From: dagoura@MIT.EDU
Message-Id: <9403111919.AA16406@w20-575-47.MIT.EDU>
To: carolingia@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Subject: re: A Plot to keep our burough "members"
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 94 14:19:44 EST


Yeah, what Justin and Corwyn said.

Some other things too...

Borough denizens aren't the only people who get socked by this mess.
Calamities happen and people loose their jobs, come down with terrible
illnesses, loose their homes to fires, etc.  If it's a major to-do for
you to save up the $13+transportation to go to an event, an additional
$20 is a serious problem.  I've been that broke when unemployed; that
was how broke my (now) Lord was when he rejoined the Society after a
year of being a full-time cancer patient.  In both cases, being able
to attend events was a major source of moral support in times of great
need for us.  

Likewise there're oldtimers who only make it to a few events a year.
As a rather active member of this borough pointed out to me, $20, when
you only go to 4 events a year, is rather steep.

Justin lists a number of reasons why an adoption system wouldn't be
feasible.  I won't go into it now, but suffice it to say, I can add
further problems to his list.  Justin and I have been over this
discussing the workings of equerry/demoiselle-ing.  I have thought up
some kludges to fix some problems, but not all of them, and certainly
not enough to make this a fix for pay-for-play.  (But anyone who
"Alway wanted their very own demoiselle or apprentice" should chat
with me.)  

It seems to me that the whole problem with pay-to-play combined with
the rate hike is that is makes it harder to join the Society.  Think
of it as a fence.  We can build all the gates and stiles we want, but
it's still a fence, and it will still look like a fence to people on
the outside, and inevitably some people are still going to run into it
hard.  And moreover, I suspect that that is the feature of these
policies which supporters of them *like*.  I suspect they *want* a
fence, not merely to keep someone out, but to give that territory which
will be marked out by the fence more identity as a unit.  

Now, I dislike this fence.  I might be able to tolerate a low stone
wall, easily stepped over, or a hoppable split-rail, but this is a
fortification.  The only way to see inside is to stand at the main
gate and peek in.  And it's not as if it will keep the "undesirables"
out.  As the Chinese discovered, you can't build a wall big enough to
keep the Mongols out.  It will be far more successful at keeping out
those people we would prefer: those sensitive to such things as where
and where not they are welcome, those who are not brash, those who
interested enough to try to fit in, those who are able to sense that
money is not adequate to join a thriving community, those who are
young and idealistic.

But on the "adoption" front....

I think Corwyn very eloquently expressed the major concerns with a
program of adoption for membership.  None of which is to say that
older people taking younger people under their wings is a bad thing.

I'm curious if there are people out there who would be interested in
an apprenticeship program.  I was thinking of something more rigorous
and study oriented than equerrying/demoiselling usually is.  Here at
Mitgaard at the moment, we have a lot of people who don't know what
they want to do, but who might (note qualifier) be willing to make a
time commitment if there was something to commit to.  In the Barony,
we have a plethora of skilled crafts people, who might be willing to
formally teach.  

What I have in mind would work much like a period apprenticeship; the
apprentice learns a craft, and the master gets the dishes washed, the
loom warped, the pots stirred, the onions chopped, etc.
Apprenticeships would be of very limited length (say one semester),
and wouldn't conotate the kind of personal, fealty relationship
demoiselling does (though it would be a contract).  The apprentice
would understand they were working for tutoring, and all products of
their labor would be the property of the master (who might permit the
student to keep them, etc.) who provides the materials.  There would
need to be a realistic time commitment, such as an hour a week (once a
month seems inadequate to me).  Apprenticeships could be renewed (if
mutually agreeable), or the apprentice could try to get taken into
another craft after his other apprenticeship was over.  Craftspeople
could specifically get apprentices with certain projects in mind, e.g.
a person planning on being Head Cook at an end-of-term event could
train apprentices for that particular feast.

Is this something people here would be interested in doing?  I don't
mean "think would be a good idea for someone to do" but "would do it
themselves".  I could certainly organize it, trivally enough.  

-- Tibicen