[Cynnabar] To Seneschal et all

[dirkmayhew at comcast.net]

I am 100% confident our legal representative, Finn, will act rightly and in compliance with the terms of the settlement. 


If my emails were interpreted as "substantive opposition," I hereby consent to contribute more than the minimum required. 
If Their Majesties request more, I support sending a larger amount. 


Randy, nobody is stopping you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+to+set+up+a+free+online+poll 


- dirk 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Asplund" <randyasplund at comcast.net> 
To: "Barony of Cynnabar" <barony at cynnabar.org> 
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2012 4:22:51 PM 
Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] To Seneschal et all 

Just got back and have read all that was posted up to here. To answer some questions raised for those who did not fully understand what I wrote -for whatever reason- I will clarify- 


Ermenrich, the slanted direction is that when people start out by using words that say specifically that it is "generous" to support the SCA in this way, and in a context that sounds like anyone who disagrees does not support the SCA or want to be generous to the SCA, it is very likely to make someone else feel that if they post openly on the list that they feel there might be a better use of the money, that they will be branded in a negative light. Nobody wants to look bad in front of their friends, so it creates a pressure not to answer contrary to that statement. 


David, that is why a poll is valuable. It may go out to all of the same people, but it allows them to answer privately instead of publicly. That in itself means they don't have to worry about how their opinion will be viewed, meaning they are free to give it honestly and without worry. I still believe that it would do this group a service to ask the question in this manner, even though the seneschal has already stated the decision. I still feel t is the fairest way to get the best answer. 


Gregoire, you have taken personally something that was never aimed at you. I was talking about the words like "Generosity" and if I remember correctly, you happened to be the first person who used it. That's your only connection. Several others did the same many times, and I made a point to say I felt that the use INADVERTENTLY created the potential for people to not want to confront it in public, even if they had reservations. I'm not accusing anybody of trying to shut anybody down. Yes, people have been pushing hard to get this through before allowing the rest of us to look at it in more detail and be thoughtful about it, and yeah, that is steam-rolling it. I think they are just excited and going with a gut instinct to try to help, so I don't blame them for the feeling or getting an opinion early on. Nothing I wrote was a slight to you or anybody else who said anything along those lines. I was just trying to show how the choice of some words can impact a discussion. Please re-read what I wrote and think about it. I feel that I have been taking great care to promote the most fair and open, honest discussion. 


Lord Finn, for reasons stated above, I hope you will consider waiting a bit longer, unless you honestly feel that you have already heard a telling majority that makes a poll moot. I also trust you to be very conscientious in this and have great faith that you will do the best job that you can with it. Never doubt that. But we do have until Friday night to figure it out. Why rush? 


As for opposition, let me be clear. I am NOT standing in the way of the decision being made before Saturday. What I am doing is trying to help us find the best way to get the best sampling of opinion. That is a very different thing. If WE as a group want to give extra money now, even up to the full $1200, I am NOT saying I oppose it. I'm just asking us to be smart about how we evaluate the situation and make that decision. 


RanthulfR 





On Feb 9, 2012, at 10:28 AM, David Hoornstra wrote: 


Re: [Cynnabar] To Seneschal et all 
What I would like to know is how an on-line poll will reach more people than this process. Does it not make itself available by the very same electronic means as these emails? 

If the poll does not have in its address list people not able to read these emails, I do not see how it will get us new insights. 

Nor deos a poll give us the nuances of people’s feelings as does this discussion. I, for one, do not want to have to force my nuances to fit into a simplified multiple-choice quiz. 

I would rather trust a seneschal — having been one -- to read all of these and decide. 

Daibhid 



From: Matt Lagemann < malagemann at gmail.com > 
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:56:01 -0500 
To: Barony of Cynnabar < barony at cynnabar.org > 
Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] To Seneschal et all 

How is this slanted? Because more people respond in one direction? Just about everyone who regularly attends Cynnabar meetings has voiced their opinion. So the people who take the most active role in our finances has made a statement, just like a we would in a meeting. 

I am not against the poll per se, but I think the other options available also fit in fine. Besides, lets say the poll does go out right now and then on Friday at 6:30 pm we receive new information that is important and could change the way people would have voted. What then? Do we throw out the polling numbers because of new information? That violates the vote people sent. Do we allow our officers to keep the decision even if it now changes the basis on which we voted? 

Personally if new information comes to light, I want know that I have not tied anyone's hands. 

I realize that what we are doing is not under optimal conditions, but I think anyone and everyone who does have an opinion has options, both public and private, to state that opinion. If our Seneschal tells me that we are going with an option I don't like, but in private conferences with several members of the barony finds it to be the most liked and best for the group, so be it. I remember the three meetings we spent deciding if our current Seneschal was the man for the job. I have faith in the ability of Baronial Leadership (our Baronage, our Seneschal, and our Exchequer) to take the information given to them by their superiors and our desires and synthesize the best possible choice. 

Ermenrich 

On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Randy Asplund < randyasplund at comcast.net > wrote: 

<blockquote>
And yet, if the poll I wrote were distributed out to our membership along the schedule I proposed it would get a higher response (thus a more accurate sampling) of the greater number of members. We "poll" (call it a vote if you like) at almost every Cynnabar meeting by a show of hands. Why is this different? 

Do you really want to steam-roll this without adequately sampling the opinion of as much of the group as possible? The seneschal making this call based on his interpretation of emails in a situation that is slanted in favor of one opinion is not fair and not representative. At that point, our own rules call us to go back to the consensus model of three meetings. Would you rather have that or compromise enough to allow people to voice their opinions honestly and fairly? 

Regardless of how I would "vote," (and as I said, I still do not know how I will vote yet) I will keep pushing for fair and honest sampling of opinion because it is the right thing to do. 

RanthulfR 


On Feb 9, 2012, at 9:22 AM, Greg Less wrote: 


<blockquote>
Sir Ranthulfr- 

As stated yesterday, the Barony of Cynnabar does not vote. A poll, regardless of the outcome, could not be used to make a decision on this matter because it would be tantamount to voting. 


In my experience, it has always been the job of Cynnabar's seneschal to listen to the discussion, steer the discussion, contribute to the discussion impartially, and at the end of the allotted time, decide whether a consensus opinion has been formed on the proposed action and whether or not a substantive opposition has been voiced to said proposal. 


Here, the proposed action is to give the Kingdom 18% of our 2011 coffers rounded up to the nearest dollar. The discussion is ongoing. I am sure that Finn is doing his best to hear all of the opinions, both pro and con, and decide whether the aforementioned consensus has been reached without substantive opposition. 


If a person wishes their voice to be heard on this matter, but does not wish to speak up in public, Finn has made his home phone number and personal email address available. Their Excellencies are also available for private communication, I am sure. There are plenty of ways to get your opinion out there; don't let being shy, my rhetoric, or anything else stop you from being heard. 



-Gregoire. 





On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Randy Asplund < randyasplund at comcast.net > wrote: 


<blockquote>
Lord Finn, 

How will this decision be made before Saturday? A poll has been proposed and seconded, and another person has offered to draft it, but t is now Thursday and we've had no word yet about how the decision will be made. 


I ask because I am concerned that this group might make the mistake of using the gist of this week's emails to imply a decision rather than actually using a method that is impartial and non-public. We are already in a darker than gay area for stretching the "emergency decision" definition, so we should try our very best to be as fairly representative as possible. 


The logic for using the poll system rather than looking at past emails is about fairness because: 

1) Although many posts on this subject have been made, the majority of the posts have been from the same few people, which is not a fair representation of the far greater numbers of the Barony. In fact, we have not heard from most of our active membership and only (if I counted right) three of our local Peers. It may turn out that the opinion of the ones who posted the most for one side carries the favor of the majority, but we won't know until we have a chance to decide and vote in private. 


2) From the first post by Gregoire, language has been used that would dissuade anyone who disagreed from saying so has been used. I am NOT saying that was intentional on anybody's part, but that is certainly the psychological effect. Who wants to publicly state an opposing opinion when it might cause them to appear ungenerous or not in support of Kingdom and Society, even if they thought there was a better way to do both? I know for a fact that there are people who have not posted but do disagree. They deserve to have the opportunity to be counted privately and impartially. 


3) There are people on the list who just don't post much, but would like to vote. There are also members of the local group who are physically active but are not on the list-serve. 


4) Some people have expressed off-list that they have not posted because they felt others had already made their points. 

5) Regardless of what has been said already, we are still waiting for the last information to arrive, and people on either side might change their minds in either direction based on that information. Frankly, I don't even know how "I" would vote yet. 


6) And who is eligible to vote ought to be stated. (Please note: This is not a slight to Their Graces, who live in Pittsburgh. I personally feel that anyone who feels they are a member of Cynnabar first and foremost should be allowed to vote. But we have people on this list who are in a grey area and others who were just plain never members of Cynnabar but simply want to keep aware of what we are doing). 


I doubt strongly that anybody in either camp wants anything but what is best for the SCA, for the Middle Kingdom and for Cynnabar. The question is really about what is the wisest way to deal with the situation. The decision needs to reflect the honest opinion of the group's members without having anybody feel socially pressured into voting against what they believe. 


RanthulfR 







Randy Asplund 
Facebook: "Randy Asplund, Artist" 
www.RandyAsplund.com <http://www.RandyAsplund.com> 
Maker of Medieval books and 
Illustrator of Science Fiction & Fantasy 
(734) 663-0954 < tel:%28734%29%20663-0954 > 
2101 S. Circle Dr. Ann Arbor, MI 48103 




_______________________________________________ 
Barony mailing list 
Barony at cynnabar.org 
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony 





</blockquote>


Randy Asplund 
Facebook: "Randy Asplund, Artist" 
www.RandyAsplund.com <http://www.RandyAsplund.com> 
Maker of Medieval books and 
Illustrator of Science Fiction & Fantasy 
(734) 663-0954 < tel:%28734%29%20663-0954 > 
2101 S. Circle Dr. Ann Arbor, MI 48103 



_______________________________________________ 
Barony mailing list 
Barony at cynnabar.org 
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony 


</blockquote>



_______________________________________________ 
Barony mailing list 
Barony at cynnabar.org 
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony 
_______________________________________________ 
Barony mailing list 
Barony at cynnabar.org 
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony 

</blockquote>










Randy Asplund 
Facebook: "Randy Asplund, Artist" 
www.RandyAsplund.com 
Maker of Medieval books and 
Illustrator of Science Fiction & Fantasy 
(734) 663-0954 
2101 S. Circle Dr. Ann Arbor, MI 48103 

_______________________________________________ 
Barony mailing list 
Barony at cynnabar.org 
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cynnabar.org/pipermail/barony/attachments/20120209/a00066e7/attachment-0001.html>