[Cynnabar] To Seneschal et all

John Wilkerson jmw at wilkersons.ws
Fri Feb 10 14:06:31 UTC 2012


 From a post on the Midrealm FB page, I would encourage us to attend and 
ask questions, bring concerns to the President of the SCA.

Johannes


            Judy Kirk <https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=651783853>


            To all the populace of the Mighty Middle Kingdom, pray heed
            this announcement!

            At ValDay 39, the Tournament of Chivalry for TRM Eikbrandr
            and Runa II, there will be a TOWN HALL MEEETING conducted by
            the Middle Kingdom Seneschal and the President of the Society.

            This meeting will take place around 4pm in the
            Auditorium/A&S Hall.


On 2/9/2012 6:24 PM, dirkmayhew at comcast.net wrote:
>
> 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
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *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:
>
>     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
>     <mailto:malagemann at gmail.com>>
>     *Date: *Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:56:01 -0500
>     *To: *Barony of Cynnabar <barony at cynnabar.org
>     <mailto: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 <mailto:randyasplund at comcast.net>> wrote:
>
>         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:
>
>             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
>             <mailto:randyasplund at comcast.net>> wrote:
>
>                 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>
>                 <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 <mailto:Barony at cynnabar.org>
>                 http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
>
>
>
>
>         Randy Asplund
>         Facebook: "Randy Asplund, Artist"
>         www.RandyAsplund.com <http://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 <mailto:Barony at cynnabar.org>
>         http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
>
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     _______________________________________________
>     Barony mailing list
>     Barony at cynnabar.org <mailto:Barony at cynnabar.org>
>     http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
>     _______________________________________________
>     Barony mailing list
>     Barony at cynnabar.org <mailto:Barony at cynnabar.org>
>     http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
>
>
> 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
> 2101 S. Circle Dr. Ann Arbor, MI 48103
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cynnabar.org/pipermail/barony/attachments/20120210/8e31933e/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Barony mailing list