ANST - P-word

nolen dale fairborn at swbell.net
Tue Feb 17 15:52:27 PST 1998


Keith Hood wrote:
> 
> >From Tomonaga:
I will try to answer your questions and concerns piont by point. I hope
these personal remarks will provide yourself and others with a greater
understanding.
> 
> I've heard people talking about splitting this kingdom into
> principalities for years.  If only for the sake of balanced
> consideration I present these thoughts:
> 
> Everybody in favor of principalities always mentions all kinds of
> problems that are supposedly caused by the size of the kingdom.  Why is
> it nobody ever mentions any kind of efforts to find ways around those
> problems without dividing the kingdom?
> 
> How about extending the tenure of kings and queens to two years?  They
> would still have to make the rounds of the kingdom, but only once in
> their tenure.  That would have **all kinds** of benefits.  An easier
> travel schedule for the royalty, with the travel costs spread over a
> longer period.  Less physical stress for them and anyone who helps them
> get ready and/or get around. 
Let me answeer this first questions. Very few kingdom officersmake the
full two year limit for their office. Let's face the king and Queen are
the ultimate kingdom officers. They would have to deal with all the
usual problems x4 becuase of the length of the reign. What might be
saved in travel costs if any at all would be more than made up for in
the new longer phone bill. Being crown I would think would be a great
joy and a very hard job. I think you might have fewer people do it after
having to do it for two years. Also with the present dates for crown
tourney the prince and princess after having stepped down have already
been traveling for the kingdom for 9 months. And yes you would have to
change kingdom law and that could be a war unto itself and that very
ruling could change the next reign.

 Crown tournament and the champions'
> tournaments would only be put on every other year, which would be a
> great saving of time, effort and money for anyone involved.  It would
> help ease the competition for decent event dates and sites.  Business
> involving royalty could be conducted at a more leisurely pace--more
> mailings to and from, and fewer long-distance phone calls.  Kingdom law
> changes would get more time for consideration because there would be
> less pressure to get things done before the next crown tourney.
I think I have answered part of this already. Having crown tournament
twice a year is a necessary econimc boon to what ever group gets the
event. limiting this would not only hurt, but it would really hurt the
smaller groups who bid for this event and would put greater pressure to
bid for other larger events like queen's and coronation. This would not
save space on the calendar. Calendar space is at a prim becuase of the
size of the kingdom and the number of groups where in and everybody
wants to have their event on the same weekend.
  And I'm
> pretty sure there are some people out there who would like the idea of
> holding positions for two years running. 
I know that very few kingdom officers do last the two years. Lasting the
two years in a position is the exception not the rule.
 It would cause an easing of
> scheduling, financing, logistical, and mental pressures all around.
> 
> I think the one-year tenure for royalty is one of the main root causes
> of the problems that the pro-principality folks always mention.  
I think I have already commented on this already

Anyone
> who has ever had a job that involves supervising others knows good and
> well that a high personnel turnover rate is a guaranteed cause of
> expense, friction and ineffeciency.  It works that way in the military,
> at IBM, at McDonalds...anywhere you can think of.  Ease off the turnover
> rate of royalty, and a lot of the problems that drive the push toward
> principalities will solve themselves.
One problem with your examples is that non of these are totally
volunteer, not for profit organizations. Our organization has problems
unique that way.
> 
> Nobody every mentions trying a compromise course of action.  There must
> be all kinds ways of dealing with this kingdom's problems without
> busting it like a wishbone.  Why not try some other solutions first?
> Give them a shot for a year or two--if they are actually proven to fall
> short of needs, then it would be sensible to talk principalities.
> 
> Whatever the supposed advantages of dividing this kingdom, obviously the
> regular people of this kingdom still have little or nothing to gain from
> it.  For someone who wants to go to Steppes Warlord, the distance from
> Victoria is still the same.  The people who man the troll booth and make
> the banners for the tournaments still have only so much money and still
> have to get around their mundane work schedules.  The people who run the
> campgrounds where the annual fall events are done will not drop their
> prices because Ansteorra is divided.  Etc., etc., etc.
You are right people who travel will still travel, but their should be a
greater identity or of self within the new principality. You would have
prince and a princess who could travel for the king and queen and who
could give out all awrds except those granted solely by the crown and
the peerages. gee wouldn't that be same as having a new king and queen
almost.
> 
> And how can it benefit this kingdom's standing with other kingdoms to
> make it smaller and weaker? 
Ansteorra would still be as strong, because every principality would
still be apart of ansteorra. Also the smaller groups within the
pricipality might benefit from the smaller geographical focus. And again
I am more like to go to war with people who live 50 miles away than 250
miles. 
 Aren't we already badly outnumbered at Gulf
> War without cutting down the size of the recruit pool?
> 
Your pool should grow even larger as each principality would be able to
concentrate more effectively to provide more troops and training within
its own boundaries.
> And new boundaries give people a new set of problems in dealing with
> other people:  can you still go to tournament X without falling out of
> favor with people at home?  Are the old friends you used to fight beside
> at war now your enemies? 
If I were in prinipality x I would still be an ansteorran. Just like if
I live in the barony of elfsea or stargate I owuld still be an
ansteorran. The only time you would stop being an ansteorran would be if
the principality became a kingdom and not all principalities do.
And yes you can still go to tournament x if you want it is your choice,
but know you would have a chance to be prince or princess of a
principality.

 There must be ways of dealing with the
> problems without taking measures that may strain and even sunder
> relationships that may have formed over years.
I do not believe these measures would strain or sunder relationships.
Simply put we are straining at the seams right now. That is why the
whole regional system was created. If anything the principality would
ease the strain a great deal in a great many areas!

just a few thoughts
Richard Fairbourne
Central region
And thinks principalities are really cool!
> ============================================================================
> Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.
============================================================================
Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.



More information about the Ansteorra mailing list