[Bards] So let's quit sitting on the sidelines and getdancingalready

[Scott Barrett]

On Sunday, November 5, 2006, at 04:02 PM, Jay Rudin wrote:

> "I've said this before, and it won't change.  The Deputy KMOAS is 
> *not* our
> oficer, and we cannot assign him (or her) to the college."

We haven't, we were discussing the idea that said Deputy might want to 
be included and how that inclusion might be spelled out. We aren't 
assigning anyone, we're offering the suggestion, seeing what floats and 
what doesn't. Nothing is being treated as final or settled.

>   He (or she) is
> the corporation's officer.  We have no authority to assign him or her
> duties.

No one said we did. We were simply wondering if these additional duties 
would be a good fit for what is a new position. If not, okay. I for one 
didn't realize talking about possibilities would exclude anyone from 
the conversation.

>  Note that the statement above implies that people with no interest
> in the college are ineligible to be the Deputy KMOAS, which we have no 
> right
> to assert.  Also note that by forcing this officer to be an active 
> member of
> the college, all the pretty statements about "No member of the 
> College, to
> include officers, shall have the right to A.) Determine membership in 
> the
> College B.) impose standards of performance ..." have already been 
> violated,
> since we have already imposed memebership requirements and the 
> performance
> of certain duties to this kingdom officer.

We wouldn't be asserting it. We're wondering if this might be an 
amiable asset to the position. Future deputies would know this was one 
of the aspects of the position.If they didn't want to take on the 
duties of the job, they wouldn't apply for the position. The choice 
remains. The current Deputy may decide he's not for it, as well as his 
boss. That's fine, just an option we were discussing. This College 
statement Michael wrote was a hypothetical place to get started, to add 
to or take from.
>
> Secondly, we can no more assign duties to the Premier Bard than a
> self-selected portion of the populace of the Steppes can assign duties 
> to
> the Steppes Warlord.
>
I thought every competitior for local championship positions understood 
that by winning, they were the de facto defender of that group in time 
of need in their particular field. As such, future Premier Bards would 
know this was part of what being Premier Bard meant, just like planning 
the next Eisteddfod is their job. If we don't like that, cool by me.

> If we want officers that we can assign duties to, we will have to do 
> the
> work of choosing them ourselves.  We cannot piggyback our duties onto 
> the
> kingdom's officer.
>
No, but we can certainly invite them to be a part of the structure if 
they wish.  Does everyone understand that this all still open to 
discussion, that no one has claimed they were making decisions for 
anyone?

> Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bards mailing list
> Bards at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/bards-ansteorra.org
>