[Artemisia] Re: Artemisia Digest, Vol 43, Issue 16

[Jeanine]

I have to agree with Their Excellencies - Once again, while the intent is laudable, the potential for abuse or even just the unforeseen consequences of such a policy are rather frightening to consider.



Ja'mala


"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither"

CvZ wrote:
I guess I just feel like this could unfairly label someone as something they
aren't based on the simple 'pass/fail' system.  And, not knowing the
criteria, we won't know why someone failed. 

And Lady Ellisif Sleggja wrote: 
I share the concerns that this information has the potential to be used in
ways that violate the rights of those involved, so I would also like to know
what convictions would constitute a "fail" rating.  Beyond that, the
Seneschals and Youth Officers involved should be trusted to keep any
information they get regarding any specific background check with the
strictest confidence, with the exception of notifying their respective
Kingdom officers of any 'fail' conditions.  
......................................

I totally agree with Conrad.  I have seen 'witchhunts' based on incorrect
information occur in the SCA before.  And as far as the information being
kept confidential, with no offence intended to anyone, I've been in the SCA
long enough to see *way* too much information 'leaked', to have any faith in
our ability to keep anything completely confidential.  (and it's not like
those with access to such info don't change on a fairly frequent basis...)  

Having never been charged with or convicted of anything beyond a traffic
violation, I have nothing to hide, but I have a negative gut level reaction
to the whole idea of background checks.  (perhaps a few 'libertarian'
tendencies sneaking out?)   ;-) 

Gefjon