From: atterlep@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Montgomery J. Moose)
Subject: Re: Term Limits for the Landed Baroncy
Organization: National Association for the Disorganized
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 01:31:22 GMT

mittle@watson.ibm.com (Josh Mittleman) writes:

>Greetings from Arval!  Alan Fairfax wrote:

>> "Objective criteria" won't help simply because they're not going to make
>> the decision--there will either be several candidates or none.  Even with
>> the criteria, the decision still needs to be made, and making it isn't
>> any easier.

>That is clearly not true.  Here's a list of objective criteria for choosing
>a landed baron:

>1) Must be the tallest man in the barony.

>That would be a pretty foolish way to choose a baron, but it definitely
>makes the choice easier.  Here's a more reasonable list:

>1) Must be able to attend every baronial event published in the kingdom
>   newsletter, and hold court at least twice each year; must either attend
>   Coronation or some other royal court each reign to swear fealty.  
>2) Must have a good enough voice to be effective in court.  
>3) Must have enough nice garb to make the barony look good.
>4) Must live in the barony, be employed, and have reasonable prospects for
>   remaining employed & resident in the area of the barony, to ensure some
>   stability.

  I would like to make sure that our goals are the same.

  As I understand it, we are trying to find ways to miminize the political
impact and turmoil that is created when a barony has to choose a new baron.
You (Arval) believe that a predefined, objective statement of the minimum
requirements for a new baron ("objective criteria") will help achieve that
goal.  I do not.  I am not arguing against centralized setting of criteria, but
against the setting of criteria at all, for reasons that I will hope to make
clear below.

  As it stands, a barony wishing to choose a baron must make one decision--the
choice of a baron.  This choice is generally difficult and involves a
reasonably large amount of contentiousness.  By its nature, the system does
have criteria for who can become a candidate for baron.  These are

  1) General acknowledgement as an "senior" member of the barony.

  2) Familiarity with all, or most, of the core members of the barony.

  3) A willingness to become the baron of the barony.

  4) An existing base of support (home group, household, clique, or friends)

  I calculate that these would leave about 8-12 candidates in Northwoods out of
a population of 300-350 people.  In the best case, all of the candidates 
remaining will be able to meet most objective criteria, and the criteria will
be useless and harmless.  In the worst case, one or more of the people who 
would like to be baron will use their political influence to fight a battle 
over the criterion that would exclude them, starting a battle either to change
the criteria or to eliminate them.  This complicates, rather than simplifies,
the issue.
  The problem with objective criteria is that anyone with the desire and 
influence to fight over a baronial coronet will also start a fight over the
criteria.  Then you're left with two fights to resolve instead of one.

		Alan Fairfax Aluricson, Fenris Herald
		Canton of the Riding of Hawkland Moor
		Barony of Northwoods, Midrealm
		atterlep@vela.acs.oakland.edu		**Magnitudo Vocis**

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca