Exec Meeting @ 2023-06-08 15:00:00
WSC Exec Meeting, 08/06/23, 1pm, FAB2.32
Present: Liv Lancastle (chair), Daniel Kallin (minutes), James Patt, Eric Liu, Tomas Caldon, Jay Patel, Josh Heng, Zain Mothupi, Sophie Cooper, Ethan Dougall, Dillan Patel
In attendance: Kieran Hall, Ethan Graham
Apologies: Adam Skrzymowski
Welcome and Apologies
Exec updates
Marketing: JPL: still problems with PiSignage (JH: fixed now, EL: can confirm)
Publicity: SC: Fine, coming up with ideas for next term, not much on
IT: JH: website keeps breaking, needs fixing, need to figure out problem, think its with file system
Socials: TC: going alright he thinks, some people showing up but only those who live on campus
Blog: LL: channel now exists, email address for it, SC: Sueda sent updates, quiet for now, managed to post first article, should start marketing the successful article, LL: discuss marketing ideas in #blog, JPL: has linked it in our linktree, LL: will remember to put in weekly email
Banner on library bridge: LL: still not happened, will happened, LL + SC have committed, EL: worth doing next year to avoid damage/being taken down – LL: hold off to Sep
FOs email address to be added to Film Suggestions page: EL: also has incorrect link to forms, JH: will fix that
Funding application rejected: LL: submitted application for pitch pot
Socs Fest: LL: discussion on big screening, SU slow to get back to us and we signed up to run popcorn event instead
ED: Welcome Week fair, they wanted us not to give out popcorn next to SU stall, LL asked SU but they don’t want us
EL: are we going to try get popcorn anywhere at all?
LL: we will discuss this later
Kid’s Ticket Prices: under 16s free + promotion of this, LL: has this happened? Nope. LL: think about it doing it for Term 1 pre-advertising next year
WW timetable: DP: started putting events on it, will finish soon, LL: deadline is 25th/26th, if running out of time let Exec know, ZM: are we adding all of Exec, DP: thinking of adding anyone who will be around next year, ZM: add everyone as editors? LL: can just be FOs, DP: wants to add more people so it's easier for next year to copy and paste, ZM: copied from last year’s so someone can do that again, LL: can add two of you as editors and then maybe DK (or whoever)
Cinema4All: LL: has been renewed, free one, not spent any money!
35mm Glossary: LL: not happened yet, will be done and put on Wiki at some point
Lifetime crew seeing rotas: LL: Can they? JH: hasn’t done it, KH: said he would just do it, so has just done it
IT/Pub/Mark meeting: LL: has it happened, AS suggested it, design meeting, SC: assumed it was more website-oriented, JH: not organised yet, LL: preferably before end of term, JH: wants to do website stuff over summer, LL: “worth getting a wiggle on with that”
FOH: JPT: general updates are fine, concern of not enough people hasn’t been a problem.
A discussion occurred about an incident involving a crew member’s drug use and frequent discussions of drug use, a vote about whether to decide, in this meeting, on whether the member should remain in crew going forward did not pass, and so further discussions with the crew member and among the Exec will occur in the following week. Initial communications with the member involved a temporary two-week period of them not signing up to shows so a decision can be made, and a clear defining of the Society’s drug and alcohol policy could be agreed upon.
Proj: EL: JH qualified on JW4! Rotas been quite full, trainees on most shows, few exceptions like during Eurovision, Q-show for Marnie on Renfield, wish her luck, Sam been signing up to shows, other trainees had personal issues - P&D sending wrong adverts, being dealt with. Exec recently forwarded email which clarified EG’s access to proj box due to incident towards start of term, ambiguity about what he is allowed to do.
35mm: EL + DK now trainees, EL done a couple, arranging practice shows for W9/10, crew social next week for practice, ZM asked to leave 35mm training scheme, needs to be ratified
LL: James Coe has asked to not continue 35mm training
EL: no further communications with him, can stay on as q-proj can pick it up again with n-proj, still has keys
LL: did discuss this in proj meeting, would be difficult to keep ZM on scheme due to issues on who will train him and how viable that will be, Exec need to vote on this for fairness, any questions?
JH: what happens if vote doesn’t pass?
LL: main point is LL doesn’t feel comfortable training ZM, by extension KH is not, he could remain on scheme but nobody could train him until Zuzanna qualifies and is comfortable with trainees
EL: can forward on or bring up Proj meeting minutes
ZM: not necessary
Vote: 3 abstain, 8 for
EL: Rachel been removed from dig. proj. team due to inactivity
Lifetime Crew
EL reminded LL about this.
LL: been through old Exec, only graduates are Max and Sueda, wanted to nominate Joe for qualifying as DM and working a lot of shows in time of need, any other nominees?
KH: Pointon?
LL: still on Exec
ED: he’s already spent a lifetime on crew
Vote: all in favour.
70mm Spring
LL: Background - in projectors, there is a small important spring in the 70mm maghead, 2 new ones were fitted at start of academic year. Ethan went to meet the projectionists at BFI IMAX(?) and following a discussion, a 70mm maghead spring was donated to the society to the Chief Proj at WSC - spring in a projector was replaced with spring Ethan was sent. There was confusion as to the status of the spring, there is now a spring missing now, Ethan is in possession of it.
We need the spring to do 70mm mag sound but also to do 70mm DTS as to lace proj without it you would need to bodge lacing path, expensive to damage a print - one person can project, Kieran, who is not confident to bodge lacing without damaging print. Not in a place to project 70mm without a functioning spring for the projector.
KH: new spring, AP replaced old springs at T2 last year
ZM: when discussed, wasn’t in projector for Sound of Music
LL: questioning accounts on what happened, we know EG replaced spring at one point and we know the current spring is wrong quite clearly, there is something wrong and we need the spring back
JH: how difficult to get another spring?
LL: very; custom-size part, not sure where it will be sourced from, discussed with previous Exec, spring sent to WSC as opposed to EG personally, him as Chief Proj, essentially he had society property, none of us would know how to source new spring, best bet would be KH and AP who would have to do a lot of hours of unpaid labour to possibly not even find one
EG: statement, this spring is his personal property, his friend Michael Ford given to him and he has asked him about this and he confirmed this, happy for society to use the spring
LL: do you have evidence of this?
EG: shows email from Michael Ford which states the spring was, “given to you for use in your society”
JPT: how does this make it mean you own it?
LL: lots of things at WSC have been sourced by individuals
EG: happy for it to be left in the society after I leave , but still mine
KH: invite everyone to consider whether this is true in general, heaps of stuff sent to people, between AP, Andrew Maddison and KH they could empty the proj Box, has emails from Cinema Next where KH is sent a Scope lens, sent it to AP’s home address, didn’t say FilmSoc or Technical Officer, nobody would tolerate it if KH or AP went into Proj Box and marched off with scope lens, people would be angry, including EG, discussed semantics of it saying Student Cinema on the envelope, but does that matter, nobody thinks it works like that
EG: was actually proper reason of why spring was removed, account muddled, spring sent on 18/5/22 at 18:57, spring was taken out of P1, compared two springs and conferred with KH how they weren’t same size, at 19:00 replaced original spring, new spring had been lying about for 9 months, took this envelope out of office so it wouldn’t go missing or be thrown out, at the time this spring being in EG’s bag or being in the proj tray wouldn’t make a difference - spring in projector for 3 minutes total, old spring been in there and used for 2001 or The Sound of Music (shows us the spring in question)
LL: why was old spring removed?
EG: KH and I were looking at it together
KH: did ask EG at the time not to touch it
Message exchange between EG and KH read out. Includes picture of two springs side-by-side, new one on right. KH asks EG to put old spring back in “so AP doesn’t stress”
EL: is old spring usable or not?
KH: now we have two projectors with wildly different amounts of tension, no way of knowing which is correct and how it got into this position
EG: will admit condition is not great
LL: so we cannot in good conscience project knowing this is a problem, even if we have done so before
ZM: if spring wasn’t in projector, only wanting it back now, why didn’t we put it in earlier
EG: reason why is that new spring wasn’t same as old spring so made tension on P1 a lot tighter, inconsistent sound, idea at time was to avoid P1 and P2 having sudden drastic sound differences
KH: after springs replaced, both worked well and both the same, now something has happened, we do not know what, things have occurred when people weren’t present, in position where two projectors now not remotely the same
LL: summary, would be beneficial for us to have a functioning spring, like the one EG has in his possession to make sound functioning, we can argue about the semantics of who the spring was sent to, more useful about what it means for spring to be used by society whilst not being owned by society, we can’t have a projector reliant on EG just taking the spring whenever, viable if it is gifted
EG: thinking of “not really permanent loan”, took advice as it was in his proj tray, Sony technically own SDDS processor but they won’t walk in and take it at any point, on same grounds as that, or as Andy still owning sound trailers which FilmSoc uses – am quite sentimental about gifts, even if I never see it again after I leave, very happy for it to sit in projector unless it needs to be adjusted
JPT: in that case, why can’t you just give it to the society?
EG: sentimental about it, sounds weird…
LL: are you willing to return it to the Society under the condition that EG can only have it back if Proj comm, Exec, etc. vote on it
EL: would it be ok if someone else installs it given current situation?
EG: would rather do it, understands it would be difficult
KH: wouldn’t be comfortable doing it himself, literally irreplaceable now, should be AP who does it
LL: agrees
KH: condition is FIlmSoc can not flog it on Ebay, but nobody can march into office and just decide to take the spring – worth having this in writing
EG: “if it breaks, it breaks”, still his so accepts damage for it, understands tiny spring could get lost, but very small group of people who would have access to it, confident that it wouldn’t be lost
JPT: would you not want compensation if it breaks?
EG: didn’t pay for it so has no claims to make
LL: are we happy with agreement that EG will permanently loan spring to Society, AP will replace it to projector, can not be returned to EG unless agree to by Exec, Proj comm, Tech officer – if it breaks, EG not responsible for it, Society’s responsibility to source a new one – worth getting this written down, and then vote off after properly in writing
LL: would you be happy to leave spring with us today?
EG: not happy to until AP is down and on the day he installs it, or if he is down prior
EL: what about if it is in WSC possession in a secure place until installation?
KH: can be issue where AP not available for a while and no good date is organised
ZM: is EG putting it in a random place in WSC any different from EG just keeping it
KH: makes it easier to plan ahead on things like booking Oppenheimer if Society is in possession of it – installation of spring might not happen until late September, WSC wouldn’t be comfortable booking it if we don’t have it
JH: do we know it works?
EG: should do as it fits the projector and is designed for it
LL: would be easier to have it back now and place it in the safe or elsewhere or a clearly labelled box, agreement on permanent loan means it would be useful to have it in an accessible place for projector reinstallation rather it needing to be discussed at later date, also up to AP if he is able to have EG along for install, priority replacing spring into projector, leaves it up to AP
EG: reason that he is hesitant is not breaking/loss but large thing used for testing film [RP40] suddenly went missing, doesn’t feel comfortable keeping stuff in proj box
JPT: only a few people have access to safe
EL: obvious if something is taken from safe, office is open space
LL: can guarantee it will not disappear from safe
EG: happy for that on those grounds
LL: happy for it to be returned today and be immediately placed in safe and notify AP of this
EG: yes
LL: will write up conditions of the loan today and email round to Exec and then to EG to confirm he is happy with this
Committees/Roles and Responsibilities Document Ratification
LL: sent email last night, kinda late, amended version of Comms doc with changes from last meeting and changes proposed in DM/Proj meetings, not enough people have read it to vote on it
EL: only problem, unclear on intention on “if Q-comm is fewer than 3 members, has to be sent to Exec to be ratified”- if 2 Projs in attendance, can they get qualification ratified by Proj meeting
LL: procedure is 3 full DMs/Projs can qualify people on their own, power in and of itself, fewer than 3 can run Q-show but don’t have autonomous power to qualify themselves and needs to go to Exec
EL: reason it isn’t just to proj committee?
LL: just to cover back if DM or Proj committee has less than 3 members themselves, whereas Exec should always have enough people
EL: can still be hard to arrange 3 people to be present?
LL: managed it last year in all but one, respects the point, assumption is if something is taken to Exec to be ratified, Exec will trust Q-projs and sign it off
KH: useful context, don’t have to wait until next Exec meeting before allowing Proj to be qualified
LL: protects against rogue DMs qualifying anyone whenever, assumption that everyone is acting in good faith but Exec as overseeing body should oversee it, change wording?
EL: confusion between qualification committee or Proj/DM comms, but mostly clear
LL: wording can be rearranged at some point, main point fine then its ok
DP: do we need to outline what constitutes crew status for other committees?
LL: Pub and marketing have informal trackers which they use
SC: Pub has some with free films, and then five titles is crew
DP: useful to formalise this
LL: if current guidelines are fine, can Pub and Marketing send them over to ratify?
DP: a few people try to claim free tickets despite not being involved for a while
LL: implicit rules can just be written down formally, even if it is just copy/pasting existing rules
JPL: marketing, changed it for T3 so its 3 for crew status, next term back to 5, will send those details to LL on Slack
DP: is this done on a termly basis?
LL: discussions in Proj/DM meetings - document officially says it will be reviewed termly but CDM can hand over current method to successor
JPT: checked twice per term for DMs
EL: termly for Projs, but has same effect
JPT: difference is, that mid-term check is for giving back crew status, otherwise unclear when crew status given back
LL: this portion is specifically about removing crew status, assumption that crew reinstated after enough shows done, can clarify that this is the case, does protect people who don’t do a lot at start of term but do a lot towards the end
DP: can we make this consistent across all committees?
LL: will add that to Comms Doc and make them consistent
JH: potentially crew status can be awarded for people helping with website
LL: any thoughts for IT team crew status, can just be anyone who helps gets crew status
LL: will add crew status clarification for Pub, Marketing, IT – new amended version as commentable Google Doc will be sent around, not urgent, preferably before end of T3
LL + JPT discussing Welfare role as it is now obligatory from SU, LL: proposed to merge Welfare Officer with Events & Socials for future years
TC: cannot take the responsibility, happy being least important Exec
LL: regardless if that change is made, useful clarifications of role of Welfare officer, good to get people looking at it, maybe for next meeting
DP: could it not be its own separate role?
LL: one reason it's like this is that, (TC reassures SC she is important), already some overlap between E&S and welfare as being a friendly face for people to talk to, events and socials are wellbeing, these coincides with how welfare officer is run in other societies, enough overlap for it to make sense
ED: reasonable as Welfare officer has never been a thing people have gone for, implicitly built in to Pres/VP, now its just moving to a different role
LL: having it as a main role means people are now voting for someone deliberately for them to be Welfare, rather than Pres/VP just being it by proxy - previous issues with filling full Exec so a new role might go unfilled in future, current welfare officer already holding another Exec role
EL: Welfare officer as independent role not as relevant to us per se
LL: would be smallest role on Exec
KH: here, Welfare is quite a lot of overlap with E&S, so they might be fighting with them, or we’d end up with lots of very small, specific jobs
LL: would be a problem if Welfare is run for as an easy role without much work behind it
JPT: means disproportionate amount of work, now E&S becomes a bigger role too, also runs risk of Welfare officer being discounted or undervalued during votes
EG: did think it would be nice that there is an expectation for welfare to be present at socials
JPT: would also be responsible for ensuring a sober Exec at socials, so welfare is present at every event
ZM: to clarify, this is for next year?
LL: This would be a change to be discussed with SU, Anna Taylor said to ask SU for their opinion, email to democracy, only electable from next year onwards, lots of time to consider it, no major changes right now
KH: says thank you, to get to this point a lot of work has gone into this, remembers discussions about why we have welfare officer and why it’s so important, not an abstract thing we are discussing, at this point a lot of time has been put into getting the proposal to this point
LL: please look at current incarnations of these docs, Comms doc to be voted on next meeting, Rs+Rs more just about general opinions for now, continue discussions next time
JPT: also proposing that the Welfare officer creates and maintains a signposting list, already created a list which he will send round Exec, put into effect for next year
LL: discussion of where this list will be best-placed
ICO Screening Days
LL: sending people to young audience screening days at 6th of July in Lewes, deadline to register is 23rd June, actual cost of pass to go is only £10 for young people, if people pay for themselves we can send unlimited people, if FilmSoc pays – they might only pay for one transport bursary
DP: trying to get us involved in sessions about things which we are already doing, view to presenting at it next year, might get paid for it (KH: we have a lot of experience and success, sus it out)
EL: also there is an online section of the event with films to watch
LL: who wants to go? (ED, DK, TC, EL), work out how much FilmSoc is willing/can reimburse?
KH: there are rules about what we can reimburse
LL: will go away and have a look at this, find out how much SU is willing to reimburse, and work out train costs, and how much we can get funding from Film Hub Midlands, and figure out who is able to go, message to Exec channel post-haste
Term 1 Schedule
LL: at time of year when we need to think about T1 schedule, how is prep going?
DP: started, lots of decisions are things coming out at the moment, not a lot of information about releases in a few months
ZM: exams finish on Monday
LL: scheduling will hopefully start soon
Deadlines
LL: joint films/pub deadlines, worth setting them now
SC: for pub, needs pub by welcome week for mega pub run, moving weekend is 23rd, move-ins from Thurs, ideally from start of that week, packs can be made in time, final deadline = Monday 4th September, allows for time if things get sent to wrong place or take a while to arrive, problems with A0s last year for instance, SC going home in August and working over summer, not much time
DP: can send SC stuff more concrete, keep her in the loop
SC: likes to work on things, lots of free time in July, pub workshop before end of term ideal, wants a few rounds of proofing, lots of things to look at, wants to work on it all of July if possible – week before 4th Sep (Aug 28th), SC sends out final draft
DP: will depend on how much FOs give
SC: ideally confirmed schedule by start of August
LL: with this in mind, can we vote on schedule in early/mid July, is that a viable turnaround?
DP: obviously quite a lot of advance programming, for December for instance, more time = better schedule, wanted longer ideally
LL: publicity at start of welcome week is vital, lot of T1 money made from successful pub run, could jeopardise the entire term
DP: after mid-July, goes straight to SC to deal with until end of August, anticipating doing a lot herself, longer we have there’s less chance of changes
LL: check availability before schedule vote so we can be sure that there will be no further changes after vote (unless park circus are idiots again), still leaves plenty of time
ZM: doing booklet right? Are we doing separate welcome week pub? Finished WW bookings before finalising rest of term
DP: programme them separately or together?
LL: more programmed earlier the better from pub standpoint - for Barbie/Oppenheimer worth having films carry over from Welcome Week as they should be massive shows
SC: specialist pub can be worked on if I have time and people to work on it
KH: WW marketing and films booked and needed on sale by A-level results day, which is also biggest day for social media engagement (EL: 17th Aug this year)
Door: makes noises (possibly paranormal activity)
DP: current timeline is start working on it, programming meeting sometime in July, earlier not later
EL: not before end of term?
DP: better to make more decisions with more information, need to wait a little
LL: programming meeting earlier rather than later so it can be revised multiple times, possibility of meeting on W10?
DP: probably not around in-person, will also use Discourse frequently so revisions can be sent out straight away
LL: when can we accept first schedule draft?
DP + ZM: prefer meeting before first schedule draft, to confer amongst each other
LL: better to confirm deadlines as an Exec rather than individually, based on Pub deadlines, around 20th July good time to aim for Exec vote
DP: films coming out in Nov don’t open bookings until a month before
LL: how many confirmed films would be on schedule?
DP: most can’t officially confirm films to us
ZM: The Whale wasn’t confirmed even when it was on the schedule, they hadn’t decided on single-film bookings yet
DP: push films like that later down the schedule, mostly just prints will be confirmed
LL: stuff with unopened bookings, when will we know?
KH: depends on distributor, A24 and Disney really bad at this, other ones will take firm bookings for films coming out in December in July – can ask them if this looks sensible even if they can’t promise it
DP: knows what is sensible, just not what is confirmed
LL: worth getting in touch which distributor to ascertain feasibility
DP: will slow down things as takes a week to deal with
KH: traditionally schedule decided by end-of-term, difficult to see why end of July is too early
DP: knows difference between safe range and risky range, just don’t put films in risky range
LL: can you not send an email off, after fully drafted schedule, asking feasibility and availability on the days we have chosen, once confirmed re-email distributors to book them
DP: issues with quick responses
LL: hoping for draft schedule by first week of July to allow time for this, voting and confirmation by last week of July, more confirmed before vote, later vote deadline can be, could then allow more time for considering schedule
DP: Disney won’t make internal decisions for a while, level of chance might outweigh their confirmations
LL: assumption that films will be in safe zones
DP: in that case, won’t we need the extra two weeks to allow time for responses? Last term, nothing was booked apart from prints
LL: but then pub deadline ran over by a week
KH: takes half-an-hour to send all the emails, usually they reply by next day, if one distributor hasn’t got back to you in time of schedule draft, still a good position to be in, don’t deal in absolutes
LL: availability checked by last week of July would be ideal
DP: wasn’t aware we ran over last term
ZM: ran over booking rather than voting
DP: out of 7 emails sent, only 3 got back within a few working days, follow-ups had to be sent, communication issues, safe zone is good enough guarantee, if stuff changes it’s more likely to change closer to the films
LL: balancing between pub and films officers, SC needs enough time to design booklet, pre-empt booking issues like Spider-Man last year as early as possible – needs to be confirmed by end of July in order for Pub to be done in time
ZM: to clarify, suggestion is schedule > programming meeting > availability of films by last week in July, that’s when vote happens?
DP: vote happens and then the booking – have to have done by the 10th if working from 20th
KH: this has been done in the past
LL: ways things worked previously haven’t worked very well anyway, pub struggled and deadlines nearly missed or missed
KH: situation with booklets involved several people doing several all-nighters to get them done, collected them right off the press to get them ready for Welcome Week, this isn’t reproducible, FilmSoc will programme some big films which come out in Sep/Oct which may or may not be good, involves recognisable films, not an issue if they suck
ZM: when is pub sent in?
LL + DP: Sep 4th
SC: can do things with more confidence once schedule confirmed, tracker always has caveat that people might be making pub for films which won’t end up on schedule
ZM: are we doing separate WW things? – easier to confirm a week over 10 weeks
LL: back it. Now I have calendar. Last full week of July is 24-30, ideal to have had schedule by that week, if distributors can be contacted by then, and if more volatile films can be highlighted, schedule vote will be 24th July – gives some leeway if there are voting issues, confirmed schedule for pub all through Aug, now FOs can focus on booking throughout Aug, 10th-24th July to contact distributors and check availability, gives four weeks from now to get schedule ready for contacting them, reasonable?
ZM: yes. Confirm to people that there will be a point where no more schedule updates can happen. LL: Gives people a week for people to comment, and three weeks for distributors
DP: Might be pushed back a week
LL: Fine as long as July 24th deadline met
ZM: wants to make sure people aren’t suggesting more films once booking confirmation area is closed
LL: Discussion deadline = 10th. Voting deadline = 24th.
DP: will think about when programming meeting is best placed, would be earlier, will decide between W9/10
LL: will try structure votes in same way as last term, on pub money, on schedule, on film costs.
Membership Pricing/Benefits
DP: will move to next meeting.
50th Anniversary Ideas
LL: will move to next meeting.
LL: make an anniversary slack channel!
JH: will do.
KH: there is also a Welcome Week one, use it.
Tadonm
LL: Week 9 lettucemeat will be sent out.
Aobs
LL: have the people who were coming to Exec training signed up? Needs two Execs to sign up to each one.
EG: wants to clarify meeting minutes from 10th Feb meeting, doesn’t match with meeting
LL: you distribute minutes to ask for changes, people then send you changes
EG: doesn’t recollect last paragraph of these minutes happening
EG: also wants a new vote on his proj supervisions at next meeting
ED: update – we have money! No more fears of WSC ceasing to exist
JPT: do we get hoodies?
ED: will do over summer
SC: wants to do pub meeting/workshop, has ideas, would like input, will update
KH: amplifier for centre sub is dying, knew it was dying when installed in 2020, previously uninstalled when it was dying, AP bought one cheap on ebay after he eagerly misread KH message, cheap enough to resell if Exec don’t want it
Vote: All in favour
KH: congrats to Pres LL who has been shortlisted for outstanding leadership, LL should go to the fancy do
EL: do we want to consider sponsorship for next year?
LL: will add to agenda for next meeting.
EL: permission to take a WSC invoice to a different wholesaler to get better stuff for Tuck shop as they only sell to businesses, proves we exist
ED: approves
Meeting ended at 15:57.