SR - Principality Solution

[Rollie W. Reid]

Timo said:
>...one of the *primary* specs on a group going principality is it's
>viability to go kingdom.
>(snip)
> On a side note, I think they should change the guideline for
> principality/kingdom population. Currently it is 100 and 400 members
> respectivly. IMHO it should be more like 300 and 1000 to
> ensure some greater diversity and depth. This also might keep us
from having 25
> kingdoms in the Continental US in 20 yrs.

I have an alternate proposal, one which I have written and send to the
BOD.  It involves making a few changes with the idea of making
principalities more permanent institutions.  One of the problems with
being a principality is that the Prince/ess has no real power.  Almost
every decision can be countermanded by the Crown.  It was actually a
series of proposals which went from the simple, and
conservative(i.e.-give the Prince the right to give AOAs, no Crown
approval necessary)to the very controversial (let the knights in a
Principality swear fealty to the Prince).  My proposals were also
based on making a Principality closer to the historical model, where
Principalities were usually independent or nearly so.  If you make
Principality a more attractive stage, then more regions will be
willing to make the step, and fewer Principalities will be in a hurry
to jump to Kingdom Status.

You may be interested to know that I support a small and long term
principality, but the present rules for principalities make it
difficult for a region to remain a principality for a long time, Mists
and Cynagua not withstanding.  A few changes would make a principality
a more attractive long term alternative.

If anyone is interested I will dig out the letter and repeat the
proposals here, or privately.

Conor

lucetis sicut luminaria in mundo

============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.