======================= Grand Council Chronicle ======================= Issue #27 -- August 9, 1995 Contents of this issue: Sec'y: Hossein's Proposal; Web Site; Administrivia Brion: Intro; GC Direction Finnvarr: GC Direction and Questions; Various Maghnuis: SCA Central Umbrella Alysoun: checks and balance 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 Two things: First of all, upon a little reflection, I am *not* calling a vote quite yet on Hossein's proposal. This is for two reasons: first, I'm now seeing more disagreement, and second (and more importantly), it occurs to me that it's now Pennsic season, and calling a vote during Pennsic seems inappropriate. (Sorry to those who aren't in the eastern half of the US, but the fact is that we are losing something like a third of the Council for a couple of weeks.) After Pennsic I'll be away for a couple of weeks, so *I* can't take action on this, but others should feel free if they think it appropriate. Second, I've rearranged the Web site slightly, to be a little cleaner. The only substantive difference right now is that there is now a publically-accessible archive of the discussions of the Membership Working Group, which has kicked into pretty high gear, and is now having a pretty busy debate. Other working groups should feel free to send me archives, if they feel it appropriate. The URL of the Web site, again, is: http://www.inmet.com/~justin/gc/ Finally, a word from our sponsor; the rest of this message is from Kwellend, who actually runs the GC mailing list: >As of the first of this month, I'm working as a sysadmin for >America OnLine's Web Operations group. This is a good thing >in a great many ways, but it does complicate things slightly >as regard to the mailing lists I ran while I was at Princeton, >of which SCAGC-L is one. > >The bad news is that I've been asked to either find a new home >for the lists or find someone else at Princeton to own the lists. >Since the only other full-time employee at Princeton who is also >SCA isn't all that interested in the job, I've asked AOL if I can >move the list there. The answer to that question was 'Sure, no >problem.' So, as soon as things are a little more stable for me >personally (family moved down here and a machine that lets me read >my AOL mail on my desk) I'll start the process of moving the list >down here. > >I will ask Princeton to maintain a forwarding address to the new >list address, so the transision should be mostly transparent >to everyone subscribing, other than possible changes to the list >commands you'll use. I don't know yet what I'll have to get used >to... > >I had hoped to have this completed before Pennsic, but that isn't >going to happen. I will do what I can to make the transision >for both this and the SCAHRLDS list as painless as possible. > >If, for some obscure religious reason, the idea of having the >list at AOL (or any corporate office) offends thee, you are welcome >to propose an alternative home and operator (assuming they are >agreeable!) and the members of the list can decide if it is >something they like the idea of. I would not be offended if someone >else wanted the job (and the 10-20 mail messages a week that >come with it) but at this point it is nearly automatic for me, >so it falls into the catagory of the least trouble to the fewest >people. ;-) [Note that I *am* planning on taking Kwellend up on the switch; I don't much care where the list runs from, so long as it runs. -- Justin] >And now, back to our usualy pre-Pennsic malaise (no I won't be there >this year, I'll be moving.) > >David W. James >SCAGC-L ListOwner >s.k.a. Kwellend-Njal Kollskeggsson -- Justin ---------------------------------------- Sender: Chronique@aol.com Subject: Re: Grand Council Chronicle #26 Good gentles, Some Background: Within the SCA, I am Brion Thornbird ap Rhys, Earl and Knight, OL. I began thirteen years ago in the Middle Kingdom, Barony of Caer Anterth Mawr (Milwaukee). After three years, I relocated to Caid, where I was laurelled, knighted, and reigned, in that order. I was a founding partner in Thornbird Arms, a company offering armour reproductions that failed after the unamaible dissolution of the company. I relocated to the West Kingdom upon completion of my degree, and have lived here ever since. Six years ago I began intensive research into knighthood, chivalry, and the tournament. Out of this researches came the Company of Saint George and the journal, Chronique. My intent is to provide more authentic information on how experienced SCA folk can work towards being more authentic while preserving the ethical growth that makes the SCA a truely educational organization. We have met with some successes, and some failures. The Grand Pas d'Armes at Pennsic war this year will be a milestone; seven companies participating to put on a tourney for the benefit of everyone. It is the embodiement of what we are trying to accomplish. Mundanely, I studies Political Science / Economics at UCLA. I have written many articles on philosophy and technique, and have done both technical and marketing writing. I have experience in Quality management and in strategic marketing. Now, on to my thoughts... I have read over many of the past Chronicles, and remain uncertain where to begin. I believe we suffer from a great lack of direction, a problem accountable to the equal weight given to all issues. I think we need to address an agenda of events, and then proceed to debate the items on the agenda. In many respects, this ongoing dialogue is not terribly productive, because an issue is never really closed. Someone might bring up an excellent suggestion, but it might fall into the shadow of another posting, just like the other online discussion groups. I believe that we need more strucuture if anything like a set of solid recommendations is ever to be reached. I would guess that others are similarly overwhelmed by the sheer volume and unfocused nature of our discourse. While the comments are all worthwhile, they are completely out of context. Gathering my courage, I am about to delve into the complete FTP and dig out the material needed (if the paper can be spared) to comment intelligently on the course of our discussions. ---------------------------------------- Sender: Steve Muhlberger Subject: Response to #26 Finnvarr sends greetings to the Grand Council: A number of short reactions to GCC #26. It is clear that the main Grand Council discussion is not coming into any kind of focus. We have not found any person or mechanism yet for focusing discussion, and it seems to be losing us members -- at least contributing members. I would suggest that Caroline, as our coordinator, try to set us something like an agenda, at least attempt to identify areas where there is near agreement or major disagreement, and thrash these issues out. Here are some ones that have come up in recent discussions here or in the Membership Committee (where things have been more active): -- Do we need a body separate from the Board to be the final court of appeal and perhaps even the supreme legislative body for "in-game" issues? A lot of people, including Modius, seem to be working towards a "yes" on this question. -- Does it make sense to have the Kingdoms to be the members of the SCA, Inc., or not? Many of you will remember that I have been saying NO, NO, NO to this one for quite a while. Perhaps, though, we can bring out all the arguments pro and con on this one, and settle it. -- Non-member surcharges and the like. Are these tolerable? Under what conditions? Perhaps this should be left with the Membership Commitee for a while, perhaps not. Whatever issues are chosen, I suggest that we pick something (or maybe two things) to focus on for the next month. (I say this remembering that some of us at least will see each other face to face next week at Pennsic.) By the way, I will be at the House de Taahe Camp, on the Great Middle Hwy, near the bends above Runestone Field, flying a sky-blue flag with one golden 6-pointed star on it. Response to Alysoun -- Please do tell more about support structures with expertise. I do not think it likely that the voting of individual members will have an important role in the running of large or even medium-sized SCA corporations. There must be some connection between the member and the top, though, and this could be part of the answer. Response to Modius -- I think voting on this proposal is a bit premature, but thanks for bringing it up. The very wording of the proposal shows how immersed in trivial non-decisions that the Board must be immersed in. I say "non-decisions" because most of the promotions must be completely uncontroversial, and what can the Board know about this stuff anyway? The Board must be rubber-stamping somebody else's decisions here. However, do we want to make this kind of detailed recommendation? Is the IKAC set up to do this kind of work? Is in fact the IKAC operational? I heard a rumor a while back that it was doing nothing. I thought it a fairly reliable rumor, but have no real information. Hoping to see some of you at Pennsic, I am yours, Finnvarr de Taahe ---------------------------------------- [Note that this is a reply from a discussion Maghnuis was having, which he Cc:'ed the Chronicle on.] >From Maghnuis@aol.com Tue Aug 8 07:39:01 1995 Subject: Re: A GC/Reform question Owen, Thanx for the input. Most recently it seems that The SCA inc. as an Umbrella organization is the format gaining favor. This has the advantages of flexibility for the Individual Kingdoms while still making sure that we are playing pretty close to the same game. I don't think that the idea of the Society dealing with "Foreign" groups should be expanded. By this I mean that the players should all be under the Umbrella as much as possible. Multiple Corps under the control of SCA Central, which is under the control of the multiple corps (Kingdoms or such other National Corps as are required ) is the way to go. In those countries where separate incorporation is a good idea for tax or other liability purposes, they can still easily set up the requirement to adhere to certain SCA Cenral rules. I also believe that the level of activity and control by SCA Central should be minimal. 1. Minimum combat requirements 2. Central registration of individuals (this could be done at kingdom level but I believe would be more efficient at a Central location) 3. Allocation of territory between Kingdoms (and perhaps Pricipalities). 4. Publication of a TI (which I believe is entirely over budgeted) 5. Coordination of Inter kingdom relations ONLY when the Kingdoms feel incapable of doing so on their own. 6. Purchasing a real and reasonable insurance policy to cover all Umbrellad groups/individuals. If I've missed anything critical let me know, but I think the BoD and Central admistration needn't do much else. Magnus Maguire ---------------------------------------- Sender: Carole.C.Roos.2@nd.edu (Carole Roos) Subject: gc: checks and balance In the last chronicle, I spoke of boards and support structures. When a board is not working well it is a mistake to focus entirely on the board itself. There could be other problems which do not become apparent until matters reach board level. One thing to look at are the support structures to determine why they have not developed sufficiently to balance the board. A frequent refrain is that the kingdoms should have this responsibility. But what do we mean by kingdom? Royalty is structurally weak, given the turnover and method of selection. Royalty cannot provide the consistent, sustained effort necessary. Moreover, the crowns do not have a reliable reporting system that covers the entire grassroots. The seneschal system does. Every local group has a seneschal and there is a clear communication line to the kingdom level. Collectively, the kingdom seneschals should know more about the state of the Known World than anyone else. This puts them in the position to educate the Board and to hold them accountable. I have not been given sufficient information to know why the seneschal system has not developed to the extent necessary. What is their budget and where does it come from? How difficult is it for them to communicate across kingdoms? How difficult is it for them to form support structures to help with the workload? On all levels do seneschals have the training and support materials to understand their job in this light? A good guess is that the seneschal system has not become strong because of its ambiguous relationship with royalty. I don't think the distinction here should be a mundane vs the game line. Both need to be alert to everything that is going on. Each has different strengths. The seneschal should be the primary advisor to royalty on matters of state. Since royalty travels it can gain a different perspective to flesh out the report system. Royalty has the power to inspire and to muster high energy for the short term; the seneschal should have the factual basis and longer term staying power. The positions complement each other and provide a reality check on each other. I would think that if this relation were clarified on the kingdom level and the seneschal system were given enough support, board problems would be taken care of. I am not making a proposal because more information is needed, especially >from the viewpoint of the Crowns and seneschals. However I will point out that making major changes and creating new bodies is a mistake if small changes will produce the same effect. ----------------------------------------