From: tsa@cellar.org (The Silent Assassin)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Why have the SCA, Inc.?
Date: 11 Oct 92 14:29:05 GMT
Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system

> 
> Yes, the Corporation gave us a tax-free non-profit legal basis from 
> which to operate, and yes, the Board okay'd group advancement and 
> adjudicated inter-kingdom disputes and helped keep _some_ customs
> standard across the Known World... But the BIGGEST service the
> Corporation offered was providing the Registry and managing/printing
> mailing labels for 2,000 plus members using time on Cliveden's
> husband Guy's company mainframe computer system.  Back in the
> dim past, before powerful microcomputers were around, it was 
> quite a big deal to manage 2,000 plus names and addresses.  We were
> lucky to have free computer time donated for us to use. 
> 
sounds kinda like: "Back when I was a kid...We had to keep all of the
mailing labels chipped into stone with chisels!  And we had to alphabetize
them daily.  And each rock weighed 2.3 tons!  And..."
:)

> Today that is no longer the case.  Even TI's 20,000+ record mailing
> list could be kept on a less than $5,000 computer system, given a
> Mac or PC with a large hard disk, a heavy duty printer, software,
> and a tape-backup device.
Sure could.  For 2-3 thousand you could probably upgrade someones home
coumputer system to be able to handle a 20,000 person mailing list. 
> 
> Please realize that I'm not necessarily arguing that we should
> abolish or severely restrict the scope of the current corporation
> (though I'd certainly be willing to consider ways to pare things down).
> I do believe that some things are better handled by the Corporation than
> the kingdoms.  I just thought it would be valuable to point out that one
> of the primary reasons for _having_ the Corporation (that hasn't been
> mentioned in previous discussions) no longer MUST be done at the
> corporate level.  The Australian Registry and the soon to be coming
> European Registry are excellent examples.  There's no longer any
> *technical* reason why kingdom newsletters can't keep their OWN 
> subscription lists and collect their own money.

I agree.  The corporation is becoming a larger and larger part of the SCA. 
I always thought that the whole point of SCA inc. was to work behind the
scenes keeping the mundanes off our back.  I didn't think it was supposed to
be very visible, or even a large part of the SCAdian community.

> So, let's try talking about which services would and would not be
> more effective provided by a large group (the entire corporation)
> versus smaller groups (like kingdoms).  Insurance may be one --
> those companies like big numbers, the bigger the better.
> Adjudicating/arbitrating kingdom disputes, yep -- though
> a panel of arbitrators from uninvolved kingdoms might be
> just as good.  Reporting to the IRS?  Maybe -- though
> kingdom treasurers have to report to corporate as things
> stand today -- reporting directly to the IRS wouldn't be
> too much added hassle (barring audits, sigh...).

I think that insurance is probably one of the most important things.  An
insurance company would probably be les happy to deal with a bunch of
wacko's than with an incorporated bunch of wacko's.  A corporation is
something they are used to dealing with.

> 
> What do others think?  What would be the 'minimum effective set'
> of responsibilities, if any, that the corporation should retain?
> Clearly the Steward's job *as currently defined* has become too
> much for any single person.  What's the right balance between
> centralizing and decentralization?
> 
> I'll look forward to your thoughts and observations.
> 
> Much obliged -- Bertram

I thought that the funniest thing about the discussion of the problems of a
growing corporate presence in the SCA, things becoming less personal, etc.
was when I saw an announcement (I think it was by the BOD), that they
admitted that there wre some problems inherent in a large orginazation, they
recognized that there were problems with the growing beaurocracy and that to
try to solve the problems of a growing beaurocracy they are forming a
comitte to study it.  Really, the first thing that would come to my mind to
solve a problem with beaurocracy is NOT a comittee!> 


Patri ibn Cariadoc, Shire of Hartshorndale, East Kingdom.

Disclaimer: Not being perfect, I may occasionally make mistakes.  Other than
that, however, I mean what I say.  I speak for myself, not any organization
                            tsa@cellar.org
this weeks quote: "I bought an internal modem, but I can't swallow it."
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca