CR - Medieval Interest Group at UH

Fri May 21 07:36:48 PDT 1999

Here is my response to Lady Adela's missive.  Summary up front followed
by detail.

The short form:
1.  The student interest group is well under way.  The details are being
handled by competent people in whom I have every confidence.
2.  The primary purpose of the UH group and location for fighter
practice is to attract students and improve campus life for them, while
increasing our population.  The facilities are the means to that end.
3.  We (I believe this to be general consensus, but am open to
correction) are not willing to burden this fledgling group with the
requirements for reopening the College.  Reopening the college may be an
eventual result of our actions on campus, and one with which we would be
pleased, but we do not want to divert our attention from the primary
goal.
4.  Setting prerequisites would not be binding on a group which was not
the College.  It is always possible for people to harbor a grudge if
they want to.  I have sufficient faith in our Seneschalate and populace
that such dire problems as you suggest could be avoided by good
judgement rather than legislation.

As much as I disagree with you on this point, I am glad that you feel as
strongly as you do about the issues involved.  Thank you for your
input.  It has been thoughtful and generally useful.  I just disagre
about this one.

|		-----Original Message-----
|		From:	"Amy Forsyth" <aforsyth at UH.EDU
|<mailto:aforsyth at UH.EDU> >@ARCO 
|		Sent:	Thursday, May 20, 1999 3:19 PM
|		To:	coastal at Ansteorra.ORG 
|<mailto:coastal at Ansteorra.ORG>
|		Cc:	bretz at swbell.net <mailto:bretz at swbell.net> 
|		Subject:	Re: CR - UH Fighter Group
|Please read through this, because I believe it to be a win-win 
|situation for all involved.
|
|I'm going to make one last attempt to explain my reasons for 
|putting the "potential for affiliation" + 'requirements for the College
to be
|recognized' in the affiliation clause of the interest group's 
|Constitution.
|
|=======
|
|1)  It would not affect how the interest group is formed or ran.
|2)	a)  It would give the interest group a legitimate 
|reason for having such a large number of people on campus....especially
people who are not
|directly affiliated with the University.  (a la, We're here to 
|help this group recruit members.)  

Drawing on outside experts is well within the normal purview of a SIG.

[I do have a problem with the campus being used solely for it's 'free'
facilities.  If you're not on campus for the students, then you
shouldn't be there at all.]

The students are our specific and primary goal.  The facilities are a
secondary, albeit convenient, fringe benefit.

b)  There's nothing that says how actively recruitment has to be done.

But we want to.

|3)  If it is found out that the group is formed solely for the 
|purpose of free usage of campus facilities, and not for the promotion
of
|student-campus life, then you are putting the educational 
|careers of those people who have signed as officers of the interest
group in 
|jeoprody.  [And no, this is not a threat.  But it is a concern.]

Citing potential dire consequences and then closing with "this is not a
threat" makes it more, rather than less, likely to be perceived as one. 
Fortunately this gun isn't loaded as the facilities are not our primary
goal (haven't I seen that somewhere before?) the students are.  Also
fortunately I do not take humbrage as quickly as when I was young.

|4)  A statement of the required number of paid SCA memberships 
|before the interest group petitions for recognition by the SCA in no
way 
|means that the interest group will ever attain the number of 
|member-students necessary for petitioning for SCA recognition (although
that level does 
|need to be potentially attainable).

If enough of the officers of the SIG were interested in forming a break
away group they could change the rules.  If that many of our student
officers are dissatisfied then we are not serving them adequately.

|5)  Because the interest group is outside of the control of SCA, it can
|choose to set that petition level higher than the minimum 
|required by SCA |(ie. 5 memberships and 4 officers).

And change it later if they have the motive.

|[And I believe that the Kingdom can make exception and approve that
higher number 
|as necessary in order for the group to be recognized.]

The Kingdom has the discretion of approving or not any group as long as
it meets the minimum standards set by Corpora and Kingdom Law.

|6)	a)  If someone comes along who does want to restart the College...it
|is laid out plainly and clearly what is expected of the  College (ie.
how
|big it should be, that only the students are to be the officers, etc.).
|b)  The interest group would have plenty of forewarning that the
|group is nearing the number required for petitioning for reactivation 
|of the College.

The group will have plenty of time to know it is getting close. 
Possibly years.

|c)  This would prevent a splinter group of only 5 members and 4
|officers from petitioning for reactivation of the College.

No, it wouldn't.  A group not the College is not bound by restrictions
we place upon the College.  Likewise we could not stop 5 individuals who
are members of the SIG and the SCA from petitioning to be reactivated as
the College.  Only the fact that the seneschalate will know what is
going on can prevent that from happening.  Petitioning to form a group
is not a checklist procedure.  Approval does not follow automatically
just because the minimums have been met.  The approval process is
dependent on people who will know the situation.

How odd.  Why would someone ratiuonal blame the Baronies for the actions
of the Kingdom?

|- If the College is recognized by the Kingdom, it's very likely that
the
|University would no longer recognize the interest group....and then the
|Baronies would be upset with the College.  (But technically 
|the group did have the right to form and it was recognized by the
Kingdom.)

Why would the Baronies oppose that recognition?  And if they did why
would the Kingdom approve the petition?  And if they did why would the
University no longer recognize the SIG?

|- Even if both groups are allowed to exist on campus,
|there'd still be problems between the 2 groups because the College
would be 
|perceived as a splinter faction.

And it would be accurate, but not relevant.  If that many people are
dissatisfied enough to actually do work, then independence would be good
for them.  You are presuming Baronies antagonistic to the forming
College.  I don't think they are.  We just see it as a future issue and
do not want to be distracted from the students.

|[All around it would be a very bad situation.  I don't want to see this
|happen.  But with the way things stand currently, these are the
scenarios
|that I believe are being set up.]

Nonconcur.

|7)  If the College ever does reactivate, practices at the 
|University do not have to end.  They can continue as before ---- must
be 
|officially announced and have one member of the student group present
at 
|all times, plus the group's marshal.

Announced and have one member of the Student group present.

|[Reserved rooms have always been and would continue to 
|be an area of conflict --- the whole room reservation system on campus
is 
|just horrible.
|That's why the most recent incarnation of the College held most of it's
|meetings at a house near to campus rather than on campus.]
|8)  If the College is not reactivated, then Stargate would be 
|able to say that it at least made a valid attempt to reactivate the 
|College.  At that time the College could be formally declared disolved
and the College's
|money be turned over to the Kingdom.  [Criteria would need to be
|established:  time limit, etc.]

The money is not significant to this issue.  It doesn't matter if that
money goes to Kingdom as long as there is the potential for restarting
the College.

|This in no way means that the Constitution of the interest group
|would need to change.

So why do we need to address it?

|To summarize:
|
|This provides for an amicable changeover of the control of the group on
|campus should a viable (keyword!) College group ever form.

Changeover of what control?

|This provides for the formal dissolution of the College if it cannot be
|formed, pending an establishment of criteria.

Dissolution is also not what we are concerned with.

|By inclusion of the expectations of the College, it prevents 
|the formation
|of a splinter group which would be damaging to the Region.

No, It doesn't.

|It acknowledges the connection that the interest group has with SCA and
|provides a reason for the presence of non-University people.

Which they don't need.

|And it still achieves the goal of creating an interest group so that
|fighter practices can be held on campus.

Our goal is to reach the students.  Our method is to hold fighter
practices on campus.

I think the parameters are reasonably apparent: an active group large
enough to support a base of officers who consistently and successfully
do their jobs.  Lack of support from the baronies is not likely to be an
issue.

|I think this is reasonable.
|&
|I think this is a sound course of action.

I disagree on both counts.

Cian
the long winded
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.