A proposed Corpora change worth shooting down

[jducoeur]

Not a huge deal, but one of those silly changes that fails the cost-benefit analysis badly. I'm sending my response to the Board now; I recommend others consider something similar. (Especially fighters, who would be particularly affected.)

Please note that the following proposed change has been previously discussed in a variety of forms, but is now being distributed for commentary.

 

The Board of Directors would like commentary on the proposed change to Corpora:

 

 

Section IV A 2

 

From:

 

2. Each competitor and prospective consort must hold a valid membership on the day of the Royal Lists, and must maintain that membership until their term of Royalty is over. Positive confirmation that the Registry has processed the membership application is required before anyone may fight or be fought for in a Royal List. Positive confirmation consists of a valid membership card, appearance of the name with a valid membership on a printout from the Corporate Office, a membership label issued by the Corporate Office showing the name and expiration date, or a postcard or letter from the Corporate Office confirming that the membership has been received.

 

To:

 

2. Each competitor and prospective consort must hold a valid membership on the day of the Royal Lists, and must maintain that membership until their term of Royalty is over. Positive confirmation that the Registry has processed the membership application****and that it is valid through the end of their prospective reign ***** is required before anyone may fight or be fought for in a Royal List. Positive confirmation consists of; a valid membership card, appearance of the name with a valid membership on a printout from the Corporate Office, a membership label issued by the Corporate Office showing the name and expiration date, ****receipt of online membership (as downloaded from the renewal website)****, or a postcard or letter from the Corporate Office confirming that the membership has been received.

 

 

The additional wording is in bold type, and would require all combatants and consorts to show, prior to acceptance in Crown Tournament, that their membership will remain valid throughout the duration of their potential Reign.

 

All commentary should be sent to comments@sca.org. All Commentary should be received on or before April 1, 2009.

 

As ever, the Board of Directors and Corporate staff welcomes any and all input.

 

You can subscribe to Announcement by going to;http://www.sca.org/BOD/announcements/

 

 

Essentially what this means is that *anybody* who enters Crown Tourney would be required to take out a multi-year membership, to cover the entire possible reign. Sure, that's not unreasonable for the incoming Royalty themselves -- but requiring it of all entrants is pointless and silly.

This is pure bureaucratic thinking: "why *shouldn't* we introduce this restriction, to avoid the chance that Royalty might possibly allow their memberships to briefly lapse?" To which the answer is, it's an added hassle for many hundreds of people per year, with little-to-no actual benefit to anybody. It would have no reason at *all* if the rules for legality of courts weren't foolishly tied to the Royal's memberships (a bad idea in the first place). And if it's so desperately important to avoid that, a more-appropriate rule would say that Royalty must have sufficient paid membership before being Crowned, not before entering the Tourney.

It's well worth shooting down, so I recommend letters to "comments@sca.org" on the subject. Spread the word.

(Oh, and just for reference: the second change in the letter -- allowing entrants' online receipts as proof of membership -- is completely uncontroversial IMO. It's only the change to require additional membership over and above the current rules that, IMO, is far more hassle than it's worth...)