[MR] The surcharge (fwd)

[Craig Levin]

Neca:

> and Renard LeNoir replied:
> > My apologies, milady, I should have been more specific.  What I meant is
> > that these merchants offer discounts to "carded" members of SCA....
> And Ceara responded:
> Ah, I see. I'd have to agree with ya there, it's an excellent idea! Of
> course, as a consumer, I'd have to say any discount is a good
> thing...<grin>
> 
> I view any discount that SCA merchants would offer much the way I view the
> Hertz rental discount I get as an American Express employee "Nice to have, but
> not the main reason why I work here."

For that matter, it would go against the ethics of some
merchants. Quakers have considered it unethical for centuries, at
this point, to have separate price schedules for people simply
based on who belonged to what.

> But there seems to be a large group of people in the SCA who I think of as
> "casual SCAdians."  These people go to a number of events, rarely attend
> business meetings, don't hold an office, and are infrequently fighters.  They
> go to hang out with friends, shop, and "be a part of the show."

Or they're merchants-without whom our life as SCAdians would be
much the barer. Or they're 

> Maybe they are
> new, their lifestyle doesn't permit more active involvement, or their interest
> isn't as all-encompassing as it seems to be for so many SCAdians.  I am not
> criticizing these people - but the fact is they have a very different view of
> the SCA and membership than does the run of the mill "avid SCAdian" who can't
> seem to find time between events to clean out their desk of paint the guest
> bathroom, holds multiple offices and autocrats when they aren't too busy
> cooking feast.  It says a lot for this hobby that the avids seem to far
> outweigh the casuals.

Er? 

Actually, the rule of thumb that I've seen is that there's about
as many, or perhaps twice as many, non-Milpitas tithe people as
there are Milpitas tithe people in a given area.

> The challenge (presuming you believe these people should be encouraged to join
> the SCA) is to sell the idea to this casual attendee that membership is of
> value.  The simplest way is not through selling them on the intangibles they
> may or may not value (insurance falls here for many people too, even though its
> important).  The easiest thing in the world is to show them a simple equation
> that says "Membership costs $35.  You will save $20 at Pennsic plus $3 at each
> additional event you attend.  If you attend more than 5 events, membership
> saves you money."

There's also people who were embittered from the last time this
dog came out, and who've since decided that the corporation
doesn't get their money. I know a number of people for whom this
is the case.

> I don't feel strongly for or against the non-member surcharge, but as an
> economist I can see why it would be the simplest way for the BoD to encourage
> people to behave in the desired manner i.e. Paying membership dues.

And if the issue's partly philosophical? If there are other
organizations with whom one can play a very similar game, but are
less expensive or offer certain options that SCA membership
doesn't, like a vote in its governing assembly or personal
accident insurance? As an economist, I am sure that you know that
competition would be a big factor.

Pedro

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