From: tbarnes@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (thomas wrentmore barnes)
Subject: Re: Decentralization--what we can do
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 03:45:18 GMT

In article <Bw5746.EC7@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> tbarnes@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (thomas wrentmore barnes) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.221554.6650@midway.uchicago.edu> ddfr@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>
>>On the general subject of decentralization ...  .
>>
>>It seems clear that the board is moving, slowly but steadily, in the
>>direction of claiming that the Society (the game that lots of us are
>>playing) is the property of the Corporation, and that the Corporation
>>can and should restrict access to the Society as a way of increasing
>>its ability to sell memberships. For those of us who think this is a
>>bad idea, there are two obvious responses. One is to try to persuade
>>the board to reverse its course. I would like to discuss the other.
>
>Much good stuff deleted....
>
>I would be in favor of getting the BoD to reverse its course. I fear
>that without some sort of central organization the S.C.A. will fragment
>and fragment again until its' separate parts are weak and unrecognizable
>as the S.C.A. I know.
>	I get the sense that people feel that the BoD is unresponsive to
>their wishes. How might we get them to change.
>
>Lothar
>
>
Back again, after having been chased out of a public computing site. Man
I hate that!

	Here's my suggestions for getting the BoD to change. 

1) Get rid of most of the members. Having a zillion "Ombudsmen in charge
of X" makes the BoD's useful functions less obvious, increases expense
for travel and other expenses. If neccessary, have fewere paid (1/2
time ?) BoD members.

2) Institute direct elections for BoD members. Ballots would be
distributed in TI and the Kindgom newsletters. Members of the Society
would be eligible voters. One vote per person. One or two year terms.
This has all the advantages and disadvantages of any other democracy,
but all in all democracy is a pretty good way to run things.

3) Institute popular referendums for major policy decisions or financial
outlays. The BoD gets to deal with the minor B.S. (<Whine! They won't
let me have a toaster on my arms!>, <Whine! King Swaetsochs gave the
sacred order of the purple peccary to somebody from out of kingdom!>,
<Whine! The Gargoyle Principal Herald eats heraldic submissions for
breakfast or uses them as kindling instead of sending them in!>), but
has to come to THE PEOPLE for the big stuff. Same procedure as in #2.

Anything else is up for negotiation. The people decide. 

I agree that the BoD is not being as responsive as it could be in some
ways. I also agree that the BoD is made up of people who truly love the
Society and are trying to do what is best for it. It's just that most of
the common sense and human elements get squashed out by a feeling of
"official officiousness" when BoD decisions get printed up and BoD
members seem to forget sometimes that things that are obvious to them re
not as obvious to people who don't have the same information as they do
(Most of the populace.)

I would argue that without a centralized body, irregardless of its
powers, and a spirit of unity rather than division, is neccessary to the
SCA. What Cariadoc proposes, though appealing and sensible, might
cause split after split, as dissaffected groups fall away to form their
own groups. 
	When this happens now, it happens informally. The present system
encourages splinter groups to stay within the larger organization and
most splinter groups eventually rejoin in some way or another. It is
this spirit that binds people in far-flung states, provinces and nations
together. I welcome strangers into my home as if they were family,
because I know that they are fundamentally "playing the same game" I am
and will behave in a predicable way.
	In the proposed system splinter groups will be encouraged to
splinter further and never rejoin the larrger group. 
In this world we might not all be playing the same game and that
marvelous spirit of unity that allows a person from Australia to be
welcomed by a person from Connecticutt as a friend will be lost.
	In that world the SCA has all the beauty and integrity of a
broken glass. And that I would hate to see.


Lothar \|/
        0
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca