[Cynnabar] To Seneschal et all
Hannah Schreiber
hannahschreiber at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 10 15:07:26 UTC 2012
My Lords and Ladies,
We would encourage you all to attend if you are able. Our Society is doing a great job of making the information available to us regarding this matter. It's our responsibility to get it from them first hand to make our own decisions instead of hearing it through somebody else's interpretation. If you are planning to come to Val Day, please make the time to listen to what they have to say.
Hannah
Baroness
There are two ways of spreading light; to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. ~Edith Wharton
________________________________
From: John Wilkerson <jmw at wilkersons.ws>
To: barony at cynnabar.org
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 9:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] To Seneschal et all
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
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:
>
>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:
>>
>>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> 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>
>>>>>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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>>________________________________
>>_______________________________________________
>>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
>>
>
>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
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
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/20120210/69ed7e66/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Barony
mailing list