MINUTES OF MEETING OF 4S COUNCIL
March 25/26th March 2025
Agenda March 25th/26th 2025 @ midday GMT
Anne Pollock called the meeting to order at 12:03AM GMT
ITEM 1 Greetings
In attendance and in order of arrival: Anne Pollock (1), Amanda Windle (ex-officio), Noela Invernizzi (Secretary) (2), Monamie Bhadra Haines (3), Zhaopeng Li (4), Yichen Rao (5), Amit Prasad (6), Vincent Li (7), Pouya Sepehr (8), Rohit Negi (9), Shiv Issar (10), and Melissa McCreary (11).
Apologies
Upali Bhattacharya (non-voting), Yelena Gluzman, Cathy Herbrand, Wen-hua Kuo (President-Elect), Marko Monteiro, Michal Nahman, and Thao Phan sent apologies in advance.
Action: Vincent Li to send updated bio to Amanda.
ITEM 2 Review Ongoing Actions Table
Anne Pollock presented the two ongoing actions for discussion, and with no comments moved to the next item on the agenda.
ITEM 3 Approval of Dec Minutes
The council had one amendment ahead of the meeting for the October 2024 minutes but no changes for the December 2024 minutes. Action: A change to the published October 2024 minutes to include Thao Phan as attending. VOTE: The motion to approve the December minutes was moved by Amit Prasad and seconded by Vincent Li, and approved by (11) votes, with zero (0) against, and (0) abstention. The motion was carried.
ITEM 4 Finance and Operational Updates
Windle presented the quarterly update of the 2025 financial budget as presented to Exec previously. This also included the proposal to ratify the move over to X-CD that Exec had approved in principle for memberships, registration and website. VOTE: The motion to ratify the proposal for system change from MemberLeap to X-CD for the conference and website management was moved by Amit Prasad and seconded by Shiv Issar, and approved by (11) votes, with zero (0) against, and (0) abstention. The motion was carried.
Prasad gave context to the budget for the Seattle 2025 conference, the 4S annual budget, and an overview of setting the registration fees along with Anne Pollock. With the costs being higher than usual because of a legacy contract which was signed before the pandemic and extended during the pandemic, that is no longer fit for purpose, this has increased costs. An additional conference site had to be found as there was no additional room at the Sheraton Grand for our size of conference. Moreover, moving to hybridity will mean higher AV and WIFI costs. This year, the budget estimates—at this time—are running at a deficit. Pollock noted that we have one more of the legacy contracts in Toronto with the Sheraton to go in 2026.
In regard to the registration fees, Pollock proposed for discussion whether or not to stick to the registration fees as the same as Honolulu ’23, or to increase with an additional inflationary cost? Further, Pollock asked Council to consider—do we increase due to the budget, or go into deficit (i.e. reserves for 2025)? Prasad agreed with Pollock to stay with the 2023 registration fees. Melissa Creary responded to suggest it would do us well to raise fees slightly, but this might not be the moment to do so, given the political tumult. Monamie Bhadra Haines asked if we know how many people are attending online/in-persons at this point? Pollock, noted that attendees will be asked twice at early bird, and then closer to the conference. Rohit Negi asked how many people anticipated attending Seattle? Windle noted as per the attendance documents that it is roughly the same if not a little more (23% uplift as Honolulu at this moment, prior to registration). Bhadra Haines asked if we are adding anything only about the US? Shiv Issar asked about notices on the recent US 100-mile border zone. Noela Invernizzi noted that she is working on written statements presently as related to the travel grants, so that attendees can make up their own minds, and to check their own embassy’s guidance. Prasad explained that the issue is presently coming up in relation to visa letters. Windle noted that the 18 visa letter requests had come in as of March 25, 2025 (to date), ahead of registration opening, and this might be tracking a little less than 2023 and 2024, but more will be known after registration. Action. Invernizzi to revise wording for visa letters.
Issar asked if 4S should bring in an advisor to deal with non-profit investments? Prasad, noted in discussion of the CD investments that we will need to hit a threshold, and increase our reserves to a million because we presently do not have that kind of reserve. Prasad noted that Issar’s point is very well taken, but there are two issues of concerns related to ethicality and mixed kind of investments. Pollock reprised the fundraising plans to date, with a change of course on the anticipated launching a bunch of fundraising for long-term investment. There is a need to invest in alternative strategies in the future. Action: Anne Pollock to send a personalised email to members about the registration fees.
Bhadra Haines asked about budgets related to the meeting for Toronto 2026 and also asked about the overall financial health of the Society. Pollock and Prasad noted that the current budget does not cut our reserves by half. Creary asked if Council could come back to the fundraising point this year, in relation to the importance of how knowledge production supports science, because there is a way people could give money in these times if we were to have a campaign about the importance of protecting institutions that help promote scientific query and knowledge production. Pollock reprised that Planned Giving (after you die), is an important element if people do have means. So that we can gain further support for institution and open access too. Recommendation: Creary to join the fundraising committee. Recommendation: Pollock to make fundraising an agenda for the Seattle’25 conference. VOTE: The motion to endorses the budget for proposed Seattle 2025 conference and registration fees was moved by Noela Invernizzi and seconded by Monamie Bhadra Haines, and approved by (11) votes, with zero (0) against, and (0) abstention. The motion was carried.
Pouya Sepehr discussed the 6S budget for Seattle 2025, coming in at $3,500 USD (room rental included in room package) for two events: an ECR panel discussion and a social event with coordinated games. VOTE: The motion to approve the budget for proposed 6S events for Seattle 2025 was moved by Amit Prasad and seconded by Shiv Issar, and approved by (11) votes, with zero (0) against, and (0) abstention. The motion was carried.
A financial request from the 4S affiliated journal Tapuya, was made in writing by Leandro Rodriguez-Medina, a journal that has not historically needed finance from 4S in the past. The passing of Sandra Harding whose loss is sitting heavily with 4S, was a strong supporter of the journal. Pollock reprised that this concession has been made for other journals for this kind of support. Tapuya editorial has asked for $5k (USD) to support APCs, and while they have some waivers there aren’t many, and they want to increase the number of waivers for APCs going on. Prasad asked for clarification if this is for one year or ongoing? Invernizzi concluded that this was for one year at this time. Recommendation: Pollock to have an open discussion for all affiliated journals on APCs. Pollock supported a one-off payment for Tapuya. Recommendation: For Tapuya to give 4S feedback on the impact of this funding for APCs before committing to further support in subsequent years. Prasad also noted that friends of 4S would have asks—the various STS countries and we will need to think about finance and budgets on these, but as separate items. Action: Nicole Nelson (Chair of the Publications Committee) to talk to Tapuya with your expertise, and not just giving 5k to T&F but lessening the burden on ECRs. VOTE: The motion to approve the Tapuya request for $5k was moved by Amit Prasad and seconded by Monamie Bhadra Haines, and approved by (11) votes, with zero (0) against, and (0) abstention. The motion was carried.
ITEM 5 Committee Updates
Each chair of the Prize Committees gave an update. Pollock noted that the Bernal prize has been awarded and published, with both Paul Edwards and Anna Tsing joining 4S in Seattle for the prize ceremony. Pollock updated on the Fleck Prize, having moved a long-list of 47 books to 7 books for more close-reading, with a decision pending by late April. Haines noted a long-list of 58 entries for the Carson Prize, and while there was a bit of a problem populating the committee two more members joined. Rohit Negi updated on the Edge Prize, having started with a 35 nominated articles, and timeline to short list in next 2 weeks from now. Thao Phan updated on the Mullins Prize having needed to restructure the membership of the committee, with the committee finalising results now. Yichen Rao updated on the Infrastructure Prize. The committee met on March 21 and agreed a winner, and the notes and citation have been prepared. The winner is the collaboration Digital STS, to be announced next month (embargoed until Technoscience).
Pollock gave an update on the fundraising committee on behalf of Wen-hua Kuo. Pollock suggested pressing pause on fundraising and celebration work at this time given the political decision-making in the US affecting academia and scholarly activity. Creary was mindful of softening to a pause going forward.
Invernizzi gave an update on the ethics committee with future committee work needing to review the documentation and make sure that it is adaptive to every present situation, seeking help from local organisers. The committee has not met yet but has and undergone some changes in the committee membership. Invernizzi asked, do we need any other members? Actions: The ethics ombuds is now in place (Marika Cifor and Nassim Parvin). Haines and Prasad will add to the committee Vivian will come off.
Windle presented an update on behalf of Wen-hua Kuo, with Pollock noting that many Memorandums of Understanding have been signed this year. Awaiting countersigning are the MOUs for associations in Japan (JSSTS), and China (CASSSP). Signed to date are MOUs with ESOCITE, AUSSTS, STS India, CTS Ecuador, NAIS China, and Korea/KASTS. 4S committee members are participating in the International Science Council (ISC) participation: Thao Phan—Codata (committee on data at the ISC) as the conference is in Brisbane; and Marko Monteiro—Regional Focal Point for Latin America and the Carribean.
ITEM 6 Council Elections – Nominations Committee
Creary convened a nominations committee of 4 people. In 2025, there is a need to fill the seats for 3 council members (for when Marko Monteiro, Yelena Gluzman, and Michal Nahman end their terms). There is also a need to electing a 6S student representative when Pouya Sepehr ends his term. The following TIMELINE was endorsed by Council: March 20th: Get people ready for nominations season in Technoscience. April 20th: ANNOUNCE call for election nominations in Technoscience and elections page on the website goes live (@MD and President). May 1st: OPEN election nominations form on elections webpage (pending web build). May 19th: CLOSE election nominations form on elections webpage. May 21–25th: DELIBERATION of election nominations committee. Action: Elections web page and form to be prepared ahead of April 20. Recommendation: For Sepehr and Creary to be point of contacts for any further information related to interested election candidates.
ITEM 7 Publications Committee* Updates
Chair of the Publications Committee, Nicole Nelson was welcomed to the meeting as the new Publications chair giving updates on the successful renewal of the contract for ST&HV Managing Editor who has signed on for the remainder of the term of the collective (until 2028). Pollock noted that the journal is going great! Nelson gave an update on open access changes to the potential MIT/PubPub collaboration and how this is no longer fit for purpose. This collaboration couldn’t really envision a half-way between a journal and a book format (like ISIS and Osiris), and with PubPub not continuing as a non-profit has put a stop to this MIT/PubPub collaboration. Further discussion were had with the University of Chicago Press but they’re not launching any new journals in the near future. An alternative direction is to perhaps create a diamond Open Access initiative, like a reviews section of ESTS, but ESTS is in the middle of a search. Prasad, asked if we have any other option than the ESTS model? Windle noted that OJS is quite cheap at $2,700 per annum for the top-end package. Invernizzi asked, if MIT published in this new format, it would have been the publisher that would have invested, so this now would be a society cost of like ESTS? Invernizzi was in favour of the idea, but I wondered about costs. Nelson predicted that it wouldn’t be a revenue-generating output as we’ve had been before. Prasad asked if the main costs would be for a Managing Editor? Nelson agreed, but it would be about keeping the volume low, and it would be for David Ribes, Nicole Nelson, and Amanda Windle, to model how much time per year that model would take as it does on ESTS.
Nelson noted that the ESTS editor search could be aligned to the STS Handbook? It is under transition and the new editorial collective hasn’t been chosen. A lot of individuals or small groups that don’t have a collective have come forward, and Nelson has put them in contact and held a zoom information session and mailing list for interested parties It does look like a collective of two mid-career editor-in-chiefs might be the model, with more proposals coming in by the end of the month. There will be at least one solid proposal, but I don’t think it will be a competitive search, but people can go in with open eyes and look out for another update in a week’s time. Pollock thanked Nelson for all the work that she is doing.
*Vincent Li left the meeting at this time.
ITEM 8 Seattle Conference Organiser Updates
Pollock presented the decision to move to hybridity as discussed with Daniela Rosner. Windle then updated the Council on their hotel accommodations, progress from the Program committee on acceptances (2,124 acceptances (26 Roundtables, 204 Closed Panel abstracts, 52 Zine Festival abstracts, 58 Making and Doing abstracts, and 1,784 Open Panel abstracts, with a total of 3,132 people are logged into the abstracts submissions portal in March 2025). Pollock updated on this year’s themes and how the conference organisers are thinking through Reverberations on several panels on Water, Borders, Art worlds, and potentially Algorithms.
Pollock opened the discussion to budgets around paying for presidential committee travel and speaker fees. Creary noted that, I think we’re concerned about financial budgets, can we commit to one speaker for a themed plenary? Prasad calculated $200 USD for 11 speakers, plus accommodations totals more than $7,200. Invernizzi asked for clarification about the 4th plenary ‘algorithms’? Action: Pollock to ask if University of Washington can administrate this because it would have an impact on 4S’s administrative time. Prasad asked what is UW’s financial contribution to the conference? VOTE: The motion to vote for a conditional approval (with an aspect to reduce the budget) the speaker fee for threads ($7,200 stipend to UW) was moved by Monamie Bhadra Haines and seconded by Amit Prasad, and approved by (10) votes, with zero (0) against, and (0) abstention. The motion was carried.
ITEM 9 NSF Travel Grants Committee and ITEM 10 US Travel in these Times
Item 9 and 10 were taken together. Invernizzi gave an update on committee formation, and that at this time (call closes on March 27) with 113 applications by Friday 21 March. Rohit Negi asked for clarity on visa processes in the US for members. Prasad and Pollock noted that we need to see what is real and keep up to date nearer the time.
ITEM 11 Future Meetings Planning
Pollock gave and update on Toronto 2026, progress on the successful expression of interest (EOI) which was launched via Technoscience. Wen-hua Kuo provided a written update on the Taipei meeting in 2027 with continuing talks and visit to national Taiwan university with key figures for the conference for leadership, taking place in April. VOTE: The motion to encouraging Kean Birch to convene with Amanda (and Pollock) meeting of those who have expressed interest in 4S-Toronto organising and others from their networks to embark on planning was moved by Amit Prasad and seconded by Noela Invernizzi, and approved by (10) votes, with zero (0) against, and (0) abstention. The motion was carried.
ITEM 12 6S Update*
A presentation of 6S contribution to Seattle ’25 was given by Sepehr and voted on during the finance update (see Item 4, above).
*Pouya left in the middle of the discussion of item 12.
ITEM 13 Any Other Business
With no AOB proposed, Pollock brought the meeting to a close.
Meeting was drawn to a close at 14:15.