General Assembly of IASS in Thessaloniki attended

Yesterday evening, I attended most of the General Assembly of the International Society for Semiotic Studies (IASS). I remain a representative for Norway, and for the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies (NASS), in the Executive Committee of IASS.

Opening of NASS XII; General assembly chaired; reelected President of NASS

Yesterday I took part in the opening of the 12th conference of the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies (NASS) at Vilnius University in Vilnius, Lithuania (held November 5-7th, 2021, with the theme "Meaning in perception and the senses"). In the evening, I chaired the General assembly of NASS. I was reelected as President of NASS for a third term (I have served as President since 2017), and as ordinary representative for Norway.

NASS board meeting chaired

Today I chaired the first board meeting of the new board of the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies, elected at this summer´s General Assembly in Stavanger during NASS XI. the meeting took place via Skype. 

NASS board meeting chaired

Today I have chaired the board meeting of the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies. Amongst other things we talked about the forthcoming General Assembly during NASS XI (Stavanger June 13-15).

IASS general assembly in Kaunas attended

On June 29th I attended (most of) the general assembly of the International Association for Semiotic Studies, held in Kaunas, Lithuania.

10th newsletter of NASS finished; call for GA in Kaunas

I have just taken part in finishing the 10th newsletter of the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies, along with Inesa Sahakyan. The issue includes a call for the NASS general assembly, to take place June 30th in Kaunas, Lithuania.

NASS: Possibly running for president; UiS candidate venue for NASS XI

I have just signalled interest, to the board, in being nominated as President of the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies (NASS) ahead of its General Assembly in late June in Kaunas during NASS X, and launched the University of Stavanger as a possible venue for NASS XI in 2019.

NASS General Assembly attended; reelected Secretary

Yesterday I attended the 2015 General Assembly of the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies (NASS), in Tartu, Estonia, during NASS IX. I chaired the very beginning of the meeting, and was reelected Secretary of NASS and Norway´s Ordinary Representative in the NASS board.

NASS board meeting attended

Today I attended a board meeting of the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies (NASS). Agenda issues included preparations for the General Assembly to be held in Tartu August 19th.

ISBS General Assembly attended; Kalevi Kull new President of biosemiotic society

On July 2nd, in Copenhagen (during the 15th gathering in biosemiotics), I attended the General Assembly of the International Society for Biosemiotic Studies (ISBS). At the meeting, Jesper Hoffmeyer stepped down as President of the ISBS, and Kalevi Kull was elected new President, the society´s second.

NASS General Assembly scheduled for August 19th

This year´s General Assembly of the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies (NASS) - the first since 2013 - has been scheduled for Wednesday August 19th at 18.30 (during NASS IX, Tartu - Estonia - cf. preliminary program).

IACS General Assembly held - Todd Oakley new President

Yesterday I attended the General Assembly of the International Association for Cognitive Semiotics (IACS), which was held during the IACS' first conference, in Lund, Sweden. Todd Oakley was elected new President.

Complete mess at IASS Executive Committee meeting - Paul Cobley new President, Kristian Bankov new Secretary General

Yesterday the Executive Committee of the International Association for Semiotic Studies (IASS-AIS) had its meeting to elect a new IASS board (all executive positions). The meeting took place during the 12th world congress of semiotics (Sofia, Bulgaria, September 16-20), and was attended by 50-60 Executive Committee members. I represented both Norway (along with Drude von der Fehr) and the Nordic Association for Semiotic Studies (NASS), and voted on behalf of both.

Paul Cobley was elected the new IASS President. He got my support after announcing a sensible, reform-oriented electoral program. Kristian Bankov was unanimously elected new Secretary General, after Massimo Leone withdrew his candidature. Both are elected for the period 2014-2019.

Like the IASS General Assembly held the day before, the meeting of the Executive Committee was unfortunately characterised by a selective and random approach to rule-following. I was embarassed at both occasions. At the General Assembly no proper financial report was presented, for instance - and the electoral procedure was a mess, and far from transparent. At the meeting of the Executive Committee, the Committe first decided with a clear majority that after two consecutive mandates, an elected official is not eligible for any position for the next 5-year period. Then, an hour or so later, a majority of the very same Committee elected Susan Petrilli as one of five Vice-Presidents (if only for 2 years), even though she was ineligible for any position according to the decision just made by 80% of those present. In other words: The Executive Committee voted on whether or not to follow its own rules, and a clear majority voted not to follow them.

A bit later two Treasurers (plus one Vice-Treasurer) were elected, since by mistake too many names had been put forward, and the Committee did not want to choose between them.

Adding to the unprofessional mess, at both occasions, was the fact that even though English, French and Spanish are all official languages of the IASS-AIS, at several points voting took place after the members had been informed e.g. just in French. At these instances half the audience did not know what was going on.

All this is funny at best, tragic at worst. The IASS is in desperate need of some simple professionalism.

Code biology conference: General assembly, roundtable attended

On Friday May 23rd, while at the 1st International Conference in Code Biology (Paris, May 21-23), I attended the first General Assembly of the International Society of Code Biology (ISCB) - which was very brief (approving financial report and formally also the venue for the second conference) - and the concluding roundtable discussion (cf. programme).

See also:

Codes and interpretation paper presented

Afternoon session chaired at 1st code biology conference

Second code biology conference, 2015

Call for General Meeting of Minding Animals Norway

As the chair of Minding Animals Norway, about a week ago I wrote the call of the board for this year's General Meeting, which will take place in Oslo September 22nd in connection with the first Animal ethics conference (Dyreetikkonferansen, September 21st) and this year's Minding Animals Norway research seminar (September 22nd). The whole call is available in Norwegian in my Norwegian language blog Utopisk Realisme.

September 12th: Founding meeting of International Society for the Study of Interactivity, Language and Cognition (ISSILC)

On September 12th at 6.30 pm, during the 1st International Conference on Interactivity, Language and Cognition (CILC - Odense, Denmark September 12-14 - see full programme here), a founding meeting of the International Society for the Study of Interactivity, Language and Cognition (ISSILC) will be held. The last few weeks I have been in correspondence with Sune Steffensen, Stephen Cowley and Paul Thibault concerning the new learned society's constitution, providing other constitutions as examples and giving input and feedback regarding the ISSILC's draft constitution, which will be treated at the founding meeting/General Assembly of ISSILC. 

Biosemiotics: ISBS to hold first General Meeting ever

After weeks of discussion by email in the biosemiotic community, the president of the International Society for Biosemiotic Studies (ISBS), Jesper Hoffmeyer, today made clear that he will call for a General Meeting. According to the constitution of ISBS, which has been in place since 2008, such meetings open to all members should be arranged annually. The ISBS, however, has so far been run in an informal way, and these rules have not been put into practice.

On April 30th I wrote this in an email distributed in the biosemiotic community, in reply to an email (one of many) from Marcello Barbieri to all participants at this year's Gathering in Biosemiotics (Tartu, July 17-22).

Dear all, I have not gotten any response from anyone in the ISBS Committee on my prior notice (April 25), which read:

I can not recall ever having been directly invited or encouraged to attend an ISBS General Meeting at a Gathering (and I've been to 5 gatherings). I think this is regr[e]ttable - and problematic in terms of organisational democracy. I sincerely hope that the ISBS will develop a culture of greater inclusion in the future. The General Meetings were never (cf. the ISBS constitution) supposed to be mere meetings of the Executive Committee (in the constitution called "Committee"). 

I now feel compelled to ask explicitly for response, from the ISBS Committee itself. Has my notice been discussed in the Committee? If so, what was the outcome, or the opinions presented? If not, then it should now be discussed by the Committee. In the following I will make clear why this is of the highest importance. 

The constitution of the ISBS says:  

7.1 The supreme authority of the Society is vested in a General Meeting of the members. 

7.2 An Annual General Meeting shall be held.  

Marcello writes that "[a] General assembly [which he defines as "the actual community that is present at a General Meeting"] has never been convened before." My questions, then, are these:  

1) If Marcello is correct, why has the ISBS Committee never convened a General assembly (aka meeting)?  

2) Does not the ISBS constitution explicitly state that such meetings shall be held annually?  

3) If no General Meeting has ever been convened, what is the legality of all the decisions that have been made by the ISBS Committee in the period of 2005-2011? This point concerns rules etc. established by the ISBS (cf. Marcello's case), and more.  

4) If no General Meeting has ever been convened, then what of the validity of elections of ISBS committee members? Cf. the constitution's point 8.2: "Names for the above offices shall be proposed and seconded at the Annual General Meeting and election will follow on a simple majority vote of the members." If no General Meeting has ever been held, then WHO have elected the ISBS Committee members? Surely not the Committee itself??  

5) In case anyone would claim that General Meetings have actually taken place: If so, why have not all ISBS members present - i.e., all participants attending each Gathering - been explicitly invited to take part? Cf., the constitution's 7.5: "Notice of meeting stating the date, time and place of meeting shall be sent by the Secretary to all voting members". Is not the lack of such formal, personal invitations in violation of the spirit and letter of the ISBS constitution, which defines a General Meeting as "a General Meeting of the members"?  

Out of curiosity I also wonder:  

6) Approximately how many persons have been present at the ISBS meetings held during Gatherings so far? How many besides members of the Executive Committee? 

and  

7) What is the proper name for these meetings (at Gatherings up to 2011) - "Committee meetings"? If so, see points 3 and 4 above.  

I am not asking these questions to be difficult, but I do hold that they need to be answered satisfactorily - particularly because this is in terms of organisational democracy a problematic story whether the meetings held have been regarded as Committee meetings (which does not have such a wide mandate) or as General Meetings (which has in case not been correctly convened). 

For a start, the ISBS Committee should explain its practice, and signal whether it intends to follow the same practice in the future, or, if not, on what points it intends to change practice.

I will not, here in Utopian Realism, go into all details of this conflict - most of which has little to do with what has been my concern, as described above - but these were, in brief, the answers to my questions (many of which given by Donald Favareau, the former Vice-President of the ISBS, who withdrew about half a year ago, as a first sign of a looming crisis):

1) Don explained how the ISBS has been run in an informal way, and claimed the constitution was never meant to be taken literally. He accused me of being formalistic.

2) The ISBS constitution does indeed explicitly state that such meetings shall be held annually. The President of the ISBS has now signalled that the constitution will be followed from now on.

3) The legality of all the decisions that have been made by the ISBS Committee in the period of 2008-2011 has not been discussed further. Marcello Barbieri asked me, in a reply to my email, not to ask questions about the past (which he had done a little before). He has in the course of this changed argumentation, and recently focused exclusively on the validity of the constitution, and that a general assembly must be convened.

4) The validity of elections of ISBS committee members has not been addressed by anyone. Election of committee members will now likely start at the first General Meeting, to be held in Tartu in July. 

5) Noone have claimed that General Meetings have actually taken place so far. 

6) The number of persons present at the ISBS meetings held during Gatherings so far have been estimated to less than 10. As far as I understand only members of the Executive Committee (which has 15 members) have been present.

7) The proper name for the meetings (at Gatherings up to 2011) is Committee meetings. No minutes were taken.

***

Don, who's done a lot of good work for the ISBS over the years, wrote in his reply to my questions that he thought my "approach would be odious, and the final nail in the coffin of this group's long and often contentious journey from a warm fellowship of friends to what it is now: an arena for a war of escalating sides-taking." He talked about the death of good faith (as have many others - it is saddening to hear good colleagues be so defaitistic). But good faith did not die with me. I have not been involved in this conflict, but been a regular member only - and I do doubt very strongly that my concern for organisational democracy could ever be "the final nail in the coffin" for biosemiotics.

Today it became clear that the ISBS will introduce organisational democracy this year. I applaud that, and look forward to seeing it happen. What I cannot accept is that my allegiance should be given to persons (whoever they might be), regardless of ideal and principle. I pledge my allegiance to the cause of biosemiotics, the cause of organisational democracy, and the restoration of good faith.