Lords and Ladies, gentles all.
Last November and December, in a brief note to many e-mail lists, I called your attention to a proposal of mine to change the method by which the SCA, Inc. was funded and to change how "membership" in the SCA was determined. This proposal was called the Participation Membership Proposal, or PMP.
Some number of you came and visited my web-site. Nearly 100 people actually wrote to the Board on the matter. Due to that show of interest, the proposal was put on the agenda of the January meeting of the Board of Directors.
At that meeting, various members of the Board expressed the desire to explore the philosophy behind the PMP, but felt that the proposal itself was flawed in some way. (None of the objections were well-articulated.) I agreed to cooperate with them in sending the philosophy of the PMP out for membership comment and worked with one director to generate a call for comment.
Just yesterday I was told by that Director that the Board has decided NOT to put the philosophy of the PMP out for comment on sca.org or the newsletters. Since I had an agreement with them, I am putting it out for comment myself, and asking you all to view my site and comment on the information there.
At the January meeting the Board said they wanted this and made me a promise: I urge you to give it to them and remind them of the promise.
YOUR PARTICIPATION IS VITAL!!! There are over 25,000 members in the SCA. On issues of this type, the Board typically receives less than 500 responses. If you care how your corporation is to be run, send in a comment. Otherwise the vocal minority will be the ones to set the future of this corporation.
Please comment on each of the ideas below:
1) Currently, while participation in most SCA activities is open to all, payment of an annual membership fee entitles people to certain additional privileges. Instead of this model, should all membership privileges be based on attendance at local group meetings and SCA events?
2) Currently, the corporation is financed primarily through membership fees. Should it instead be financed primarily through fees charged to events?
3) Currently, there are a variety of services handled by the corporation on an SCA-wide level. If the organization were to be financed primarily by fees charged at events, should these corporate services be cut to the absolute minimum necessary for SCA-wide operations in order to keep these fees as low as possible?
All comments should be sent to email@example.com.
To review the original proposal from Duke Frederick (and a more complete history of the Board interaction) go to http://xray.cchem.berkeley.edu/flieg2/allmember
Remember, be concise and be polite in your letters to the Board.
Gentles, I thank you for your attention.
Frederick of Holland, MSCA, OP, OL, etc.
Read Duke Frederick's original statement at: