[MR] value of membership (fwd)

[Craig Levin]

Mistress Anne:

> My friends,
> I'm disappointed that the value of membership in the SCA Inc. appears to be
> measured only in terms of a very tangible "what's in it for me?"
> Purchasing membership in the SCA may not buy you entry to a feast or give
> you personal insurance if you get hurt at an event, but it does give a
> number of intangibles that are, in my opinion, highly valuable.
> 
> -How about the existence of the corporation itself which gives us the
> ability, via a non-profit status, to maintain checking accounts and manage
> money?

Does it need to be central? Could we do as many Protestant
churches and synagogues do, and handle this locally?

> -How about management of those really nasty issues and lawsuits that need to
> be raised above a kingdom level?

That's one of the few things a central corporation might be good
for. However, with no real member control, one does wonder.

> -How about maintaining the insurance needed for renting sites, without which
> we couldn't rent event sites?

Again, could this be done on the local level? Also, the insurance
policy, I gather, is just for Milpitas. Does it cover the people
who could be sued, too, like the event stewards, the cooks, and
the marshals? If not, that's hardly an incentive to take on these
tasks.

> -How about a governing body that establishes our approach to
> re-enactment/re-creation, and allows us to move from one kingdom to the
> next, and play a game that's reasonably the same with titles that mean the
> same things?

Don't know how much Milpitas has to play in this so much as
Pennsic, which isn't a Milpitas production, the Rialto, other
mailing lists, and the migration of members from one part of the
Known World to another, have to. Consider that there are already
variations in award structures, sumptuary customs, and even
martial arts forms (in Calontir, for instance, there's no
fencing), and Milpitas hasn't wagged an eyebrow.

> It is true that each kingdom could secede and form their own corporation,
> get their own federal tax ids, apply for 501(c) status, maintain their own
> membership, etc.  However, the necessary liability insurance (IMHO) becomes
> an issues that makes this scenario prohibitive.  We are all much better off
> grouping together to get better rates - strength in numbers!

Dunno. Has anyone done a per-capita study of the insurance costs
of Acre, ECS, Markland, and the SCA? I'm willing to call
Markland.

> Raising membership costs always causes flack, so I assume they are trying to
> avoid that pit.  Personally, I think $35 is really low compared to my $143
> IEEE membership.

On the other hand, what are you getting from IEEE membership? As
a member of ALA, I get a lobbying team in DC, which works for
better $$ for libraries and against attacks on our First
Amendment rights, a slick professional journal, discounts at car
rentals, (potentially) a credit card, a nice line on my resume
(which doesn't hurt, these days), and all for $45. The SCA gets
me insurance for SCA, Inc. and a couple of periodicals. It's
something of a liability if I ever go back to school for my
doctorate in mediaeval studies. 

In Service,

Dom Pedro de Alcazar
Barony of Storvik, Atlantia
Drakkar Herald
Argent a tower purpure between 3 bunches of grapes proper

-- 
http://pages.ripco.net/~clevin/index.html 
clevin at rci.ripco.com
Craig Levin				Librarians Rule: Oook!