I wouldn't worry about it -- at the time, most of us thought it was a good idea. That was a *long* time ago (at least, in Internet time), and nobody could predict the way that online communications would grow and fragment, and consume the Society. (Remember that I was deeply involved there from the beginning -- my Carolingian site *may* have been the first SCA webpage -- and I completely agreed with the split.)
But yes: it's probably time for a rethink. The split was probably a good idea for ten years or so, but at this point it's likely harming both sides of the equation. We probably need to redefine Chronicler to be in charge of communication more broadly, with a lot more freedom to explore how to make that work best. It's "let a thousand flowers bloom" time -- lots of experiments needed to see what works.
As for resistance from the top: quite likely, but I suspect the Board is more open to experimentation than you think. Far as I can tell, they are finally genuinely *scared*, and for the right reasons -- it is clear that the Society is getting dysfunctional, and I believe they are more aware of that than most people give them credit for. So while I agree that the bureaucracy is likely to resist it, I suspect that the Board would be open to principled arguments for experimentation and change...
no subject
I wouldn't worry about it -- at the time, most of us thought it was a good idea. That was a *long* time ago (at least, in Internet time), and nobody could predict the way that online communications would grow and fragment, and consume the Society. (Remember that I was deeply involved there from the beginning -- my Carolingian site *may* have been the first SCA webpage -- and I completely agreed with the split.)
But yes: it's probably time for a rethink. The split was probably a good idea for ten years or so, but at this point it's likely harming both sides of the equation. We probably need to redefine Chronicler to be in charge of communication more broadly, with a lot more freedom to explore how to make that work best. It's "let a thousand flowers bloom" time -- lots of experiments needed to see what works.
As for resistance from the top: quite likely, but I suspect the Board is more open to experimentation than you think. Far as I can tell, they are finally genuinely *scared*, and for the right reasons -- it is clear that the Society is getting dysfunctional, and I believe they are more aware of that than most people give them credit for. So while I agree that the bureaucracy is likely to resist it, I suspect that the Board would be open to principled arguments for experimentation and change...