[Artemisia] Grand Council discussions

Tue Jan 22 09:11:14 CST 2008

I would like to respond to this discussion, not necessarily anyone in particular, if I may.  First off remember, the BOD is our friend.  They are not the enemy.  They are us.  Just like every officer is us.  WE all take our turns and help serve and run things.  That is what the people on the BOD are doing.  Taking their turn.  I know that sometimes we all forget that they are just players like us serving their time in an office just like we do.  Thank goodness for them.

That being said, the BOD is not trying to get us to agree to anything. Pay to play has been on and off the table as long as I have been playing. So it is nothing new but it comes up every couple of years and the BOD checks with us to see if our feeling have changed on it.  How nice that we get to express our opinion! If you are against it and enough people agree with you and also make their thoughts known, the BOD will respect that as they have in the past.  I the other side of the coin seems to be favored then they will recognize that as well.  We have an amazing group of people on the BOD and they are looking out for the best interest of our game.  

What is in it for us may be that our members are more engaged and invested in our game if they have to go to the bother of paying. How many people take better care of something that they have paid for with their own hard earned money than they would if it were free or provided to them with no investment?  If you own something you are more like to want to make sure it is well cared for. As an example, look at wars.  The people who are invested in the SCA generally put on the wars. In my experience having been responsible for the last 4 Potrero wars in Calafia, Caid, the people who are the least engaged and invested are those that only show up for wars.  They usually aren't members, don;t know anything about the SCA except they have parties at wars and they cause the most problems.  Is that because they are bad people?  No.  It is because they have no investment and don't give a rip about the SCA except for a good party.

I think what the BOD is trying to do by considering the membership tier is to let people play at their comfort level and try to get them invested int he "club" at the same time.  
Just my thoughts.  And for the record I am not opposed to the tier memberships but I need to hear more discussion and ideas before I would actually say let's do it.
Illora

> From: kimrule at cableone.net
> To: artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:13:35 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Artemisia] Grand Council discussions
> 
> I get the feeling that one of the things on the mind of the BoD is those
> of us who participate in what they think are "risky" parts of the game.
> Such as...I am an equestrian...I play in the equestrian games.  I am
> required to have a membership to do so.  If there was a tiered pay
> system, then I would most likely pay more than someone who sews.  If I
> decided to be an equestrian, and fight, then I'd probably have to pay
> even more, because I would be doing two risky things.  
> 
> My question is this, what is in it for us?  What advantages do members
> have who pay more?  I think it's kind of dumb really...if anything else,
> it will be there to discourage anyone from truly getting involved in the
> fun things we do,  And that's too bad.  
> 
> Una
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: artemisia-bounces at lists.gallowglass.org
> [mailto:artemisia-bounces at lists.gallowglass.org] On Behalf Of morgan
> wolf
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 11:02 AM
> To: Kingdom of Artemisia mailing list
> Subject: Re: [Artemisia] Grand Council discussions
> 
> Our Munificent At- Large Grand Council Member Mistress Therasia did a
> wonderful job of asking us all to be nice to each other, and polite in
> our responses, and not to start a "flame war", and telling us that the
> BoD wants input on changing membership pricing.   She asked us to think
> about it and respond.  What she didn't tell us, perhaps because the BoD
> didn't tell her, is **why** we're discussing changing the membership
> fees.
> 
> So, my response is "explain why you feel it necessary to change it
> before you ask us if we agree with it."
> 
> Right now you can attend as a casual member, not pay the membership fee,
> and it's fine, you just have to pay the extra $3.00 per event, which as
> Tanglsis (okay, Theirron) pointed out is cheaper than a membership until
> you get to 12 events a year.  The only people that *must* pay for a
> membership are those that need/want to be covered by the insurance, i.e.
> officers and fighters, and those receiving awards (why one must be a
> member to get an award is beyond me, but there it is).  I think the
> current system works just fine, the last time I looked at the Corporate
> Financial Report we seemed to have plenty of money, so again the
> question is if it ain't broke, why fix it??
> 
> Morgan (no the other other one)
> 
> 
>  
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ____________
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
> _______________________________________________
> Artemisia mailing list
> Artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
> http://lists.gallowglass.org/mailman/listinfo/artemisia
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Artemisia mailing list
> Artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
> http://lists.gallowglass.org/mailman/listinfo/artemisia

_________________________________________________________________
Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we give.
http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join