======================= Grand Council Chronicle ======================= Issue #10 -- April 5, 1995 Contents of this issue: Justin: List of the Council Members & Contact Info Cariadoc: Society, Corporation, & Goals Alysoun: Response to #9, serve members Serwyl: Various Topics Caroline: New Member Board Report Update on Moving Forward Tibor: Proposed Mission Statement Project: Streamlining Board Operations Filling the seats, a report International Issues Alienor: Introductory Letter Bertrik: Future of the GC Alban: territoriality, operations, non-us registration This is the Grand Council Chronicle, the proceedings of the Grand Council of the Known World, a body chartered to examine the structure of the Society for Creative Anachronism, Inc., and make recommendations of changes. The contents represent the opinions of the contributing authors, and do not necessarily represent the official policies of the SCA, Inc. ---------------------------------------- >From the Secretary's Desk Okay, time to pull together that listing of the members of the Council. I believe the below information to be accurate, and represent the information that I currently believe to be public. It includes the addresses of all the members of the Council, and the phone numbers and/or email addresses of those who have previously published them in the Chronicle. I will be maintaining this list on the Web; if you want to have information added, deleted, or changed, please tell me. The order is alphabetical by SCA name, because I believe that that is the way that people are most often going to want to look someone up. Forgive the slightly inconsistent format; I've gotten these from Caroline at various times, in various formats, and I don't have time to clean them all up neatly. (Says the man who should have thought ahead, and gotten a fresh list.) Hopefully it's all accurate. Alban St Albans Edward Eisenstein 3940 Highway H Fayette MO 65248 USA alban@delphi.com Alienor Llanfaes Colette Goodyear PO Box 2381, Station C St. Johns, Newfoundland A1C 6E7 Canada (709) 895-2609 colette@morgan.ucs.mun.ca Alyson de Ros Carole C. Roos 1107 N. Notre Dame Ave. South Bend, IN 46617 Carole.C.Roos.2@nd.edu Arthur the Dented Scott Keys 106 Lehman Lane Neshanic Station, NJ 08853 arthur@cnj.digex.net Bertram of Bearington P. David Schroeder 117 Gordon St Pittsburgh, PA 15218 Bertrik van Triecht Bart Orbons Warande 193, 3705 ZP Zeist, The Netherlands +31 3404 50124 orbons@fys.ruu.nl Brian O'Seabac Guy M. Cox 914 Rosewood Drive San Mateo, CA 94401 Brion Thornbird ap Rhys Brian R. Price 316 Escuela Ave. #38 Mountain View, CA 94040 Cariadoc of the Bow David Friedman Chicago, IL ddfr@midway.uchicago.edu Caroline Forbes Carol Smith 14713 Mill Spring Drive, Chesterfield, MO 63017-5654 clsmit@ccmail.monsanto.com Catrin Gwynstlum Janna Spanne Nyckelkroken 50 S-226 47 Lund Sweden janna.spanne@kansli.lth.se Corwyn Da Costa Manuel Costa 359 America Ave, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Edric Aaron Hartwood Kristofer L. Hellstrom ???, CA Edward the Discalceate Phil Anderson 9 Kahu Road Christchurch 4 New Zealand Eichling von Amrum Janet Chennault 15538 Cobalt Ave, Sylmar, CA 91342 Eric Bearsbane Eric Wagner 9301 Brydon Way, Sacramento, CA 95826 Fiacha Mac Neill Nigel Haslock 6921 Spada Road Shohomish WA 98290 USA haslock@zso.dec.com Finnvarr de Taahe Steve Muhlberger RR#1 Box 123 Bonfield Ontario P0H 1E0 Canada 705 776-1247 stevem@einstein.unipissing.ca Frederick of Holland Frederick J. Hollander 3334 California St Berkeley, CA 94703 Frithiof Skagge Sven Noren Gnejsvagen 2K S-752 42 Uppsala Sweeden Galen Eadwin Kirchenbauer Galen Bevel 9922 Kirkwren, Houston, TX 77089 sir.galen.k@dobharchu.org Gareth ap Tancred Roy Gathercoal 2504 Haworth Ave, Newberg, OR 97132 (503) 537-1162 rgathercoal@foxmail.gfc.edu Gyrth Oldcastle Gerald O'Leary 13402 Vandalia Dr. Rockville MD 20853 Hossein Ali Qomi Gregory F. Rose 95 Varga Road, #231 Ashford, CT Isabeau of the Wylde Woode Angie Eves-Welsh 38 Armstrong St, Ashfield, New South Wales, NSW 2131, Australia John of Sternfeld John Elmore 5801 Woodside Drive, Indianapolis, IN 46208 317-259-1403 Justin du Coeur Mark Waks 82 Montclair Ave., Waltham, MA 02154 617-891-3057 justin@inmet.com Kyle of Kincora Rolland Smith 1554 Church St, Mobile, AL 36604-1613 Magnus Maquire James D. McManus Suite 300 Palladio Bldg Duluth, MN 55802-1509 Michael Fenwick Michael Andrews 429 Dakota Norman OK 73609 USA Modius Monsdraconis Erik Langhans 9019 Vogue Houston, TX 77080 modius@dobharchu.org Myrdin the Just Michael Potter 121 Westview Terrace Rochester, NY 14620 201-455-2815 potterm1@iia.org Nathan Adelaar Nathan Clarenburg Manhattan, KS nathan@depot.cis.ksu.edu Olaf Askoldssonn Charles Curtis 201 N Miller Street, Greer, SC 29650 Randell Raye of Crianlarich Laureen Hart 14550 20th NE, Seattle WA 98155 206-361-9545 Sarah Karen Penn 9597 South 285 E, Sandy, UT 84070 Serwyl ap Morgan Chuck Hack 3366 Laurel Grove South, Jacksonville, FL 32223 Terras Joseph Heck 601 Lyons St Columbia MO 65201 USA (314) 882-5000 ccjoe@showme.missouri.edu Tibor of Rock Valley Mark Schuldenfrei 109 Milton St., Arlington, MA 02174 schuldy@math.harvard.edu Titus Claudius Tod Huckaby 2012 Orchard Place, Ft. Collins, CO 80521 (303) 490-2936 dlc@fc.hp.com Also, an unrelated note: I got at least one complaint from a GC member that Digest #9 was too long, and apparently broke her mailer. Assuming this happens again to any of the Council members, I'll probably have to go to splitting the digests. If this does happen, please tell me about it, and tell me *where* the break occurred, so I can make a sensible assessment of how I need to deal with the problem... -- Justin ---------------------------------------- >From ddfr@midway.uchicago.edu Fri Mar 31 00:30:37 1995 Subject: GC submission Finnvairr writes: " I do not think that the GC or any other body in the SCA has a mandate to monkey with the overall goals of the SCA. " On the whole I agree, but with one qualification. Suppose we end up recommending a looser structure, in which multiple legally independent groups recognize each other as playing a common game, perhaps with some procedure for settling disagreements about the rules. Someone at some point then has to specify what defines a group as part of the "The Society." Pretty clearly, if a Civil War recreation group asks to be part of the Society, someone explains that they are not playing our game. Acre or Markland is not so clear. So it may be worth thinking, not about the goals of the SCA, but about its defining characteristics--the minimal set of characteristics needed to make a group fit in. Alysoun writes: "Please clarify terms. In common use around here, "Society for Creative Anachronism" or "SCA" stands for the whole thing." Which whole thing--a 501c(3)a Corporation chartered in California and with no statutory members, or a social net of 50,000 or so people playing a (vaguely) common game? I prefer to use "The Corporation" or "SCA Inc." for the former, "The Society" for the latter. Alyson writes: "I am even less sure of "Society" meaning the participants, "subculture," the "people," etc. Is the intent to distinguish the real SCA from a false SCA (along the lines of France versus the Vichy regime)?" No. Aelflaed, for example, was a representative of the Corporation when she was acting Executive Director. She also was, is, and will be until her dying day a member of the Society. She was still a member of the Society even though her views on some central issues (i.e. required membership) were, in my view, mistaken. The distinction is not between the real and the false but between a clearly defined mundane legal entity (the Corporation) and a fuzzily defined social entity (the Society). David/Cariadoc David Friedman ddfr@midway.uchicago.edu ---------------------------------------- >From Carole.C.Roos.2@nd.edu Mon Apr 3 11:15:53 1995 Subject: GC: Response to #9, serve members Greetings from Alysoun (1) The message from Sylard on the situation in Canada was sobering to say the least. Can we set up a committee to find suitable people to advise us on this? Again I stress the need for information. What is the extent of our membership in countries other than US/Cananda? Do groups on US military bases operate differently from other groups in these countries? (2) Eichling suggests looking at the structure of other organizations. David/Cariadoc and Justin have already mentioned two (Mineral and Masonic). This could be very helpful. I suggest some considerations to keep in mind: a. whether the membership is open (anyone can join) or closed (someone must be invited/ approved/ meet certain requirements); b. membership orientation/training and the requirements/incentives supporting it; c. the degree to which the service staff is professionalized; d. external governance, funding sources, public relations. (These often overlap as in the case of United Way agencies or those receiving grant monies. Another example would be a college fraternity which is bounded by a local pan-Hellenic council and the university as well as its national.) (3) David/Cariadoc's model is rapidly losing its appeal to me--have I got it right? We would have a welter of legally independent groups, each requiring membership dues, but of varying amounts, although possibly regulated by some Kingdom maximum. Some groups would be territorial with open membership, rather like our current local groups. Some would be non-territorial and private, rather like our current households. Unreasonable discrimination by the private groups would result in the Kingdom refusing to accept that group as a member. How would anyone know the group discriminated unreasonably? What would non-acceptance entail? Not advertising their events in the kingdom newsletter or listing them to receive flyer from other groups? No awards? Members of that group can't compete in Crown, go to Pennsic, show up at "offical" events? What about people with membership in more than one group? Who would keep track of all this? Even aside from such problems I don't see the advantages. On this model, what guarantees there will be an open group in the territory instead of one or more private ones? More of our new members come as "friends of friends" than through direct referral so it is not the case that the territorial group would have a recruitment advantage. What ensures the health of the territorial group? One private group might draw off all the good fighters and another all the A&S expertise, leaving the open group with a steady turnover of newcomers and those who would otherwise "be left out in the cold." The advantages for the non-territorial groups are not so clear either. As it now stands, a household is not required to do any paperwork and being nothing more than a free association, it has no restrictions. A household can ride to hounds, hold religious services, or bungee-jump in armor for all we care. Moreover, in Midrealm, they can hold events if they have the sponsorship of an official group (our shire has sponsored two such events)--and this provides an incentive for the household to maintain a cordial relationship with the rest of us. (4) I'm still suffering a problem with terminology. I want to talk about the whole, not the parts, and without focusing on any particular structural form. Sometimes participants do seem to work for this larger whole: officers don't serve simply for personal glory; people take pride in the time they devote to making an event work; what is the Order of the Pelican? There's an important dimension involved here, but I don't have a clear grasp on it and would like more input. Focusing on the other side, that the organization serves the members. I think it is fair to say that most of our participants were not re-creating the Middle Ages on their own before or without the SCA. So the organization first of all provides the idea. People do not generally take the idea and implement it on their own. That is, they don't tend to form independent medieval re-creation groups. Instead the 'idea' is strongly associated with participation in this particular organization. Why? I see two reasons, but there may be more. One is opportunity. Participation in our existing event-system provides more opportunity to re-create with less work to the individual that an independent local medieval club would. The other is educational. Many people don't know how to re-create the Middle Ages on their own. They want to learn how to do it in terms of both historical elements (what armor, how to make it) and organizational elements (how to form a local group, how to run a safe tournament). If this account is accurate, it would seem that the organization (taken at any level) should provide three basic services: the idea of medieval re-creation; the opportunity for medieval re-creation; and information on how to do medieval re-creation. I would like feedback on this. ---------------------------------------- Greetings unto the members of the Grand Council from Serwyl ap Morgan. First, a general greeting to the new members. We are in for an interesting ride, and I look forward to working with you in the months ahead. Good Luck! EXCLUSIVE TERRITORIES There has been some discussion on eliminating the exclusive territories rules to allow groups to form (or collapse) as they will regardless of geographical factors. My initial reaction on this suggestion is a negative one. My reasons are as follows: 1. Demos: Trimarian groups do a lot of demos for local schools. As it is, school officials have a hard time locating our groups due to individuals moving and normal (and abnormal) officer changeovers. As such Demos are an important part of our public relations and as well as our non profit educational designation, anything that makes it even harder for the public to contact us is non productive. 2. Social Issues: I tend to agree with John Sternfeld's comments in GC#8, p.5. At least the current system encourages people to try and work out their differences. Why discuss your disputes and try to work through them when you can just pack up your household and go your own way? Could any Kingdom ever hope to make a Barony again? 3. The Heralds will go Crazy: If we try to stick to the practice of registering group names for the purposes of maintaining some semblance of a period naming practices, we could conceivably register multitudes of group names. And what happens when a group folds? If 2 separate people want to reorganize the old group with the same name, who gets to use it? Do we start to register group names to individuals then? Just imagine the mess that would be. 4. Control: With the number of aspects of the SCA that touch on mundane law, I feel that the Kingdom Seneschal has a much greater degree of control in an exclusive territory system. While I expect the majority of groups would remain stable, there will almost certainly be a few 'Shire of the Month' groups. With all that said, is the current system unnecessarily restrictive? Maybe. Sometimes a new group established close to an existing one is a good idea for population or other reasons. What about a compromise solution? Why not allow the Kingdoms to regulate new group creation? Local conditions and styles of governance will vary, and this is a good candidate for a responsibility that can be easily pushed down to the Kingdom level. ON THE DURATION OF THE GRAND COUNCIL While I realize our charter is a limited one in terms of time, there has been some talk among the Inter-Kingdom Advisory Council of using us as a permanent idea generating body. Not necessarily a bad idea. ON THE IAC IN GENERAL Since I brought up the IAC, have any of you been in contact with your representative recently? The Board may not be working with them now, but they are still out there and talking to each other. They have been discussing many of the same things we are and may have some useful insights. Also, several GC members are talking about the IAC and its' possible roles in the future. Some thoughts on a few of the responsibilities they could take: A. Review of 2nd level banishments. Assuming we don't overhaul the entire system, the 2nd level banishments could be reviewed at a lower level to help decrease the BOD workload. As the 3rd level involves a complete revocation of membership, it would undoubtedly remain a Board responsibility. B. Approval of Petitions for Baronial Status. Some might argue that this should be wholly a Kingdom function, but I like the concept of some sort of a standard which has to be met Society- wide. C. Approval of advancement to Principality or Kingdom status. This may be arguably a Board prerogative, but there I can't think of any compelling reasons why the Board has to make this type of decision. Can anyone come up with a reason this should NOT be done? D. Inter-Kingdom disputes. As long as they do not have legal ramifications. WHAT DO WE WANT THE SCA TO BE IN THE FUTURE? This is a point we have not fully addressed. In fact, we probably would not come to a consensus on it ourselves. But it is something we should be considering in every discussion. Alban mentioned in GC#8 p.3 that we should think about things we would like to see the SCA Inc do in the future. I've always wondered why the SCA doesn't have a scholarship program to aid history students. The level of scholarship does not have to be large, at least not at first. It has the advantages of providing us with a real proof of our educational status, and it's a goal that doesn't have to break the bank. WHAT TYPE OF ORGANIZATION ARE WE? Alysoun makes the point of asking whether we are we an organization where the members serve the organization or the organization serves the members? I would say that we are both. As an organization we promote education and research, and it shows every time we do a demo or someone writes a research paper. the organization's goals have helped me find an outlet for my interests study and research, and I'm sure it's done the same for others. On the other hand, we are here to have fun, and the organization allows us to participate in a very complicated and usually enjoyable role playing game. Balancing the two aspects is the real trick. ON SEPARATING CORPORA FROM THE BY-LAWS Fiacha's suggestion to separate the By-Laws from Corpora has possibilities. This would formalize a distinction between Board responsibilities and the Kingdom (and IAC) ones. I agree we should pursue this further. ---------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 04 Apr 95 09:04:01 cst From: "CAROL L SMITH" Subject: GC -- New Member Greetings from Caroline! Some of you may have noticed that the list of members of the Grand Council had only 39 names. The list was incomplete because I was awaiting confirmation from one member. I am pleased to announce that Lord Edward the Discalceate/Phil Anderson has now joined our ranks. We are now at 40 members, and have no excuse not to move forward. See my other posting on this issue. Caroline clsmit@ccmail.monsanto.com ---------------------------------------- From: Mark Schuldenfrei Subject: GC: Proposed Mission Statement Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 10:55:06 -0400 (EDT) Greetings from Tibor. Much discussion has taken place with many people, over the past year, on the Corporate Mission of the SCA, Incorporated. (For those of us who consider the Society and the Corporation severable, it has been even more interesting.) Just about every book I have read on management, restructuring or nonprofits have suggested a clear and simple Corporate mission statement. I would like to propose one. "We make medieval and renaissance re-creation fun and educational." It lacks in many details, that many other versions I have seen tend to have. It doesn't talk about how, or why, or exactly what we re-create. These could be seen as flaws. On the other hand, anything we do that violates this mission statement, is counter-productive. A few further thoughts, and directions for debate. (I'm not trying to structure the debate, but this has been discussed quite a bit already). 1. We may want to consider narrowing the scope as far as the Articles of Incorporation do, by adding "pre-seventeenth century western culture" to it. This can lead to a blood-bath when the many non-Western re-creationists feel there ox is being gored, however. There were some interesting discussions along those lines on SCA-reform, although they were bitter at times. 2. Another thought. Sir Nathan Adelaar and I discussed this an awful lot via email. He wanted to consider: "We organize medieval and renaissance re-creation for fun and education." I was not terribly in favor of this, because the Corporation has not, historically, organized very much at all in terms of the actual re-creation details. I'm also not sure, personally, that a restructured Society after the GC is done will necessarily be in a senior role. (See another post of mine in today's Chronicle, if I get it done in time.) But it does have valid positive points, and is worth seriously considering. I look forward to discussions. I do appreciate that for many of us, this proposal is coming out of the blue, and I hope you will consider it as a reasonable starting point. I'd like to propose a mission statement to the Board for the next meeting, so please do not let this lie fallow. Tibor ---------------------------------------- From: Colette Goodyear Subject: GCC-Introductory letter Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 12:29:10 -0230 (NDT) To the assembled members of the Grand Council, greetings from Mistress Alienor Llanfaes! I am still trying to catch up on the discussions that have been going on thus far so this letter is merely an introductory one. I'd like to appear at least semi-informed before I put my foot in my mouth. I am currently the seneschal of the shire of Ar n-Eilean-ne which comprises the mundane province of Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. The shire is huge--bigger than some kingdoms in fact. The total population of the province is just over 750,000 people. About 125,000 live on the east coast of Newfoundland in and around the capital city. There are several largish communities with populations of 20 to 40 thousand. The rest of the population live in small communities of under 1000 people, scattered along the coastline. The nearest group to Ar n-Eilean-ne is the Barony of Ruantallan in Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. To get there requires a 13 hour drive across the island and then a 8-hour ferry crossing. Otherwise a $400 CDN plane ticket is in order. As you may guess, the concerns of small, geographically isolated groups are familiar ones to me. What do you do with a group that has no landed nobles of its own and is so far away from a neighbouring group that it can't even "borrow" their nobles for a bit of pageantry? Royalty (and who can blame them) will come only if we pay for their plane ticket. What happens when a group is forced to rely on just its own members to organize events and teach new skills because the give and take and the visiting back and forth among groups in close proximity common in denser-populated areas is just not there? What happens to membership when all you see for it is a kingdom newsletter that lists events that you can't get to? If you can only get to two events a year because that's all your shire has the energy to organize, a three-dollar non-member surcharge becomes cheaper than a full membership. How do isolated groups get acclimated to the SCA and its customs? No one in this shire for example has ever seen a Crown Tourney or a Coronation (that includes myself). Very few have ever seen a knighting or a laurel ceremony. The concept of a "court" becomes the stuff of travellers' tales. Of course, it's not all bad. Maybe isolated groups are more flexible. Maybe they can experiment more with group arrangements. And, fortunately, we have always had someone who has taken up the challenge and taught him or herself a new skill from scratch, thus encouraging self-reliance and research. What also interests me is the increasingly international scope of the SCA, Inc. and what needs to be done there. The business of the waiver, for example, has prompted a few discussions up this way. So too has the issue of finances and financial disclosure. BTW, Alienor is from Llanfaes on the Isle of Anglesley. She is currently living somewhere in Gwynedd. Llewelyn ap Gruffydd rules over Wales and Henry III in England. Alienor is married to a Norman man who prefers to spend his time in England which is just fine by Alienor who can't stand the man. She's hoping that he'll find some eligible Englishwoman there and divorce her. She enjoys entertaining guests and keeps a fine kitchen/brewhouse. She is also a nimble seamstress but has no patience with embroidery. She enjoys riding and hunting but gets little time to do both. She takes a keen interest in Welsh politics and law. Colette Goodyear is a technical writer/editor and copyright researcher who may be entering law school in September (no replies yet!). If such is the case, I'll be dividing my time between the Barony of Ruantallan and Ar n-Eilean-ne. I've been in the SCA for 8 years. I have a BA(Hons) in English/Poli.Sci., and have completed half the courses for a MA in Middle English. Married, one cat. I've served as seneschal of Ar n'Eilean-ne for the past five years but have held no other offices either locally or at the kingdom level. My SCA interests are cooking, brewing, sewing, herbalism and archery. I'm also teaching myself how to tablet weave and my housemates are determined to see me in armor someday soon. My postal address is: P. O. Box 2381, Stn C, St. John's, NF, A1C 6E7, Canada. My phone number is (709) 895-2609. Newfoundland has its own time zone which is 1 _1/2_ hours ahead of EST. My e-mail address is colette@plato.ucs.mun.ca. Since I live with a non-SCA husband, please ask for Colette not Alienor should you phone. I look forward to working with you all. Alienor ---------------------------------------- From: Bart Orbons Subject: GC: Re: Future of the GC. Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 17:04:20 +0200 (MET DST) Good greetings, to all the gentles of the GC, from Bertrik Justin Writes in GC-chronicle #7: >In issue 7, Bertrik writes: >>Alltough I can >>understand the haste that some have in getting the discussion started, >>I am hoping that we all wanted to build some solid (With that I mean, >>excisting past the date of jan 1997) organ out of this grand Councel. > >I do *not* agree with this -- I disagree most fervently. > >The GC was set up specifically to be a limited-time affair, a one-shot >body intended to provide recommendations for the Society's broad >structural problems. It was *deliberately* not constituted to be an >ongoing body, and it is not clear whether its basic charter is I don't percieve it that way. >appropriate to an ongoing task. For example, the GC is mildly >self-selecting, although not quite as much so as the Board. While this >shouldn't be a problem over the two years we're going to be here >(because two years probably isn't enough time for a philosophical >faction to really "take over", given the diversity of mindset we >currently have), it *could* lead to something akin to "Boardthink" >in the long run. I agree with this perception, and that this might be a danger for the long term phylosophical approach. I don't know whether the GC is the most appropriate organ for discussing the long term changes for the society. I think that there is a need for such a structure though. > >Yes, there may be a need for an ongoing philosophical body. Frankly, >it should be the Board -- that's what Boards of Directors are >*supposed* to do. I don't agree with you on this... I think the board of Directors should busy themself with the task wether the society is running well. So keep track of what the officers are doing. What might be the problems living in the kingdoms etc. I think the board should be monitoring the current affairs of the board. I think that it would be a good idea to have an independent structure advising the board on long term changes for the society as a whole... To indicate that we are not talking about giving different names to the same structures... Who in your perception should controll wether the officers of the society are functioning ok? >Or other structures. The point is, that isn't what we're here for, >and we shouldn't waste time on it. We should be working out >procedures for what we *have* been chartered for, not worrying >about the ones we haven't... Uhm.. I think I you are misleading the discussion here... I think it is very important that we work to the well functioning of the society. What structure within the society does what. Making new structures is one of the inherrent sollutions if we want to unburdon another structure. Basically the Long term discussions and feedback is an important task, and quite a heavy workload if we combine it with the controlling the 'monitoring the organisation task' My proposal is to separate the two tasks... And, currently the GC does cover one of those two tasks. So it is a likely candidate to take over that task for the long term. I would not mind reshaping the GC to fill in that task in the long run (with a different selection system for new members). Or we set up a different structure that does the long term advising... Oh well, Yust another thought on how to organise the society on top level... With friendly greetings... Bertrik ---------------------------------------- From: Mark Schuldenfrei Subject: GC: Project: Streamlining Board Operations. Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 11:10:15 -0400 (EDT) Greetings from Tibor. Between various personal delays, and the excessive time it took to fill the GC, I must apologize to you all for not getting started quickly on my minor operational goal: helping the Directors rebalance the workload that they have. Being that as it may, and noting with sadness that over 10 percent of our time together has gone by without anything being given to the Board, I would like to ask for those interested in working with me on streamlining Director's tasks to volunteer to me directly, within a week or two. Email at schuldy@math.harvard.edu or regular mail at 109 Milton Street, Arlington MA 02174-8734, or phone at +1 617 648 5326 will all do. I would like a small group of us to be ready to work closely with the Directors, taking the lead from them as to their workload, shortly after the next Board meeting. I would like to have a proposal that meets with informal approval of the various current and former Directors by early June, so that the GC can vote on it before the deadline for the July meeting. I hope to be able to update the Chronicle every week or two, as to who is working on the project, and what we are doing. Tibor ---------------------------------------- From: Mark Schuldenfrei Subject: GC: Filling the seats, a report Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 11:57:36 -0400 (EDT) Greetings from Tibor. I've been asked, in a few times and places, to explain how the remaining seats were filled in the GC. Below, is a version of the answer I sent to the Outlands mailing list. I must emphasize that these are my opinions only. I have not discussed them with Baron Corwyn, or Lady Caroline, and it would be unfair to attribute my opinions to them. For one, I think our process took too long. For what we accomplished (and for which we ought to be pleased) we could have operated much faster. The lesson I would learn from this is that for every process, someone needs to be tasked with a schedule, and a need to track time. There was also something of an information gap. I think part of the reason the task languished so long, was that none of us really took the lead in informing each other of the status of the task. This is another management lesson. One positive side effect of a public commenting process, was that any questions people have about the process, and its politization, can be answered by inspection. People who do not like the outcome can certainly question the judgement of the participants, but our hands are pretty clean. Since I have been asked by individuals in two different kingdoms why their Kingdom doesn't have more representation, it's clearly come in handy. On the negative side. We really didn't receive much negative feedback, since it would all be on the record. And our own negative discussions were kind of inferential. If a candidate had 3 reasons for rejection, we might mention only the most objective and acceptible reason: even if that in itself was not sufficient. Overall, I'm pleased with the open approach: but perhaps it could have been improved. I am quite glad that we took a different approach from the SCA standard "Private Meeting, with results announced and no explanations" style. I also want to thank Corwyn and Caroline, for not getting mad at me when I grew impatient. Or at least hiding it well. We did have one disagreement, about the timing of announcements. I am pleased to report that it really ended up making no difference. And, in the mea culpa department, I was one day late with my original review. So, this is how I pared the list down, and how I see the process as having gone forward. I speak for me, and not for Caroline or Corwyn's thoughts. [Adapted from a letter posted to the Outlands list] I looked at the list of Kingdoms and mundane areas that were represented by Kingdom appointees, and the Board, before we started. I didn't see a terrible lack in terms of range of experience in ranks or regions, except for two faults. One was really new people: it seems it takes a few years before your Crowns or the Board notice you. The other was Canadian representation. I went through the entire list of resumes, one at a time, looking for something that each person could add to the GC, especially from a mundane and technical end. Some of the people I kept on the list really had little to offer but international residence: but I felt that was valuable, and kept those too. I sent my notes to Caroline, and we accepted those that had three votes for, and discussed those that had two votes for. This left us with not enough candidates on the committee. (We accepted each of those with two votes, as the third member always agreed.) I then sat down and did an analysis of membership in years, and mundane location. We had covered the "years experience" issue, but not the Canadian one. We settled on Duke Finnvarr for that. We also considered several late-arriving resumes, and picked one person from those. This left us with 6 openings: for expediency, we each chose two, gave the others veto power, and when no one was vetoed, we closed the case. One of our candidates chose to back out, but recommended a substitute that was on our "2nd choice" list anyway. We approached him, and he accepted. I chose two people I had corresponded with over the years, that were not from my Kingdom. I felt that the Eastern point of view was already very well represented. Both of those people have disagreed with me over those years: but always in a fashion I found edifying. I specifically DID NOT choose yes men. What I didn't do, honestly, was pay much attention during the process to where people where from. The end result was *slightly* biased bi-coastally, expecially toward the California coast. Caroline said that her analysis showed that we basically picked proportionally to the number of applicants per kingdom. I didn't double check this, but relied upon it. [... Outlands specific stuff excised ...] I don't know if this answer is satisfactory. In a nutshell, I took the technical experts, and international representation, looked for any obvious bias, and finding none, quit the process. I used mundane locations for my analyses: never Kingdom ones. [End of adapted letter] If you look at the lists that I produced at the end of my first pass, it was broken into five groups. One was individuals who I felt I needed to discuss as unique cases. Another was people that I felt I could not see on the GC, for whatever reason. The remaining list was divided as I described above. I referred to those people as the A list. There were also a B list, and a C list. B list was people that, while I didn't see a particular reason to recommend them, were also folks that I would accept without question. C list folks, I felt, also had something to offer, but not something that wasn't already well represented. I was really pleased at the candidates, and letters, that we received. I was also pleased to be able to serve. I'm kind of pleased to be done, too. (:-) While perhaps we could have done a better job here, and there (and I would really appreciate people's advice on how to have done better) I think Caroline and Corwyn, with my help, have done a fine job. I will answer any questions, privately or publically. Tibor ---------------------------------------- From: Mark Schuldenfrei Subject: GC: International Issues Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 13:07:40 -0400 (EDT) Greetings from Tibor. Some discussions from the sca-reform mailing list have brought to light an interesting international issue. I think we should begin to discuss it here. Any group that functions as an Society group, will tend to do some of the same things. They will tend to handle money, handle communal property, settle insurance issues. In order to protect our members in non-US situations, many of them have found it necessary to locally incorporate. From what I understand of these situations, this is very wise, and very necessary. However, with the exception of Lochac, the SCA Incorporated seems to be unable to define, or create, a working relationship with those groups. And, >from what I gather, the current situation with Lochac is working only by dint of extraordinary effort, and much winking at interesting situations. I submit, as a thesis, that the Society will HAVE to deal maturely with the issue of multiple international corporations, in a mature and professional manner. This we do not do. I also wonder about some of the basics. Gentles in Nordmark (on the sca-reform list) have noted that their government does not let nonprofits cede control to overseas corporations. I don't know if there is any way that an US 501(c)(3) can turn over funds to international nonprofits: I know that it is restricted in the domestic arena in some ways. There seems to be some sensitivity in overseas groups to simply ceding control to the US corporation, on a social level. They are not our colonies, after all. I think we need to begin to discuss mundane international issues. My thinking on this is rather affected by discussions on sca-reform, and I have come to the conclusion that we need to find a structure that is not US Corporate based, that coordinates the actions of International corporations that are independent, toward the same goals and mission statements. There may well be other ideas and issues, that we should discuss. Would someone like to take a leadership role in this? Tibor ---------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 04 Apr 95 12:51:54 cst From: "CAROL L SMITH" Subject: GC -- Board Report Greetings from Caroline! Below is the report to the Board I sent for their meeting this weekend (the 8th). As we present information for the Board's discussion and decision, I expect more of you to be involved in the construction of these reports. CFO ------------------ TO: Board of Directors, SCA, Inc. FROM: Carol L. Smith (Lady Caroline Forbes of Oxfordshire) Grand Council Coordinator DATE: 24 March 1995 RE: Grand Council Report for April 1995 Board Meeting This report covers the time period from 14 January 1995 to 8 April 1995. ACTION REQUIRED BY THE BOARD Confirm the appointment of the remaining 20 members of the Grand Council. These gentles were chosen from the 125 applications received. The choices were difficult, and we feel we have appropriately staffed the Council to continue our work. Honorable Lord Alban St Albans Edward L. Eisenstein Mistress Alienor Llanfaes Colette Goodyear Lady Alysoun de Ros Carole C. Roos Lord Arthur the Dented Scott Keys Master Bertram of Bearington P. David Schroeder Lord Brian O'Seabac Guy M. Cox Sir Brion Thornbird Brian R. Price Lady Catrin Gwyntstlum Janna Geggus Spanne Sir Edric Aaron Hartwood Kristofer Hellstrom Lord Edward the Discalceate Phil Anderson Lord Fiacha Mac Neill Nigel R. Haslock Duke Finnvarr de Taahe Steve Muhlberger Duke Frederick of Holland Frederick J. Hollander Lord Frithiof Skagge Sven Noren Duke Gyrth Oldcastle Gerald O'Leary Honorable Lord Hossein Ali Qomi Greg Rose Lord Magnus Maquire James D. McManus Master Michael Fenwick Michael L. Andrews Lord Modius Monsdraconis Erik Langhans Lord Terras Joseph J. Heck SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES OF THE GRAND COUNCIL * The Grand Council has begun its work on a few projects as well as discussing the mission of the Corporation and the Landmarks of the Society. We have nothing to report yet, but the discussion is lively! * The infrastructure for the Grand Council is in place under the capable hands of Mark Waks (Master Justin du Coeur). The Grand Council Chronicle is produced weekly in both paper and email versions. There is also a Grand Council World Wide Web page and an FTP site for Internet users. The Chronicle is also available by subscription for non-Grand Council members. Please let me know if you have any questions. Carol L. Smith 14713 Mill Spring Drive Chesterfield, MO 63017-5654 (314) 694-4655 (days) (314) 530-1836 (evenings) (314) 693-4655 (fax) clsmit@ccmail.monsanto.com --------------------------- ---------------------------------------- >From ALBAN@delphi.com Tue Apr 4 14:44:36 1995 From: ALBAN@delphi.com Subject: territoriality, operations, non-us registration on canada, and indeed on non-american (i almost said "foreign") groups: has the board has ever, formally, refused to allow the registration of the sca in the appropriate country/province? if the sca needs to be legally registered with every country (or, in canada, every province) that we have groups, then register them. corpora states that the laws of the country supercede corpora, and if the country requires registration, payments of taxes, and so forth, go ahead and do it. the corporate treasurer would need to keep two sets of books: one for purely american income and such, for the internal revenue service; and another for worldwide income and expenses. unless, of course, the sca is divided into no- bigger-than-national entities, in which case there would be no, umm, SCA, Inc., treasurer (just an SCA, Inc. (U.S.) treasurer, and an SCA, Inc. (Canada) treasurer, and an SCA, Ltd. (Britain) treasurer, and an SCA Gesellschaft (Germany).......) my idea about adding services, later: well, it was an idea. (anyone attended a barnstorming session? the kind where all ideas, no matter how silly, stupid, or worthwhile are put up for discussion? and then everything is discussed, modified, thrown out, changed, and/or adopted?) territoriality: it strikes me that we're going into this a lot deeper than the subject requires; we're supposed to be reforming the board, not the whole sca. but...if we can discuss the idea of the sca, inc., becoming a federation of kingdoms, then i can easily imagine a local group being, not the standard model of a local group where everyone plays together, but a federation of households/guilds/interest groups. this would increase the importance of diverse groups and decrease the importance of a central group government, but, if it works on a national level, it could work on a local level. there would need to be at least one contact person to give assistance to new members; and the diverse groups would get together regularly even on an informal basis for gossip and beer. the household of x could hold its own event, or call on the assistance ofhousehold y and guild z for a kingdom level event. (mind you, i prefer the "one group per area" ideal we've been operating under for lo these many years - but i can also see how a federation of groups could also work locally.) this is, in fact, the way a certain barony of my acquaintance works: weekly (or more often) meetings are held by the various guilds and households, and once a month there's a baronial moot-with-dinner held, so that everyone gets together, newbies are shown around, and upcoming barony-wide events are discussed. small shires don't tend to have a lot of different groups within them, and this federation idea won't be needed. several different interest groups/households develop only when there's enough of a local sca population to have several groups. the population's big enough to have sub- groups only when sub-groups start appearing...if you have the typical 5-member group trying to get started as a shire, if they don't like each other enough to get started, there won't be a shire. new members: how do interested people join at the local level? i've heard there are two traditional methods: the local group puts on a demo/event/dance practice, and someone looks over, finds it interesting, walks up to one of the people at the , and asks where he/she can join. the other method is when someone talks about it to friends, neighbors, and co-workers, and the friend/neighbor/co-worker is interested enough to join. there may be other methods (national magazines doing a story on us; local newspapers doing local color; a local radio station, ditto....). where was i? in either of the traditional methods for recruitment, the local federation should not have a problem, as long as there's at least a contact person, which usually means a chatelaine/gold key. if the local federation meets at least once a month, new member recruitment and retention should not be too much of a problem. in any case, i think this should best be left at the kingdom level, not at the board level. if kingdoms want to restrict groups to strictly territoriality, so be it. if they want to try out a federated group territory, so be it. we can try everything from a united kingdom through a bunch of local pricipalities a la germany to independent city-states. question out of left field: does the iac have an operating charter like the one caroline forbes put forward for the grand council? possible idea for possible discussion: divide known-world-wide operations into several types of bodies. the biggest and broadest would be an international confederation, specifically detailed to put out publications like ti and the complete anachronist, and to maintain some sort of stock clerk. there would also be, at this level, something like an advisory bureau of standards (or several bureaus of standards) which would handle, oh, heraldry (like the college of arms), minimum armour standards, landmarks for groups to handle what is and is not official sca (i.e., the landmarks discussion going on over in sca-reform), requirements for peerages, minimum mundane requirements for the chirurgeonate. in other words, stuff that _we_ require us to be, rather than what mundane authorities require us to be. the next level down would be the national/provincial bodies, which would handle all the mundane requirements that, oh, the relevant tax authorities would have us handle; or getting good rates on insurance that site owners need. a third grouping would be simple clearinghouses which serve as contact points for usefule information: arts and sciences, the archivist, addresses for known-world-wide (or even kingdom-level, or other large groups) guilds and households, addresses fOr contact people for the various territorial groups. there'd be groups to handle what _the sca_ requires, to handle what _mundane authorities_ require, and to handle everything else that _isn't_ required but is really useful to have around. alban ---------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 04 Apr 95 14:09:32 cst From: "CAROL L SMITH" Subject: GC: Update on Moving Forward Greetings unto the Grand Council from Caroline! This note will discuss a number of topics relating to the administration of the Grand Council. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GC AND THE BOARD Many of you have asked for more information on how the GC and Board interact. To date, the short answer is "not much at all". My role is to be the point person for the GC to the Board, and Randall Tatro is the Board Ombudsperson for the GC. Unfortunately, Randall and I have not communicated at all since before the January Board meeting. However, Randall is rumored to be stepping down at the meeting this weekend, leaving open the opportunity for a new ombudsperson. Ideally, this person would: * be an active reader of the GC Chronicle * work with me and any other appropriate GC people to provide feedback on proposals and help prepare them for presentation to the Board * facilitate the gathering of Corporate information for the GC * sponsor the GC to the Board Hopefully, the situation will improve this weekend. MY ACTION ITEMS As the result of your recent comments, I will be working on obtaining a bunch of information from the Board and Milpitas, including the final 1995 budget, the 1994 year-end statements, an update on the status of the latest version of Corpora and Bylaws, Committee reports, and anything else I can think of. This information may not be available for a couple of weeks since the Board meeting is this weekend. Also, thanks to Sylard's excellent letter via Finnvarr, I will work offline with our Canadian members to further pursue work on the issues with Revenue Canada and our Canadian branches. I would also like to hear from any other non-US members who have similar information on these issues in their countries. We need to provide this information to the Board. MOVING FORWARD We are all learning how to work and converse on a weekly digest basis. I, too, am learning how to facilitate such a communication process. I agree with Nathan and others that we need to create a process for discussion of issues to clarify where we are and where we're going. Therefore, I propose that we try out something like a Delphi method for the following topics. Of course, work on Canadian tax issues, outsourcing, etc. will continue as projects; this method would be used for discussing broader issues. Please let me know by _Issue 13_ (26 April) if you think this process (NOT these topics) would be a BAD idea (and why). _PROPOSAL_ To begin a Delphi discussion on the following 2 topics, beginning with Issue 14: Topic 1: What should the Mission of the SCA, Inc. be? Topic 2: What should the role of the Board of Directors be in the day to day running of the Corporation? Commentary: The results of both topics would be sent to the Board as proposals, for the July meeting (if we're ready) or the October meeting. Both have been bounced around for a while, so I'd like to try the process with them. Topic 1 has already begun to be discussed here and elsewhere, with a proposal by Tibor and perhaps others. These suggestions and any comments would be combined into the first Delphi discussion topic. This effort will take a few weeks to get organized, which is why it wouldn't start until Issue 14. Nathan has volunteered to be one of the 3 or 4 people to administer this Delphi discussion. If you would like to help out Nathan, please contact him or me by Issue 12 (19 April). Nathan's address should be elsewhere. Thanks again for your work on the Grand Council. I am always available for questions and feedback. Caroline ----------------------------------------