[Ansteorra] Participation vs. Recruitment

Tue Jan 24 05:20:43 PST 2012

Hosey, your position takes for granted that we share the same values but
you don't justify why that should be other than "because I think so".  As a
matter of fact, you unwittingly have proved a contrary case: your position
is not the popular one.  For every 1 Kingdom level player there are 5 local
players... who are members and who are as interested in some aspect of the
club as you are... they just express it differently and disagree with your
value system.  Also, your position on local play is ignorant of the data we
have: local play *does* generate kingdom play- I consulted on the analysis
and I encourage everyone to read the report.  Not every local player grows
into a kingdom player... but many do.  Farming involves planting and
watering and waiting.

I also think your argument wonts for some very specific answers:

How do we measure the health of the SCA?

I would submit that any metric that can be linked with extending the life
of the club and insuring it's future that is in line with it's mission and
vision statements is a viable way to measure the SCA's health.   Things
like:

Membership- raw paid numbers
Participation- in *any* organized activity that falls within the scope of
the club's stated purpose
Scholastic Advancement of Knowledge
Public Awareness of what we do
Fun had by participants/members

Note: Number of events is NOT on this list nor is hosting big events.  Why?
 Because those are byproducts of the more core metrics.  If events are fun
and hold the interest of more members they will naturally participate in
that particular type of activity.  But, if members don't hold your
particular values (that fighting at events is the end all/be all... that
War X is the reason we are in this club... [insert another "me and my
personal brand of fun" answer]) then perhaps some rethinking is in order.
 We can encourage those things, but tide of public opinion is clearly out
on this issue: more people are into "their thing" in this club than are
interested in "the Big Event".  So whose value system is more important,
Hosey?  Who should be steering this ship- the one or the five?

I'm not advocating lower participation at events; I'd love to see larger
events.  (although I do subscribe to the tenet that quality is far more
important than quantity) However, the times have changed and the sooner
people like you and I acknowledge that we are the *minority*, the sooner we
can start using the real data to our advantage.  I want to see more
authentic tournaments in the SCA; it's easier to recruit local players; I
find ways to make the latter fact facilitate the former.  For the Kingdom
Player disdain for local play/local players is shortsighted at best;
foolish and selfish, at worst.

There are also consequences for holding on to an antiquated/unpopular value
system... but that's food for another thread.

Ritter Dieterich

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Cionaodh O'Hosey <
CionaodhOHosey at verizon.net> wrote:

>
> So expecting a person to show up and play on game day is what prevents us
> from getting people to play, because going to events is just too difficult.
> I agree that going to events is difficult which is why I say the local
> activities should be focused more on getting people to events. Part of
> getting them to events is helping them to get there. I am not trying to put
> no value on the work done on a local level, i am just saying the work done
> on a local level should be focused on getting people to events. A well
> attended fighter practice that sends no one to tourney is just a local
> fight club claiming ties to the SCA. The measure of a successful fighter
> practice should be not how many fighters attend it but rather how many of
> it's fighters go to tourney or war. The measure of a successful group
> should not be the number of people that group has at populace each month
> but rather the number of people that group has at events that month. It
> doesn't matter to the Kingdom when five hundred of my closest friends get
> together in garb in my back yard, it only matters to the rest of the
> Kingdom when they show up at an event or host an event for the rest of the
> Kingdom.
>
> What I am trying to point out is that there is a difference between
> "increasing our number of local players" and "increasing the number of
> people playing locally". Increasing the number of people playing locally
> does not lead to more people going to events if your activities are not
> focused towards getting them to events. In fact just the opposite, if they
> can play locally a lot of people will chose to stay home and play locally
> rather than go to the expense and trouble of traveling to an event. Fighter
> practice is a great example, we have i am told hundreds of authorized
> fighters in this Kingdom, but most at most Tourneys we are lucky to have
> thirty show up, and less than a hundred bother to show up and fight in one
> tourney in a year. So all of that activity at the local level is producing
> very little in the way of event attendance. At the last event held by our
> group had all of the locals with paid memberships in our group showed up
> there would have been no room for any one else from the Kingdom, so what
> happened? We had plenty of room. So more people "playing locally" does not
> mean more people going to events, even local events. In fact fewer local
> activities could mean more event attendance, we all have only so much time
> we can spend on SCA activities, if we spent less of our SCA time on local
> activities it would leaves us more of our SCA time for going to events, but
> if you are going to four different guild meetings a week by Saturday all
> you want to do is get away from the SCA.
>
> In short, and not meaning to be cruel, our time and resources should be
> invested in developing players who can and will go to events. That will be
> more productive in the long run than trying to make the SCA available
> locally for those who can not or will not go to events. For instance I have
> only a limited amount of time to train fighters for war, should i spend it
> working with people who can and will go to Gulf War or should i spend it
> with people who can not or will not go to Gulf War?  The answer is obvious,
> if a little cold hearted.
>
> Cionaodh O'Hosey
>
>
>
> On Jan 24, 2012, at 12:21 AM, Jeffrey Clark wrote:
>
>  This forms the crux of my original point. The focus on THE ONE EVENT is
>> counter to our ability to get new people into the SCA. With modern
>> schedules the way they are, in these economic times -- and especially
>> speaking of younger people (under 35?) -- you MUST understand that even
>> four events a year can be difficult.
>>
>> Lord O'Hosey, I'm a junior in college -- I sit in class in Fridays until
>> four in the afternoons, I also work for a church -- which means that I have
>> to be at work awake and alert (not tired, drunk, or hung over) at 7am every
>> Sunday morning. I will do well to make three events this year, I probably
>> won't realistically make more than two -- I have neither the time nor the
>> money to travel that much; nor do most of my friends. Should I just not
>> participate at all in the SCA since I'm not willing to lead others by
>> attending more events? Should I stop trying to get some of my friends to
>> join since I can't (sorry, won't) go to more events? Shod my friends not
>> bother joining because they can't make that many events either?
>>
>> I agree with Lord Casey's response that increasing our number of local
>> players will cause more people to attend events, and I restate my assertion
>> that we need more activities on the baronial, canton, and shire level. We
>> need to be more social in our own baronies and get to know each other
>> locally beyond the guys you see at fighter practice and the weaving guild.
>> We need to get together in garb (or garb optional) and just hold
>> mini-revels, no classes or fighting. That will give us a good place to
>> bring newcomers that isn't overwhelming and allows them to talk to people
>> and get a sense of what's going on. It also gives the more veteran members
>> a chance to wheel and deal and for intrigue to happen across the
>> established groups and guilds. It allows networking and helps like-minded
>> people find each other where they otherwise wouldn't.
>>
>> Stronger local groups would make for a stronger kingdom by providing
>> members with more opportunities to get involved and re reasons and support
>> to make it to the big events; as well as motivation and reason to keep
>> playing in the downtime between the events they can go to -- whether those
>> events are weeks, months, or years apart.
>>
>> -- Alessandro Zorzi
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2012, at 16:36, Cionaodh O'Hosey <CionaodhOHosey at verizon.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  There is a lot of discussion about recruitment on this list, i hope this
>>> is because we want more people to participate in our events. We can also
>>> increase the participation at our events if we all participate more often
>>> ourselves. For example lets say we have 48 events a year, and our goal is
>>> 200 active players people at each event then the following things are true:
>>> If we all go to every event then we only need 200 people total to meet our
>>> goal. If we all go to two events a month then we need 400 active players.
>>> If we all go to an event just once a month then the we need 800 active
>>> players. If we all go to just three events every four months, that's just
>>> nine events a year, then we need 1066 people, that is also the minimum
>>> number of events a person needs to attend to save enough on non-member
>>> event fees to break even on a sustaining membership. If we all only show up
>>> once every two months, six times a year, we need 1600 active players. If we
>>> all go to an event once every
>>>
>>  quarter, four times a year, then we need 2400 active players. If we all
>> go to an event twice a year then we need 4800 active players. Lastly if we
>> all go to an event once a year then we need 9600 active players.
>>
>>>
>>> It becomes immediately apparent that the fewer events we all go to the
>>> more people we need to successfully recruit to meet our goal. But lets also
>>> be honest, the fewer events you go to the harder time you are going to have
>>> getting new people to go to more events. If it is not worth your time to go
>>> to an event why would a new person, who looks up to you as an experienced
>>> player, want to go to that event? It is a simple matter of leadership, you
>>> cannot recruit people to do what you don't do.
>>>
>>> Cionaodh O'Hosey
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> Ansteorra mailing list
>>> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>>> In order to make changes and manage your account please go to:
>>> http://lists.ansteorra.org/**listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-**ansteorra.org<http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org>
>>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Ansteorra mailing list
>> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>> In order to make changes and manage your account please go to:
>> http://lists.ansteorra.org/**listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-**ansteorra.org<http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org>
>>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Ansteorra mailing list
> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> In order to make changes and manage your account please go to:
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/**listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-**ansteorra.org<http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org>
>