Cian: category

2006-11-08T23:37:06Z

category

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:37, 9 November 2006
Line 3:		Line 3:
	Apparently, they thought that for some reason (perhaps [[insurance]]) possibly as the result of bad advice from either their [[lawyer]]s or from the outside person they had hired to help "professionalize" the SCA, they should ''require'' [[membership]] to attend SCA [[event]]s.		Apparently, they thought that for some reason (perhaps [[insurance]]) possibly as the result of bad advice from either their [[lawyer]]s or from the outside person they had hired to help "professionalize" the SCA, they should ''require'' [[membership]] to attend SCA [[event]]s.

	This did not go over well with the [[hippy]] mentality that had been part of SCA culture since the beginning.		This did not go over well with the [[hippy]] mentality that had been part of SCA culture since the beginning.

	The fact that the BoD behaved in a heavy handed and overly paternalistic fashioned only served to exacerbate the situation. There was talk of splitting the SCA into smaller groups, a lawsuit was instituted by some members against the corporation to gain access to the books, impeachment petitions against Board members were circulated.		The fact that the BoD behaved in a heavy handed and overly paternalistic fashioned only served to exacerbate the situation. There was talk of splitting the SCA into smaller groups, a lawsuit was instituted by some members against the corporation to gain access to the books, impeachment petitions against Board members were circulated.

	It was quite a kerfuffle.		It was quite a kerfuffle.
Line 12:		Line 12:

	The name, "Pay-to-Play", is a misnomer, since everyone who attends an event "pays" to "[[play]]" in the form of [[site fee]]s and [[feast fee]]s. The loyal opposition characterized it as a "members-only" policy, but the name "pay-to-play" is the one that stuck.		The name, "Pay-to-Play", is a misnomer, since everyone who attends an event "pays" to "[[play]]" in the form of [[site fee]]s and [[feast fee]]s. The loyal opposition characterized it as a "members-only" policy, but the name "pay-to-play" is the one that stuck.

			[[category:SCA politics]]

AlexandreDavigne at 19:13, 8 November 2006

2006-11-08T19:13:41Z

New page

In the early 90's the [[SCA]] [[BoD]] tried to initiate a '''pay-to-play''' policy.

Apparently, they thought that for some reason (perhaps [[insurance]]) possibly as the result of bad advice from either their [[lawyer]]s or from the outside person they had hired to help "professionalize" the SCA, they should ''require'' [[membership]] to attend SCA [[event]]s.

This did not go over well with the [[hippy]] mentality that had been part of SCA culture since the beginning.

The fact that the BoD behaved in a heavy handed and overly paternalistic fashioned only served to exacerbate the situation. There was talk of splitting the SCA into smaller groups, a lawsuit was instituted by some members against the corporation to gain access to the books, impeachment petitions against Board members were circulated.

It was quite a kerfuffle.

Eventually, the BoD backed off. (I believe they lost the lawsuit as well.) They did manage shortly thereafter to institute the [[Non Member Surcharge]], though.

The name, "Pay-to-Play", is a misnomer, since everyone who attends an event "pays" to "[[play]]" in the form of [[site fee]]s and [[feast fee]]s. The loyal opposition characterized it as a "members-only" policy, but the name "pay-to-play" is the one that stuck.

Pay to play - Revision history

Cian: category

AlexandreDavigne at 19:13, 8 November 2006