SR - meeting at Hero of the Temple / Regional Naming

[Chris and Elisabeth Zakes]

At 01:47 AM 5/9/99 -0500, you wrote:
>On Sat, 8 May 1999, Donal & Sosha <catsden at texas.net> wrote:
>> Duncan and Aehelyan have my congratulations / condolences for doing
>> the grunt work of counting the votes and names if they are still
>> inclined to do so
>
>Oooh!  Oooh!  Can I help?!

We'd love to have your expert assistance.
>
>Is there someone in charge of ballot issues?  I'd volunteer for that
>committee.  Just for my own curiosity, I'd like an optional survey
>question asking whether the person is a paid member of the SCA Inc..
>(For a *principality* poll, only members' votes are allowed to count,
>but I'd like to allow voting by everyone now.  I suspect that paid
>members and non- will not have any significant differences in opinion,
>but I'd like to know.)  There may be other survey questions that
>others would like.

I like the idea of a survey. But I agree that non-paid members should have
a vote in the name.
>
>
>Was the question of *borders*, or how to determine them, ever settled?
>At one time, there was much discussion of a couple of groups just
>north maybe wanting in (Waco, maybe?), and maybe a chunk of the west,
>or maybe a few groups would like to shift to Coastal?  Perhaps we
>should add
>
>    The SCA branch I "play" in the most: ____________.
>    I __ do __ do not think it should be part of the southern region.

No formal or final borders were decided. But the name is for the current
region, so all folk living in the current SR should be given the
opportunity to vote.
>
>We could just ask the current Southern Region and leave the issue of
>what the boundaries ought to be for the future -- on the grounds that
>if there's a future principality (THE P-WORD!  EEEK!) there'd have to
>be discussion then and new voting for a name and arms.  However, I
>think if a group currently wants to be in on the start of a southern
>grouping, they should be asked and cast ballots now.  This might be a
>good preliminary step before balloting: go back to groups within and
>without and ask if they want in.

I rather prefer your first alternative. Once the P-discussions start up
again (as I think they will in a while), we can then discuss a possible
name change (we may not want to at that point) and see who wants to. But
right now, the issue is regional identity.
>
>Oh, since our Regional Seneschal asked me to generate the list of
>names for the ballot, I decided to use only the five-star names:
>    1.  Campoleone
>The balloting scheme will be Soviet Ballot: you choose "yes" or "no".
>If there is a majority of "no", we will go to the second ballot:
>    1.  Campoleone
>
>Daniel "you don't leave the table until you finish your broccoli" de Lincolia
>-- 

My proposal was that the ballot include three, four, and five star names.
That gives us lots of choice without making it impossibly long. Should we
include a "None of the Above," let people write it in on their own, or
leave it alone?

Aethelyan


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