[MR] Out of pocket expense

[Siegfried]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

It appears that one point in the original statement, has been missed,
evident by statements such as the following:

Otto Wrote:
>> If the cost is under $30 per person, would the suggestion to make
>> this an out of pocket expense for the volunteer as part of the
>> training be too much to ask?

AlexandKier Kenlon wrote:
> If this is now a requirement that anyone who is in charge in any way shape
> or form in charge of a children's activity then like the requirements of
> other offices, then  this needs to come out of society funds. Maybe not the
> Kingdom paying for everyone from Kingdom to Canton and everything in
> between, but at least I think that even the average canton can afford $38
> bucks every two years for an officer.

The proposal did not state that only officers would have to have this
background check.  It stated that all volunteers that will be involved
with helping out at a children's activity at an event will have to.
That means not only officers, but all youth marshals, all page school
volunteers, possibly all page sponsors, and anyone who wishes to
volunteer to help at a children's point.   By reference, one might even
think that we need to get all archery marshals, thrown weapons marshals,
rapier marshals, and heavy marshals also with background checks, because
minors can participate in those sports (especially archery & thrown).

This means, that if I am walking past a children's point, and one of the
people there running it yells to me:  "Siegfried, please, relieve me for
a minute because I HAVE to go to the bathroom."  That if I have not had
my SCA approved background check, with some accompanying documentation
to go with it ... that I will not be able to say 'sure' and give a hand.

I feel it is my duty in the SCA to offer help whenever possible, and
therefore, I would need to get this background check, even though I hold
no 'youth offices', but just because I 'might' help out with children's
activities.

I know many many other people, who would not want to have to refuse to
help someone in need, because they didn't have the check ... meaning
that masses of people will be getting the background check ...
essentially taking it to the extreme of every adult having it, just in case.

Perhaps others aren't as altruistic as I assume they are ... but given
the foundations of our society, I would think that most everyone, if
this was the rule, would step up to have the check, causing MANY of
them.  (That is, those who don't just walk away from the Society because
of this)

Siegfried
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGHiiDUTBVzmoxCKIRAifqAKCwOSo/k/C3BKl4J4ddUTJw+NXrkACeP4Cx
kTjd8RuzuYJ2Re7nacijtss=
=ULPz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----