SCA politics
Nov. 7th, 2002 09:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cellioLast month, the officers of my local SCA group proposed changing the way we hold elections to restrict who can vote. The proposal was controversial and they had to have know that. I wrote then about why I thought this was a bad idea.
Last night was the next officers' meeting, where these changes were to be ratified. As it turns out (I'm failing to surpress cries of "I told you so"), the notion that these restrictions were now required by the kingdom and/or corporation was baseless. Someone got a ruling from the kingdom seneschal that our open policies, as they stand, are fine.
In addition, many officers (and other people) present spoke in favor of retaining our current policy on this point. Almost everyone in fact voted that way. One officer voted to restrict voting anyway.
My estimation of a couple people who were involved in this has dropped (not surprising). One of them is probably saying the same about me, but that's not my problem. At least that bit of ugliness is over now. (And hey, my estimation of some other people has risen, so it all balances out I guess.)
Now, onward to getting the officers to agree to structure events in such a way that the new, objectionable corporate tax can be avoided. (Early signs on the group email list are leaning positive, but there is also correlation between those who support the corporation in this matter and those who are email-averse, so that doesn't necessarily mean much.)
Last night was the next officers' meeting, where these changes were to be ratified. As it turns out (I'm failing to surpress cries of "I told you so"), the notion that these restrictions were now required by the kingdom and/or corporation was baseless. Someone got a ruling from the kingdom seneschal that our open policies, as they stand, are fine.
In addition, many officers (and other people) present spoke in favor of retaining our current policy on this point. Almost everyone in fact voted that way. One officer voted to restrict voting anyway.
My estimation of a couple people who were involved in this has dropped (not surprising). One of them is probably saying the same about me, but that's not my problem. At least that bit of ugliness is over now. (And hey, my estimation of some other people has risen, so it all balances out I guess.)
Now, onward to getting the officers to agree to structure events in such a way that the new, objectionable corporate tax can be avoided. (Early signs on the group email list are leaning positive, but there is also correlation between those who support the corporation in this matter and those who are email-averse, so that doesn't necessarily mean much.)
(no subject)
Date: 2002-11-13 11:58 am (UTC)Was speaking to one of the undergrads here at work today and she was complaining about a (greek) party she was sort of obligated to go to this weekend. The entrance fee is $80. Not sure if that's just for her or for her and a date... Apparently that's one of the cheaper functions because it's just a party and not an overnight trip (like they have coming up in a few weeks).
Reminded me of this conversation and thought to throw it in.