Download Audio 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 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 sorr
