[SCA-AE] Change in Corpora Proposed
taranach at gmail.com
Wed Jan 7 15:51:37 EST 2009
That was not my point.... I think memberships *SHOULD* be mandatory
*AND* prepaid... I have had to pay and hold membership in EVERY other
group (quite a lot) I have belonged to... If I wanted to "play" I
expected to pay for it.
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Ben Cogan <donnghaile at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why is there such an uproar with having to
>> maintain membership to hold an office?
> because that is what we currently have and we like it, the current
> rules say we must maintain membership to hold an office.
> The rule change says we can't be trusted to maintain our membership
> and so in order to show any interest in the office (Crown
> specifically) we have to show we won't need to maintain our membership
> for the duration of the office that we don't yet have.
> That's what bothers me that we can't be trusted to maintain a
> membership that most of us have maintained for years, and the
> probability that it will come to stand for any office, not just crown.
> It's not that I'm not going to pay the money and maintain my
> membership, but the blatant insinuation that I can't be trusted to do
> so as I've done for the past 12 years.
> Sca-aethelmearc mailing list
> Send general discussion email to discussion at aethelmearc.org to post to the list.
> Email Official announcements to announcements at aethelmearc.org .
> Visit https://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/sca-aethelmearc for:
> more info, archives, subscription changes, etc.
> When replying to posts, you should remove excess quotage.
More information about the Sca-aethelmearc