SR - A small proposal
Kevin Varner
kvarner at planview.com
Mon Apr 13 07:44:35 PDT 1998
I agree with Sir Conor. The convenience of a smaller Principality cannot
be overlooked.
To me, the idea of immediately (within 1-3 years) breaking off and
forming a new Kingdom
would be a horrible nightmare! I am willing to work for the
Principality, but not to form a
new Kingdom. I prefer the Southern Region on its own proposal.
Duncan MacConacher (Bryn Gwlad)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Conor mac Cinneide [SMTP:carcassonnais at geocities.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 12, 1998 11:41 PM
> To: Southern Regional List (E-mail)
> Subject: SR - A small proposal
>
> I have made no secret of the fact that I am in favor of a small
> principality. Recent postings on this list and the Ansteorran list
> has driven me even more to this opinion. People seems convinced that
> we want to break off and be a new Kingdom quickly. I am not in favor
> of this and I know that others feel even more strongly than I. A
> small principality, just the Southern Region, has the best chance of
> remaining a principality far into the future. The Southern Region is
> unlikely to qualify for Kingdom status for a long time.
>
> One of my objections to a Southern and Coastal Regions principality,
> is that it would nearly qualify as a Kingdom now. In a very few
> years, the step to Kingdom status would probably seem like a logical
> step. That is something that I want to avoid. I have the same
> objection to the Southern and Western Regions principality, though
> since the starting population would be smaller, the transition to
> Kingdom would probably take longer. The fifth proposal (Southern,
> Western, and about half of the Central) is the worst of all by this
> logic.
>
> For this, and other reasons, I support a Southern Region only
> principality.
>
> My present proposal is that we, of the Southern Region, should
> discuss a Southern Region only principality, until we actually decide
> yes or no. The Southern Region can only decide the principality
> issue for itself. We can talk all we want to about forming a
> principality with the West, or the Coast, or a few extra groups, but
> we cannot include them without their approval.
>
> Is anyone opposed to forming a principality if it includes only the
> Southern Region? If no one else wants to come to our party, do we
> still want to throw it? I would very much like to hear from anyone
> who is opposed to a principality unless it includes the Western
> Region, or the Coastal Region, or half the Central Region, or some
> combination of these? At the moment I am not interested in anyone's
> ideal principality (unless it agrees with mine), but I am interested
> in anyone who cannot support a Southern Region only principality, but
> would support something more.
>
> I think we should move forward with a Regional name, and start moving
> toward a principality for the Region. Beyond that can be added
> later, if we decide to go ahead.
>
> Conor
>
> lucetis sicut luminaria in mundo
>
>
>
> ======================================================================
> ======
> Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list
> tasks.
============================================================================
Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.
More information about the Southern
mailing list