[Northern] Running some numbers
burkemc2 at home.com
Thu May 17 23:49:02 PDT 2001
At 01:32 AM 5/18/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Sir Burke scribed:
> > The populace numbers are only for paid members so there is no real way to
> > know if the true participating membership of these various groups has
> > stayed level or not.
>This indicates to me that the population of the region may be even more
>unstable than I initially beleived. Unfortunately, as you stated, the only
>way to "officially" measure the population of the group is to count paid
>memberships. That is what both the crown and the BOD will use. And without
>those being at a stable or steadily increasing level, I (and probably
>others) remain unconvinced a principality is the right thing to do at this
> > One more point, the requirement for a principality is at least 100
> > subscribing members, the North has 240 as of 12/31/00.
>Then why does the web page state 342 members in the Northern Region? The
>numbers on the web page are what I based my analysis on. If those numbers
>are in error, then both our analyses may be flawed.
Those are the combined totals of all membership types. The survey result
pages indicated the split out for last year.
More information about the Northern