[Northkeep] Moot on 30 June notes

STEVEN RUARK DHSPA5F at dhs.state.il.us
Mon Jul 9 15:15:44 PDT 2001


Y'know, I have to wonder where some people's heads are.  (For the
record, I always wanted Northkeep to CONSIDER becoming a privince,
I cared much less whether they DID it.  They've now done so.)

But some of the things said bug me:

>Also, becoming a province will
>negate any chance of Thorgrim and Sigen being reinstated.

Why is this an issue?  It'll take at least as long, likely longer, for this
happen as for the appeal to run its course.  Therefore it'll be a
dead issue one way or the other.  Pointless point.

>Mistress Caitrin also pointed out the BoD could use the
>suggestion of our considering provincial status as an excuse
>not to deal with the appeal.

A little better, but only a little.

>Lord Damon pointed out that, if we were a province, the
>Crown could demand we have leadership selected by a
>semi-annual Warlord tournament, which would mean a change in
>politics every six months. Such a situation could kill a group.

Where the heck did THIS come from?  Local groups that do this
are called Palantine BARONIES.  Larger ones are Principalities
or Kingdoms.  Whoever heard of a Palantine Province?  And what
would you call the winner?  Seneschal?  And what Palantine
Baronies, Principalities, or Kingdoms died because of how often
they chose their respective hat-types?  I expected better from Damon.

>It was clarified that, should the Northern Region become a
>principality, the Prince and Princess would have no say in the
>selection of a Baron or Baroness.

Here I'm just confused: because there ISN'T one for a Province, or
even if we remain a Barony?

>Family memberships count as paid memberships.

That's a switch.

>By law, when presented with the list of candidates voted upon,
>the Crown cannot select the bottom person/couple.

Then why did all three have to be interviewed last time?

>We can also put "None of the above" on the
>ballot, to give a voting opportunity for those who feel that way.

Pointless.  It'd be more useful to do a ranked voting (1-N) of ALL candidates or yea/nay on EACH.  Either voting method automatically puts compromise,
best-fit candidates to the fore.  If we'd done that in the Presidential elections, McCain would be President now, and we'd all be happier.

>Write-in votes will also be allowed.

Cool.

>All candidates will need to consider the possibility that
>Thorgrim and Sigen might be reinstated by the BoD, and that it is
>possible they might hold the position for only a short time.
>Thorgrim and Sigen had stated they were planning to step down
>within the year. They realize they probably will not be
>reinstated, but if they were, they would still like to be able to
>step down on their own.

Wonder if we could wrangle it so they are reinstated for a time contained
within a single court, they make their closing thank-yous and awards and
whatever, and the new B&B take back over.  Wonder if we could do
something similar REGARDLESS of the BoD's decision, since they will/should have court baronies.

>Ian pointed out this solidarity in our voting shows how together
>the barony is in reaching its goals.

Sure looks that way.  Makes me wonder who called Larissa.

>Lord Ian called for a vote to approve the proposed achievement:

Good.  The change makes it better.  I appreciate the sentiment,
but cutesy is bad heraldry.

>The subject of the motto was tabled until next month, as some
>people still want to submit ideas.

Any idea what-all's been seriously proposed so far?
Last I saw, there were a bunch of joking 'proposals'.

Steve




More information about the Northkeep mailing list