Non-member surcharge (Was Re: [Ansteorra] BoD meeting)

[Jay Yeates]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

- -----Original Message-----
From: ansteorra-admin at ansteorra.org
[mailto:ansteorra-admin at ansteorra.org] On Behalf Of
DonnelShaw at aol.com

Why does this remind me of a tea party?

The part that got me is that they do not want unpaid members helping
at events due to liability. So the people who come to the event and
pay the extra $3 that goes to corporate cant do anything to help. At
least that is what I read. Donnel

...
also note a bit farther down the mention that if a non-member
volunteer, in the course of helping out, does accidental damage that
impacts the holy insurance, the SCA reserves the right to sue them
for recovery of damages awarded .... while this has always been the
legal reality, making a official statement of the fact dosn't really
do much to shield the corportion, but does have a potential chilling
effect on a cornerstone of scadian existance - volunteerism.

on another point, interesting wording & concept  ... "$3 members
discount" being a more PC acceptable wording that "$3 non-member
surcharge".  as many on other lists have noted "pay to play" rear
it's ugly head again .. not to mention the increse in overhead this
will entail for all groups in order to be in compliance.

it's going to be a interesting ride ...

'wolf


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBPT/8Fm4ppl6wozUxEQJ3hACdFvtWF6JeJTMRkuk8j3ru2W+qQOAAn3kh
ouLQvAhtTTdWemCPaswuzhbE
=cDQI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----