[SCA] Can I say this?

[newman]

(This isn't going to mean a lot to you if you're not in the SCA. Even if you are, it may not mean a lot to you)

A short note came across the wires this morning from Hal Simon (Chairman of the BOD) regarding the invalidation of the reign of the current King and Queen of The Middle because of a 3-day lapse in membership due to some unusual circumstances. At the conclusion of the brief letter, Mr. Simon (as ever) indicates that "Questions, suggestions and comments can be sent to [email address snipped]". This is the note I'm considering sending; do I bother?



Dear Mr. Simon:

Upon reading your recent brief note concerning the invalidation of the reign of Lutr and Tessa, I was struck by the fact that The Board of Directors seems increasingly hidebound, interested in enforcing the letter of our laws, regardless of the cost or of the original intent of those laws. Interest in the S.C.A. from senior members (such as myself) is waning, and The S.C.A. has not been able to increase new member recruitment. My question, suggestion, and comment are

1) Why aren't the Board of Directors focused more on improving the S.C.A. and less on preserving some perceived status quo?

2) Please increase the transparency of our government. Much of the Board's actions are in a sealed Star Chamber.

3) If the Board of Directors does not make some drastic changes in the next few years, the S.C.A. as an entity will cease to exist. It already has largely ceased to exist as an organization I wish to be part of.

Alternative text for #3: If the Board of Directors does not make some drastic changes in the next few years, the S.C.A. as an entity will cease to exist. It is already well on its way to becoming an organization I would not wish to be part of.

Signed,

me, with all the titles and O.P. stuff that apparently makes me worth listening to ;-)

Comments

[hugh-mannity.livejournal.com]

I'd go with the alternate for #3.

The part that really pisses me off is that I suspect nothing would have happened had the Mid Crowns not told the office of the 3 day lapse. A less honorable person or persons would have simply renewed on line and said nothing.

It seems they have fallen foul of the "no good deed goes unpunished" rule. The BoD seems to have more in common with the IRS than is good for the Society: all errors are the fault of the membership, not the office or the Society officers and the letter of the law rather than the spirit is enforced. Quite what, if anything, can be done about it I don't know. I suspect that it won't be the cost of getting to and from events that will kill the Society, but this kind of petty bureaucratic meanspiritedness.

[new-man.livejournal.com]

Yup. The Board seems very concerned in making sure that the letter of the law is enforced equally across the board (no pun intended). Unfortunately, this sort of unyielding, "sorry, our hands are tied", inflexibility is just as bad as only enforcing the law in a erratic, biased, manner.