Message-Id: <199401182020.AA12512@world.std.com>
To: justin@dsd.camb.inmet.com (Mark Waks)
Cc: carolingia@world.std.com
Subject: Re: The Principality -- various discussions 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 18 Jan 1994 13:37:25 EST."
             <9401181837.AA04338@dsd.camb.inmet.com> 
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 1994 15:19:58 -0500
From: Michael Bergman <augment@world.std.com>

But the "last time the principality movement happened" *wasn't* five
years ago!  If it was, I'd have no complaint about discussing it
again.  What happened is that *within* *six* *months* of it finally
being voted down, after a couple of years of meetings, and special
newsletters, and on and on, someone new "picked up the torch" and
started all over again -- that's NOT my idea of taking "no" for an
answer.  That all the polls so far have been poorly designed and
yielded useless results doesn't please me either!

Its hard to tell the difference between people who "don't want to be
part of" a new principality, and people who don't want there to *be* a
new principality -- especially when all the polling assumes that of
course there will be a new principality and just offers choices about
where and when.

Most people in the SCA, when told that there will be a meeting to
discuss the new <whatsis> don't think "Oh, boy, an opportunity for me
to tell people that I see no need for a new <whatsis>" -- they think
"Oh, they've all ready decided to have a new <whatsis>; gee, I wish I
had some say in matters..."  

The way to get things done in many organizations, including the SCA,
is to stand up and say "I will be doing such and such, at this time"
and see who shows up.  I think this is a fine way to form guilds, but
not an appropriate way for making major changes to the structure of
the Kingdom/Society.  

To some extent, my objection to forming a new principality is the same
as that many people have expressed about the way the BOD handles our
insurance.  "Hey!  Who said you could do *that*!"

How about we have a republican form of government, with election to
the house of representatives being by petition?  Then, instead of
having inconclusive polls, we let the reps fight it out.  Then we make
sure that the votes of each rep match their petition and invalidate
any that don't...

I think this much controversy over where the border should be
indicates that we are not yet ready to have a border.  I don't feel
that pricipalities should never be formed, though I realize that some
of what I have said may sound that way.  I think it would be a very
good idea to resolve some hanging questions of who is a member and
what rights fo they have before we try to get their opinions.

I have to go fix my house.  Its' leaking.  Excuse me.