SR - meeting at Hero of the Temple / Regional Naming

[Bob Dewart]

Are we going to allow groups who have expressed an intrest in joining us
should we become a *p* vote for a regional name?

Gilli
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris and Elisabeth Zakes <moondrgn at bga.com>
To: southern at Ansteorra.ORG <southern at Ansteorra.ORG>
Date: Sunday, May 09, 1999 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: SR - meeting at Hero of the Temple / Regional Naming


>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.
>

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