Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Ayreton] Shell without Ravenslake (was...)

Expand Messages
  • Christian Fournier
    Thank you, Teleri, for clarifying your feelings. You raise some excellent questions, and I wouldn t want to belittle them by immediately countering them in
    Message 1 of 28 , Feb 3, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Thank you, Teleri, for clarifying your feelings.  You raise some excellent questions, and I wouldn't want to belittle them by immediately "countering" them in turn.  

      Rather, for my part, I'll plan to consider the questions you raise, and see what difference they make in my thoughts about the Baronial issue.  I encourage others to do the same-- give some real thought to the questions below, and let's take them up as we continue discussions at the next Towne Hall.  Some of these questions are interwoven tightly, with each other and with the already open questions of what happens to the Ayreton infrastructure we already have in place.

      Thanks again, Teleri and all,

       Christian

      Regardless of what happens to the name Ayreton, how do we plan to maintain the unity of the greater Chicago entity, or is that no longer considered important?  My experience with the advancement process is that takes so much effort and resources from the group involved, there is little to spare for other matters for a long time.  If we want to maintain the larger area cohesion, will we now need a Governor instead of a Mayor to represent the larger entity comprising the Shell Barony and Ravenslake?  Are things like this mailing list and the Carnival event going to continue to represent the larger group or become the purview of just the Shell Barony?  Will we now need a new separate email list and new baronial events to promote the unity of the five groups without Ravenslake?  How does it make sense to try and form this shell of five, if we have been stressing for so long the cohesion of the entire set of six groups?

       

      Yours in Service,

      Teleri



      ----- Original Message ----
      From: "AlexdeSet@..." <AlexdeSet@...>
      To: Ayreton@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Saturday, February 2, 2008 8:00:18 AM
      Subject: Re: [Ayreton] Re: Actual wording of the letter of intent


      Greetings!
           Speaking as a member of the Shire of Ravenslake, present when the voting took place, I will say the Shire is excited about having a Barony, shell or otherwise, as a neighbor. We were not excluded, we decided ourselves to opt out and choose another path.
           In the Land of Milk and Honey (tm), Fair Caid, there are baronies everywhere, many adjacent to each other. This is far from a bad thing-it is actively a good thing. If it happens here, it will also be a good thing.
           While I think it is good that others are concerned that Ravenslake has been "left out", please understand that we are still here, still interacting, sharing, and helping. We have chosen a slightly different path, and forsee no problem between shire and Barony, or Barony and Barony.
      Is mise le meas,
      Alexander de Seton,
      Some Guy From Ravenslake


      -----Original Message-----
      From: Teleri <alta_gioiosa@ yahoo.com>
      To: Ayreton@yahoogroups .com
      Sent: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:17 pm
      Subject: Re: [Ayreton] Re: Actual wording of the letter of intent

      Ian said>>

      I, today do not feel that Ravenslake has "left the fold" nor do I 
      think their choice to look into the potential of becoming a barony on 
      their own in anyway affects the five groups that have decided to look 
      into forming a shell barony together. 

      ***

      The initial proposal submitted for consideration in the poll was for the 6 groups of the region to form a shell barony, and this has now changed to only 5 of those groups doing so and one remaining independent. I think this change to the proposal as has a large affect on the decision to continue forward with the process. It will have a major affect on the regional structure of this area, which will impact all 6 local groups and their members. 

      This issue was in fact brought up and discussed during the initial meetings before the poll. The general response was that such a possibility was terribly unlikely, and that we would deal with it later if that slight possibility became a reality. 

      Well, here we are, unlikely as it seemed at the time. Are we going to in fact deal with it, or try to sweep it under the rug?

      I think the inclusion of only 5 of the proposed 6 groups in the shell barony cancels out many of the suggested advantages of the initial proposal, and brings into play a number of additional disadvantages. There was a strong opinion that one of the major advantages of the shell barony format was to form, as the letter of intent indicates, a coherent structure for regional unity. Well, that will no longer be the case. The new proposed structure will institutionalize the connections between some of those groups and exclude other groups. 

      Of course, people are always free to ignore such boundaries to a certain extent, just as some of us still go to events in Northshield, now that it has become it's own kingdom. However, you cannot deny that it changes the relationships between groups when such structural boundaries are put in place. When it comes to such things as baronial events, baronial awards, baronial championships, baronial mailing lists, etc., all of which were proposed as advantages of the shell barony, some groups and individuals in the region will be able to participate and some will not. 

      I think these changes to the initial scope of the proposed regional structure need to be taken seriously, not just brushed aside.

      Teleri

      ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
      Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. 
      http://www.yahoo. com/r/hs
      More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail!



      Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. 

    • Galen of Bristol
      Having been at the Ravenslake meeting at which it was agreed that we would not join the Ayreton shell barony, I would just like to point out, in case it hasn t
      Message 2 of 28 , Feb 4, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Having been at the Ravenslake meeting at which it was agreed that we
        would not join the Ayreton shell barony, I would just like to point
        out, in case it hasn't been made clear, that Ravenslake never intended
        to make or imply any statement of opposition to the remaining Ayreton
        groups forming a barony.

        We have no wish to veto, prevent, impede, undermine or discourage the
        advancement of the other five groups.

        Sometimes, growth doesn't happen quite the way you might want or
        expect. That's just life.

        - Galen of Bristol
        another guy in Ravenslake

        --- In Ayreton@yahoogroups.com, Teleri <alta_gioiosa@...> wrote:
        >
        > The fact that the people Ravenslake chose to remain independent of
        their own will, and have every right to do so is not at issue. My
        concern is the affect that has on the logic of forming a shell barony
        out of the remaining five groups in the local area.
        >
        > Maybe my perspective is different because I have been happily
        thinking of myself as a citizen of Ayreton (meaning all 6 groups in
        the greater Chicago area) for the last several years. With the
        efforts spent by so many people to promote the unity between groups,
        it has been wonderful to be able to participate in the activities and
        events of all groups, without worrying about what geographic location
        it is in, or which group it "belongs" to.
        >
        > I was not especially in favor of the Ayreton entity of all six
        groups advancing to barony status, but I at least understood the logic
        of the folks proposing it. It would have maintained the unity of the
        area that we had all been working toward. The newly proposed shell
        consisting of only part of the greater Chicago area groups has no such
        obvious logic to it.
        >
        > During the initial advancement discussions, many argued against
        individual groups advancing in status because of the barriers to unity
        that such structures could impose. The newly proposed area-wide
        organization will have to deal with these issues of division. I am
        now looking at the prospect of ending up quite close to the boundary
        of the Barony of Five and the Whatever of Ravenslake, which is quite
        unappealing. While, of course, no wall will go up, and we won't stop
        talking to each other, my experience with the Midrealm is that people
        take Baronial boundaries much more seriously. During the polling
        process, I already had people question my right to express an opinion
        outside my geographic zip code. While the majority of people in the
        area did not support that type of exclusion, such attitudes only
        become stronger under a baronial organization structure.
        >
        > Regardless of what happens to the name Ayreton, how do we plan to
        maintain the unity of the greater Chicago entity, or is that no longer
        considered important? My experience with the advancement process is
        that takes so much effort and resources from the group involved, there
        is little to spare for other matters for a long time. If we want to
        maintain the larger area cohesion, will we now need a Governor instead
        of a Mayor to represent the larger entity comprising the Shell Barony
        and Ravenslake? Are things like this mailing list and the Carnival
        event going to continue to represent the larger group or become the
        purview of just the Shell Barony? Will we now need a new separate
        email list and new baronial events to promote the unity of the five
        groups without Ravenslake? How does it make sense to try and form
        this shell of five, if we have been stressing for so long the cohesion
        of the entire set of six groups?
        >
        > Yours in Service,
        > Teleri
        >
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message ----
        > From: "AlexdeSet@..." <AlexdeSet@...>
        > To: Ayreton@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Saturday, February 2, 2008 8:00:18 AM
        > Subject: Re: [Ayreton] Re: Actual wording of the letter of intent
        >
        > Greetings!
        > Speaking as a member of the Shire of Ravenslake, present when
        the voting took place, I will say the Shire is excited about having a
        Barony, shell or otherwise, as a neighbor. We were not excluded, we
        decided ourselves to opt out and choose another path.
        > In the Land of Milk and Honey (tm), Fair Caid, there are
        baronies everywhere, many adjacent to each other. This is far from a
        bad thing-it is actively a good thing. If it happens here, it will
        also be a good thing.
        > While I think it is good that others are concerned that
        Ravenslake has been "left out", please understand that we are still
        here, still interacting, sharing, and helping. We have chosen a
        slightly different path, and forsee no problem between shire and
        Barony, or Barony and Barony.
        > Is mise le meas,
        > Alexander de Seton,
        > Some Guy From Ravenslake
        >
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Teleri <alta_gioiosa@ yahoo.com>
        > To: Ayreton@yahoogroups .com
        > Sent: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:17 pm
        > Subject: Re: [Ayreton] Re: Actual wording of the letter of intent
        >
        >
        > Ian said>>
        >
        > I, today do not feel that Ravenslake has "left the fold" nor do I
        > think their choice to look into the potential of becoming a barony on
        > their own in anyway affects the five groups that have decided to look
        > into forming a shell barony together.
        >
        > ***
        >
        > The initial proposal submitted for consideration in the poll was for
        the 6 groups of the region to form a shell barony, and this has now
        changed to only 5 of those groups doing so and one remaining
        independent. I think this change to the proposal as has a large affect
        on the decision to continue forward with the process. It will have a
        major affect on the regional structure of this area, which will impact
        all 6 local groups and their members.
        >
        > This issue was in fact brought up and discussed during the initial
        meetings before the poll. The general response was that such a
        possibility was terribly unlikely, and that we would deal with it
        later if that slight possibility became a reality.
        >
        > Well, here we are, unlikely as it seemed at the time. Are we going
        to in fact deal with it, or try to sweep it under the rug?
        >
        > I think the inclusion of only 5 of the proposed 6 groups in the
        shell barony cancels out many of the suggested advantages of the
        initial proposal, and brings into play a number of additional
        disadvantages. There was a strong opinion that one of the major
        advantages of the shell barony format was to form, as the letter of
        intent indicates, a coherent structure for regional unity. Well, that
        will no longer be the case. The new proposed structure will
        institutionalize the connections between some of those groups and
        exclude other groups.
        >
        > Of course, people are always free to ignore such boundaries to a
        certain extent, just as some of us still go to events in Northshield,
        now that it has become it's own kingdom. However, you cannot deny that
        it changes the relationships between groups when such structural
        boundaries are put in place. When it comes to such things as baronial
        events, baronial awards, baronial championships, baronial mailing
        lists, etc., all of which were proposed as advantages of the shell
        barony, some groups and individuals in the region will be able to
        participate and some will not.
        >
        > I think these changes to the initial scope of the proposed regional
        structure need to be taken seriously, not just brushed aside.
        >
        > Teleri
        >
        > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
        > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
        > http://www.yahoo com/r/hs
        >
        >
        >
        > More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail!
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        ____________________________________________________________________________________
        > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
        > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.