided that notice of the proposed change has been given to all members at least thirty days before the vote. The Bylaws may be amended without such prior notice only at the Annual Business Meeting, and in that case the proposal shall require approval by three-fourths of the members present.
08:08:25  chosunbimbo ->  @matt - indeed
08:08:27  MattinDaegu ->  this seems to imply that there MUST be a vote on the bylaws, or any proposals
08:08:52  craignl ->  Which version, though? Two versions went out
08:09:08  MattinDaegu ->  and if they don't have a quarum, the vote would, according to Robert's Rules of Order, it would not be a valid vote...this is the one currently up on the KOTESOL website
08:09:11  chosunbimbo ->  The problem being - soemone would have to put in the time and develop changes, distribute and talk about them at the meeting and then propose a vote without the motion being voted down
08:09:47  chosunbimbo ->  or being called out of order as you note
08:10:21  chosunbimbo ->  I also have a big issue with the "rules" and their interpretation being vested in ine person
08:10:30  chosunbimbo ->  *one person*
08:10:49  MattinDaegu ->  so basically, any vote made there could be argued as invalid as there's unlikely to be a valid quorum
08:11:07  chosunbimbo ->  what is required for a quarum?
08:11:12  chosunbimbo ->  20?
08:11:18  chosunbimbo ->  plus natcon?
08:12:22  chosunbimbo ->  there should be a quarum at the ABM - there are enough interested general members this year who have expressed their interest in attending
08:12:28  MattinDaegu ->  it isn't listed in the bylaws...natcon is what I'm assuming it's talking about, which is generally accepted as 2/3 of registered members...now the bylaws state 3/4 majority of members PRESENT, but it could be argued that this would still be invalid as it could be used in a very sneaky way
08:13:01  MattinDaegu ->  that's assuming that everyone would be there and available to vote
08:13:02  chosunbimbo ->  right - which is why ONE person is not enough to turn to for an interpretaion of the rules
08:14:01  chosunbimbo ->  i play starcraft
08:14:10  MattinDaegu ->  lol
08:14:26  MattinDaegu ->  I have SouthPark on in the background
08:15:32  dhuffer ->  there won't be a quorum at the ABM
08:16:16  MattinDaegu ->  so when will they make proposals open for discussion/debate to general members?
08:17:21  saradavila ->  The ABM should be on sunday the 17th and it is usually pretty well attended.
08:17:25  saradavila ->  That was my understanding.
08:17:47  dhuffer ->  good question.  I don't think the current council intends for member discussion.  it'll be straight vote
08:17:52  chosunbimbo ->  changes have been tabled and will be looked at again by natcon - the new one - who knows how long that will take, sent out to members and then add 30 dys before a vote
08:18:04  MattinDaegu ->  ah...I might be giving you some questions to ask, if you don't mind as I can't been there...
08:18:22  chosunbimbo ->  can't be changed by council - has to be all members
08:18:43  dhuffer ->  Constitution doesn't define quorum, so by default it should be 1/2 of members
08:19:04  dhuffer ->  I think last year about 400 voters
08:19:17  chosunbimbo ->  who saw my brochure? Who saw my brochure?
08:19:25  MattinDaegu ->  hmmmm...might be something to bring up with the council...that a quorum defined in the bylaws
08:20:15  dhuffer ->  BT!

Taxonomy upgrade extras: