[Artemisia] More on BoD Proposal

[Theodora (AKA Rachael)]

The problem is that a banishment from the Royal Presence (the most common type of banishment, and the one that seems to require the least justification) is not enforceable if the Royalty is not at the event.  At least theoretically, a "temporary suspension of membership" could imply that the SCA group was trying to do something to ensure the protection of the majority of members/participants.  However, I am not sure how you would enforce that with someone who is not a paid member of the SCA.

I don't think the proposal is worded well, and I don't think there are enough checks and balances.  But I do believe it would be a good idea to have a set Society-wide policy that would be legally enforceable, or at least have defined criteria, rather than asking my friends to play goon-squad so I can make sure members of the populace are safe from harm, even perceived harm. I don't feel right just making people feel unwelcome, especially in this day in age, where it does not take much to bring a civil lawsuit on another person for defamation of character, assault, and any number of other charges that could come from simply asking someone to leave an event.

FWIW, 
Thea


"You are all learners, doers, teachers."  -Richard Bach

 --- On Tue 03/28, Chuck Heisler Jr. < conradvz at yahoo.com > wrote:
From: Chuck Heisler Jr. [mailto: conradvz at yahoo.com]
To: artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 16:13:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [Artemisia] Re: Artemisia Digest, Vol 30, Issue 46

Actually,
I disagree.  I don't understand why simple Crown banishment until the legal situation was resolved is any less effective than a 'temporary suspension of membership'.  

If people are uneasy with such a person, then that person needs to be cordially UNinvited until the problem is resolved.  At which point, the BOD can then go on its merry way by permanently suspending a child molester.  Or it won't have to do anything at all if the person is not guilty.

In this case, again, I think the BOD is too far from the problem.  

I think it should be under local control.  What if the charge is false.  Then you have a 'temporary suspension' with no local way to reinstate.  We'd be waiting on the Society Seneschal to do it.
I don't think this example supports the proposal.

gregero <gregero at gmail.com> wrote:
Example....

A year or so ago an East Kingdom (if i remember correctly) member was charged with molesting several SCA children. The was no way at the time to quickly suspend the membership of that member. I think we can all agree in that situation a temporary suspension would be appropriate. This was also not a Kingdom issue per se, but a corporate issue IMO. 

My point is there can be situations where something like this could and should be used. I agree the wording is poor and there is no system of checks and balances. 

Gregory

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way  your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com