I saw the ACLU-NC announcement, had just read _The Trial of Socrates_, and was a huge fan of that and his entire work, so of course attended.

It certainly was! He came in, was seated in a large comfortable chair and made a crack about how he'd always wanted the opportunity to speak ex cathedra. (And we were off!)

I hope someone at ACLU-NC recorded it. Sadly, I did not.

Probably so. If I find time, I'll dig around. And meanwhile, thank you for the pointer.

Skimmed thread, albeit not subthreads. 

Kevin badly misunderstood Mike D. (I've followed @questauthority, have some legal background, & know when to shut up & consult legal experts.) I also see a lot of overinterpretation by & of Standlee. Last, remain unclear on what legal position's undermined.

Thanks, Lenora. I'll delve through that. Eventually.

Ordinarily, I'm more of a Mastodon user (boo, hiss ;-> ), but the SMOFing smokesignals drew me.

Hypothetically for 2023 nominations to get redone, not to mention finalist voting, Chengdu would need to cooperate in, at least, access to WSFS's 2023 membership roster. Non-starter.

And to whom would WSFS in August hypothetically assign that pricy hot-potato? Seattle? (More pragmatism, man.)

Agreed that in any legal conflict (or potential one), one's best and 1st move is to remove foot from mouth and then zipper the latter pending consultation with counsel. But I am honestly unclear on what specific legal option is putatively being compromised. (Something Standlee said, right? What?)

I'd be amazed if the ballots weren't destroyed; that's routine.

August's WSFS Business Meeting can and may pass some resolution/statement, which I suppose could opine that 2023's awards never happened: Awkwardly, though, reality dissents.

I think more sober contemplation is in order.

With respect, I wonder if this is hasty: There's not been time for Worldcon Intellectual Property, Inc. or the MPC to get "legal advice", and I'm unconvinced that a lot of loose, confused social media rhetoric constituted a legal consult. I hope a real one occurs. It'll not occur on the Net.

I think it's obvious WIP's approach to trademark licensing is overdue for revamp, in consultation with good legal counsel.

I'm not one, just someone who led a successful trademark face-off (for Linux Gazette magazine). As such, I see WIP as having few present remedies re: Chengdu, post-hoc. Agree?

Thanks, makes sense.

Kevin's tone struck me as one of mild exasperation, which comes and goes with him, generally with ample justification. And FWIW he's correct: WSFS is literally dormant until the Glasgow convention in August, and has few retroactive options. Going forward: under discussion.

I gather "they" means Mr. McCarty, the sole figure from the Chengdu org who's so far said squat, and who's FWIW left outsiders confused, upset, or both.

McCarty doesn't speak for WSFS (nor do I), but parties frowning at him include... us, WSFS, not least those of us who preferred Winnipeg.