Grand Council

[Deborah Sweet]

Galen writes:
>Some of those discussing things on the GC list check in several times 
>per day and by the time I have read the posts and thought of something 
>I feel needs saying, it is no longer relevant to the current 
>discussion. (as you can tell, I feel that the current method of GC 
>communication needs some fine tuning).

Definitely true. Especially when they pile up over the weekend.

<snip>
>that we (I believe I can speak for both of us) feel that we should be 
>expressing the feelings and opinions of the members of the populace of 
>the Kingdom and not just our own ideas.  So far tho' getting any 
>meaningful discussion going has been difficult.  Maybe if some other 
>people are reading the GC list then we can discuss what they say on 
>this list thereby increasing the use on this list and also giving me a 
>better feel for where everyone stands on the issues.  Then I (or 
>whoever is filling the seat)can make a more useful addition to the 
>council.  This is an important time in the Society and we need everyone 
>to participate in charting the course for the future.  I hope I can 
>count on your support, and most especially your input.  

I can understand this. I must admit that some of the discussion has been 
very theoretical (& therefore almost incomprehensible). It was kind of 
irritating (& amusing) while reading the GC chronicles each week to see 
that no one could agree on what they were supposed to be doing. I'm 
still not sure that everyone's agreed because some of the council hasn't 
responded. Tibor, Yaakov & Esclaramonde's report on the tax status of 
the SCA seems to have jump started a great deal of discussion.

I don't really know how the other members of my shire feel about these 
current questions. I do know that back during the "pay to play" crisis, 
the majority of the people in our group actually thought that it was a 
good goal, but we didn't like how the BoD initiated it. I think there are 
two strong reasons why we liked it: 

1) Trying to beef up membership numbers to become a barony. We have to    
   think it's good to be a member   :-)
2) Can easily identify if person x is actually a member or not. At times  
   there are some people we really don't want identified with us, &       
   trying to explain to authority figures that "well, x is kind-of a      
   member, shows up every now & then, but he's not a paid member". *They* 
   don't understand. Membership should be a cut & dried thing: yes or no, 
   & the card to prove it.

I personally would really favor knocking the price of memberships *way* 
down and having some kind of low priced membership ($5 or $10) where all 
you get is a card saying that you're a member.

Estrill