The following is the preliminary agenda for the CMWC 2003 Open Forum. Discussion and inquiry concerning this preliminary agenda are heartily encouraged among CMWC attendees prior to the two Open Forum meetings pre- and post-event; we regard such threshing out of individual opinions as essential for acheiving informed concensus. They are not listed in order of importance, or in order of how they will be discussed - simply in the order the agenda suggestions were received by the IFBMA. That said, the following are the ideas to be covered in discussion - nothing here is predecided or set in stone - all decisions will be taken at the second of the two Open Forum meetings.

If you would like to add any agenda items to this preliminary agenda, please email them to me. Agenda items should take the form of a one-sentence statement or question that can be answered with an opinion of "agree" or "disagree", and should include a short bit of further explanation/reasoning. If assistance is needed in formulating either your agenda item or your brief explanation, please do not hesitate to ask me for assistance.

If you have questions about how the Open Forum works, please read "The Nature of the Open Forum". Thanks!

• Should use of the term "Championships" in the context of messenger racing be limited to the CMC events (CMWC, ECMC, NACCC, ACMC)?
  In recent years, several larger alleycat events have used or proposed using the term "Championships" as part of their name. While this may not result in confusion for the messengers involved, the argument is that overuse of the "Championships" moniker may dilute the event's worth in the eyes of the media, through whom the event is given status which allows us to find sponsors. There is, however, some precedent set for the use of the term "Championships" with several events, namely the East Coast Courier Championships (since 1997) and the Swiss Cycle Messenger Championships (since 1993). Is terming such non-CMC events "unofficial" (as in "Unofficial West Coast Championships") enough, or should the term be used exclusively for the actual Championship events? And should we make exceptions for the ECCC and SUICMC due to their history?

• Should CMC event dates be subject to scheduling "windows" of time so as to prevent conflicts between the various events?
  It has been suggested that the CMWC and ECMC/NACCC, when occurring on the same continent in the same year, should keep their dates separate by more than a month or so. This would enable messengers local to that continent or region to go to both events without having to either take a large chunk of time off work, or take two vacations in rapid succession. However, this could end up limiting the scheduling freedom of event organizers, but this may be averted by ongoing communication between CMC organizers.

• Should organizers be encouraged to schedule CMWC later in the year, to avoid the travel high season?
  It has been noted by many people over the years that CMWC being scheduled in the summer, while nice for vacationing, also places the event in the middle of travel high season, and thus the most expensive airline tickets possible for those who have to travel longer distances (Not to mention making any sort of airline sponsorship that much more difficult). It is worth noting that travel expenses will drop dramatically if CMWC is scheduled either before or after the travel season (May-September, roughly). This relates somewhat to the other scheduling item on the agenda, as if the timing of CMWC is changed, it may well affect the scheduling of the other CMC events.

• IFBMA logo needed
  We've been around as an organization for several years now, and it's high time we have a logo. This item is mostly a general announcement that we're looking for one, and will accept submissions from any messengers out there with art skills (or without them...). If anyone chooses to bring a logo design to the Open Forum in Copenhagen, that's great too. If enough people show up with logo ideas, we may well decide on a logo at that point, depending on the opinion of the assembled membership.

• Uses/sources of IFBMA funds
  The IFBMA collects funds in the form of donations, CMWC proposal fees, and consulting fees levied on CMWC host cities, as outlined in the by-laws. Eventually these funds will accumulate to the point at which they can be spent without immediately depleting the IFBMA coffers. Some of us have envisioned spending such funds on things such as buying tickets for messengers less able to attend CMWC (such as those from Latin American, Southeast Asia or some parts of Eastern Europe), or as a reserve fund to aid a beleaguered CMWC event. Also, once we have a logo, there is the possibility of starting to produce IFBMA paraphenalia as a means of acquiring additional income towards whatever goals we choose. There isn't really a decision required on this item at this point, but brainstorming is encouraged.

• Amend the Exceptions section of "The Host City Selection Process" add that the deadline for replacement proposals (in the event of dropped bids) should be set 6 months after the previous CMWC.
  It's been established that late proposals for a CMWC are only accepted in one instance - when a city that originally proposed to host has dropped out of the running. What needs clarification is how late in the game such replacement proposals will be accepted. It is suggested that 6 months after the original proposal deadline be adopted as the absolute deadline for such replacements.

• Should disqualification at CMWC be handed out more liberally for things that would get competitors reprimanded or fired at work?
  Currently, the specific rules of CMWC events are largely left up to the individual organizing cities, typically drawing primarily on previous years rules, and changes thereof. It's not proposed to make a hard and fast rule for disqualification, but to suggest that DQs be handed out more liberally for things that would usually get you fired or at least written up at work, such as being excessively rude towards "clients" (checkpoint workers) and damaging packages (folded large flats, crumpled envelopes, etc).

• Amend the by-laws to state that in addition to the Open Forum(s) at CMWC, The IFBMA is required to hold at least two online Open Forums every year.
  Currently, decisions are taken only at the Open Forum, and attempts to decide anything online are contested. It is suggested that online decisons would allow the organization to be more effective, but also contested that the online community is not broad enough to represent the IFBMA membership.

• Amend the Exceptions section of "The Host City Selection Process" to add the exception that in the event of only a single bid being received for a CMWC year, late bids should be allowed.
  Currently, the structure is such that if only one bid were to be submitted, that city would, in theory, win by default. The opinion is forwarded that competition is in the best interest of a quality CMWC, and should be encouraged even if it means making exceptions to the host city selection process.

• Amend the by-laws to mandate that CMWC should not remain on the same continent for consecutive years.
  Currently, there is no mandate of any sort as to where a CMWC can be held. The argument is that a CMWC held two years in a row on one continent is detrimental to the ability of those not from that continent to attend the event, while this is countered by the opinion that CMWC should always be held in the city best qualified to hold the event, regardless of location.

• Amend by-law 2.4.1 to read: "Proxy votes on the CMWC decision are accepted only from active IFBMA members who have attended at least one CMC event in the past and attend the online Open Forums, but are unable to attend the Open Forum at CMWC. Proxy votes may only be submitted via an online form available where the proposals are posted, to ensure people have actually read the proposals."

• Add by-laws specifically referencing "The Nature of the Open Forum" and "The Host City Selection Process" as official IFBMA procedure.
  Currently, these documents are ostensibly followed as official IFBMA policy, but are not referenced from within the by-laws.

• Amend "The Host City Selection Process" to require that cities bidding for CMWC present their proposal online a month in advance of the CMWC were it will be voted on.
  This will allow people a chance to look over a proposal in advance and have time to think it over, and make an educated vote, and will give validity to proxy votes sent in online to be counted at the Open Forum, as well as reducing discussion time at the Open Forum

• Amend the by-laws to establish an IFBMA council
  This council will exist to rule on motions, based on their interpretations of the by-laws. The Open Forum will remain, with power to alter the by-laws, and veto council decisions.

• Amend "The Host City Selection Process" to require that all CMWC host city proposals relevant to that yearıs decision, along with ballots, be included in the racer packets handed out at registration.