[Artemisia] Re: [Summits] Re: [cathedral] Comments regarding latest BoD announcment

[Dan S.]

Greetings,

My responses interspersed with > below:

Sir Dan,

I find your criticism of the Board of Directors in poor taste.  It is MY 
understanding that these R&Ds and ANY sanctions handed out by the Board of 
Directors have already gone through the proper channels within the 
individual kingdoms first.

>That would be incorrect. Aveloc's R&D was started and run strictly at the 
>Corporate level. He was never allowed to defend himself at the Kingdom 
>Level in a Court of Chivalry. Similarly, neither was Duke Ibrahim last 
>year.

Please remember the folks serving on the Board of Directors are PAID MEMBERS 
of the SCA volunteering as a board member.  They are NOT the "Evil Empire" 
taking over and imposing sanctions and removing memberships etc. as you seem 
to imply.  They are handling the legal matters passed to them from the 
kingdoms!

>Many good people have served on the BoD. The structure of that body however 
>encourages people to vote unanimously on all matters to put up a show of 
>solidarity. It also encourages only people of like mind will be selected to 
>replace those that leave. It has become worse and worse over the years as 
>I've watched it. I'm not the only one who's noticed.


Now, as for the number of R&Ds occurring...Has anyone done any research and 
come up with statistics as to the number of newer versus longer term people 
getting R&D or paid members versus non-paid?  In the research you have done 
in following all these R&Ds and sanctions...are they unfounded?  What are 
the reasons behind them?  Misappropriation of funds?  Criminal Mischief?

>Practically all of the sanctions are completely legitimate. But NOT 100%. 
>Justice 'most of the time' is not justice.

Come on, let's be honest here...Are these people truly upstanding 
individuals who are being wronged by the Board's decisions or have they made 
poor choices and are now paying the consequences?

So in my opinion, for you to criticize the Board of Directors for the high 
number of R&Ds etc.without statistics or facts to back up your complaints to 
be in poor taste and less than worthy of a peer!

>I gave you the statistics. That would be one single non-unanimous vote 
>since at least 2000 and probably farther back than that. Can you refute 
>that?

As Michael O'Byrne said, I apologize for replying to all, but I too am fed 
up with this trashing of the Board of Directors who are acting in the best 
interest of the society.

>I used to trust the Corporation as well. It has proven to me to be not 
>worthy of that trust. Some of the positions within the Corporation are held 
>by nice people. The organization itself though needs to be fixed.

Dame Elspeth

>In Service,

>Sir Daniel

"Dan S." <wyddershin at hotmail.com> wrote:

Greetings,

I read the Body Reports religiously and have done so since before it was my
job was Royal Counsel for Davin and Groa and the Crowns after.

Just to be safe I re-read all the ones online and it turns out I missed one.

That's right ONE.

It was in 2003.

Other than that, every single sanction related vote has been unanimous. Let
me make it easier, in the notes looks for the term "opposed:none"

You will find that in all but that one vote in 2003 as far back as at least
2000.

In Service,

Sir Daniel




Exsuscito non meus ira


New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save 
big.