[Ansteorra] Underage Participation In The SCA

[Chris Zakes]

At 04:32 PM 2/5/2012, you wrote:

>In the SCA we have always done things we did not want to have to
>reduce or eliminate our liabilities. We have weapon and armor
>standards that we hope reduce our liabilities, waivers we sign and
>rules we follow because all we hope that doing so will reduce our
>liabilities. These rules we follow we hope make sense in a risk
>verses cost way, that is the root of risk management.  With that in
>mind i say the following.
>
>It is now apparent that having people underage participation in the
>SCA accounts for over 90% of all of our liabilities in the SCA.  This
>asks the first question: Does under age participation and / or their
>parents provide enough revenue to the SCA to cover those expenses or
>is every one else having to make up the difference? Personally, I
>don't see how with the SCA charging half price with family maximums
>at calendar events and family rates on memberships how those underage
>participants and their families can possibly be covering those costs.
>That means those of us who are not underage and who don't have
>underage members in our families are covering the costs incurred by
>having those underage participants in the SCA. Is that fair?
>
>For instance when you ask "Why are membership dues so high?" a large
>part of the answer is now "We all have to pay more, so underage
>people and their families can play"
>
>So an interesting question would be "How much less in cost and how
>many fewer regulations would we have if we went adult only?"
>
>And, "How much more should we charge for underage participants to
>cover the costs involved in continuing to serve them?"
>
>Or "Is it OK to everyone that we all have to pay more so we can have
>underage participants?"
>
>I understand this will offend a lot of people and i apologize for
>that but these are the questions faced in the "mundane world" we live
>in every day by all sorts of organizations.
>
>Cionaodh O'Hosey


I think that's an *incredibly* short-sighted idea. I've ben in the 
SCA for... <sound of mental gears grinding> ...36 years. For 25 of 
those years we had underage children. If you'd told us when our first 
child was born that we couldn't come to SCA events unless we found a 
babysitter for the weekend, or one of us stayed home while the other 
went to the event, well... let's just say that the reply wouldn't 
have been suitable for delicate ears, and the most likely result 
would be that we dropped out of the SCA for good.

Look around you for a moment. How many of the folks in your local 
group have kids? What about the local office holders? How about the 
regional and kingdom officers? Barons and Baronesses? Current and 
past Crowns? You're going to tell *all* these people that they're not 
really welcome in the SCA until their kids grow up?

I think that would be a far more effective way to destroy the SCA 
than the recent lawsuit.

         -Tivar Moondragon