Creeping Bureaucracy

[hfeld@ids2.idsonline.com (Harold Feld)]

Poster: hfeld@ids2.idsonline.com (Harold Feld)

Greetings from Yaakov:

His Excellency Storvik writes:

>Before we start telling Rabah what we think he ought to do, I think it best
>that we know something first. I heard this afternoon that, apparently, he
>and every other kingdom Chronicler have been asked by the Society Chronicler
>to do this. THink about it a second before your anti-beaureaucracy glands
>kick in. What is the Acorn? It is an official publication of the Kingdom of
>(your name here), SCA, Inc. It says so on the inside of every issue you get.
>It is my understanding (and I will admit to second hand knowledge here, so
>take this at face value, if I'm wrong, we'll find out soon enough), that the
>Society Chronicler wants to make sure that web sites for kingdoms are also
>"official publications".

What a revoltin' development this is!  Good grief, can't we do *anything*
without someone on the BOD trying to nationalize it in the name of the
people.  (Please spare me the usual 'Board members are hard-working
volunteers' etc.  The road to Hell is paved with such well meaning deeds,
and I have seen organizations go to ruin through the best efforts of
dilligent officers.)

>Why? At a guess I'd say legal hassles, the first
>bastion of today's society (and I mean mundane society folks). People will
>sue over the stupidest things at the drop of a hat. Also, there may be
>copyright issues. "Over event announcements?" I hear you say. Well, probably
>not, but there could be other issues along those lines. Anyway, let's just
>chill a bit.

While quite possibly the motivation, such reasoning as evinced above is
foolish.  For one thing, it does not minimize your liability to take
responsibility for something.  On the contrary, it increases your
liability, since you henceforth warrant that you are responsible for the
content.

Yes, people will sue for anything.  This does not make the suit valid.  Nor
does panic reaction with little understanding of the law decrease
liability.  (Yes, I am an attorney, a clerk of the Court of Appeals of the
District of Columbia, thanks for asking....)

>Let's not jump on Rabah until we've heard more from him, and let's
>certainly >not tell him his job. I think he knows it well enough on his
>own. If he want to institute warrants for web owners, that's his business
>until either Their Majesties say something about it, or until he steps down
>and the next KC changes things. That's the great thing about change, folks.
>It's one of the great constants of the universe.

Do you seriously propose that it is impolite or forbidden to give an
officer feedback on proposed policy?  And that they should dismiss such
feedback as mere whining?  (Or that we should dismiss such feedback because
the people involved are merely the recipients of the policy and have never
held the office in question?)  While certaionly one of the more polite
formulations of "my way or the highway," I do not think you have thought
through the implications of your statement.

If Rabbah were not a friend and known to you, how would it effect your
feelings on criticizing the office or the policy?

Harold Feld
SCA
Yaakov HaMizrachi

"Do not ask 'Why are these days not as good as the days of old?' This
question is not prompted by wisdom." -Eccl.


=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org