[Sca-cooks] Peers, Pressuring the BoD

[Stefan li Rous]

Rosine replied to my question with:
> > > And here I have to object. What would you expect the BoD to do?
>
>    I think a few letters to the BoD requesting that guidelines about what to
> look for in a site would be quite helpful. If we requested that a general
> information article be written (available on the Web, and/or in TI for those
> who get it), that would go a long way towards educating prospective
> Autocrats.

But why does this have to fall upon the BoD to do? Yes, I think a policy
advocating preferance to handicapped accessible sites would be good, if
indeed it doesn't already exist. And putting the authority of the BoD
behind a policy takes some of the pressure off of Kingdom officers when
they try to enforce such policies on local officers.

However, why should such an article have to wait on the BoD?

As an Event Steward I'm not sure about all the things to look for in a
prospective site. An article such as you suggest would go a long
way to giving Event Stewards some guidelines to work from. Until some
of the discussion a while back on the ramps, I was unaware of some of
the pitfalls to them.

>    I think education, not condemnation, is the better path. Once a person
> has a checklist of items to look for, they can weigh a site's negative
> features against it's positive and make an informed decision.

Exactly why I'd like to see one or more such articles. And while having
such an article in an official publication like TI helps, having it only
there has its problems. Not everyone reads TI and how many can locate,
or even know it exists, an article published several years ago in TI.
Neither is web publishing the only solution as it also has problems. But
if someone will write me such an article I will place it in the
Florilegium.

>    In my area, nearly every site we use is wheelchair accessible. But we'd
> be lost if we had to figure out how to accommodate someone who was blind or
> deaf (we have only one student signer. We don't have any deaf members,
> although that could change any time).

It helps to know which disabilities you will be dealing with. That is
why, just like with food allergies, the people affected need to let
the Event Stewards and site choosers know about their needs. There
are so many possible disabilities that trying to plan for every one.
Sometimes these changes have impact upon the rest of the event. This
is often a compromise which is acceptable if it known there are disabled
folks who will benefit. If there are no folks with the disability
planned around, then the effort is wasted and at minimum, energy
is wasted that could better be applied elsewhere in the event.

So, folks with disabilities should let the event folks know. Although
if you have someone with a known disability and there is a good chance
they will be attending the event, the changes should be made anyway.

This last Yule Revel, I was Event Steward. The gate was done at a bar
which was at the entrance door. Because I knew one of the lords who
would be working gate was in a wheelchair, I had made plans to move
that shift to a table in front of the bar, fearing that the bar even
though it had an elevated floor behind it, was too high for him to
work comfortably from. As it was, he was able to move from his chair
to one of the stools behind the bar.

>    We have autocrat guidelines in our Group. I'll bet a lot of you do.
> Handicap-accessible guidelines would be a wonderful bonus.

Agreed. I am willing to simply create a message file in the Florilegium
with various suggestions on how to make sites more accessible or what
to look for in sites. However, I would much prefer an article from
someone with experience in this area, as articles tend to be more
organised and the suggestions won't conflict with each other.

--
THLord Stefan li Rous    Barony of Bryn Gwlad    Kingdom of Ansteorra
   Mark S. Harris            Austin, Texas          stefan at texas.net
**** See Stefan's Florilegium files at:  http://www.florilegium.org ****