ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Feedback and updates relating to the Westmarch kingdom corpora.

ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Keluric » Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:59 pm

ARTICLE I: NAME AND PURPOSE
Section 1. NAME
1. The name of the organization is Amtgard, Kingdom of Westmarch, Inc. (“Kingdom of Westmarch”, “Westmarch”, “Kingdom”).

Section 2. PURPOSE
1. Westmarch is a collection of Amtgard chapters whose members participate primarily in California. The Kingdom shall operate as a Floating Crown, with officers and voting eligibility determined by distance from a general Kingdom center point of Gilroy, CA.
2. Amtgard, including Westmarch, is a not-for-profit, free, non-sectarian group dedicated to the recreation of medieval and fantasy genres.
3. Westmarch typically meets at various locations (“the park”, “the field”) where battlegames, ditches, tournaments, and other events are held using the most current Amtgard Rules of Play. Events hosted by the Kingdom are considered to be held by the Kingdom for the purposes of officer jurisdiction and attendance.
4. Westmarch sponsors several smaller chapters that also play Amtgard, but are not autonomous kingdoms. All chapters sponsored by the Kingdom are considered to be part of the Kingdom and under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom officers and these bylaws.
Baron Sir Keluric Tryst
Prince of Westmarch

Bellator Adamas
Rutgers Jugging Team
Grand Vizier of the Briny Deep
User avatar
Keluric
 
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Duchy of Wavehaven

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Hannoske » Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:54 pm

I recommend we change "whose members participate in California." This seems absolute, and with the option of adding two new lands in Nevada, seems counter intuitive. My thoughts are something like "the majority of which reside in California."

I am a bit fuzzy about the second part of 2.3, what if we added "regardless of location." or something like that to clarify the intention (or at least how I interpret it)?

Will putting our name as "Amtgard, Kingdom of Westmarch, Inc." affect our non-profit in any way?
Slightly off, but I do like the Confederacy of Westmarch, it is unique, and not necessarily out of place for a Kingdom (creating a different thread to discuss this further here).
Hannoske
 
Posts: 466
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 8:29 pm
Location: Thor's Refuge

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Randy » Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:45 pm

Hannoske wrote:I recommend we change "whose members participate in California." This seems absolute, and with the option of adding two new lands in Nevada, seems counter intuitive. My thoughts are something like "the majority of which reside in California."

I am a bit fuzzy about the second part of 2.3, what if we added "regardless of location." or something like that to clarify the intention (or at least how I interpret it)?

Will putting our name as "Amtgard, Kingdom of Westmarch, Inc." affect our non-profit in any way?
Slightly off, but I do like the Confederacy of Westmarch, it is unique, and not necessarily out of place for a Kingdom (creating a different thread to discuss this further here).



I don't think Westmarch should be looking outside California. If anything, the Arizona/Nevada group makes more sense. If it does come up later, that its a good idea to add Nevada then a vote to ammend the copora wouldn't be hard to accomplish.
User avatar
Randy
 
Posts: 1583
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:16 pm
Location: Silver Sun

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Cream Puff » Tue Dec 06, 2011 4:47 pm

Just some thoughts, some nit picky, some substantive, take or leave as you see fit:

"battlegames, ditches, tournaments" ditches are a type of battlegame, the dual statement seems redundant.

"most current Amtgard Rules of Play" implies that the instant a version of the rules is accepted, it is in effect in Westmarch, which is fine if that is what is meant to be true.

"Events hosted by the Kingdom are considered to be held by the Kingdom for the purposes of officer jurisdiction and attendance." This is a cumbersome sentence, I believe I know what is trying to be said, but the way it is written it is not entirely clear.

"Westmarch sponsors several smaller chapters that also play Amtgard, but are not autonomous kingdoms". I think this could be made more clear by simplifying: "Westmarch also sponsors other Amtgard chapters that are not autonomous kingdoms." ... or something similar.

The previous sentence is also confusing in light of the last sentence: "All chapters sponsored by the Kingdom are considered to be part of the Kingdom and under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom officers and these bylaws." I guess I'm getting hung up on the idea of the lands that make up Westmarch proper, and the groups that Westmarch is sponsoring, which I view as separate. The way this is written it implies (to me, obviously) that sponsored groups are also part of the kingdom. I think I am misunderstanding the intent of the language, but it seems to be written that way.

Nice to see that the group is making progress, thanks for your work.

Cream Puff
Cream Puff
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Keluric » Tue Dec 06, 2011 7:58 pm

evil Randy wrote:
Hannoske wrote:I recommend we change "whose members participate in California." This seems absolute, and with the option of adding two new lands in Nevada, seems counter intuitive. My thoughts are something like "the majority of which reside in California."

I am a bit fuzzy about the second part of 2.3, what if we added "regardless of location." or something like that to clarify the intention (or at least how I interpret it)?

Will putting our name as "Amtgard, Kingdom of Westmarch, Inc." affect our non-profit in any way?
Slightly off, but I do like the Confederacy of Westmarch, it is unique, and not necessarily out of place for a Kingdom (creating a different thread to discuss this further here).



I don't think Westmarch should be looking outside California. If anything, the Arizona/Nevada group makes more sense. If it does come up later, that its a good idea to add Nevada then a vote to ammend the copora wouldn't be hard to accomplish.


I agree. I think dealing with things that come up in the future can be delt with then. Currently, we are not outside of California. Also, there is no reason a corpora cannot be changed in the future. :)
Baron Sir Keluric Tryst
Prince of Westmarch

Bellator Adamas
Rutgers Jugging Team
Grand Vizier of the Briny Deep
User avatar
Keluric
 
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Duchy of Wavehaven

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Keluric » Tue Dec 06, 2011 8:08 pm

"battlegames, ditches, tournaments" ditches are a type of battlegame, the dual statement seems redundant.

I think that getting that specific is unnecessary. Also, the general populace of the Amtgard world sees a difference
between 'battlegames' and 'ditching', hence they are seperate here. Also, this wording is a left-over from the current corpora, and has not caused any sort of confusion.

"most current Amtgard Rules of Play" implies that the instant a version of the rules is accepted, it is in effect in Westmarch, which is fine if that is what is meant to be true.

Yes, we are supposed to be using the most current RoP. This was a consistent point brought up for change by the IK-CoM from Clan.

"Events hosted by the Kingdom are considered to be held by the Kingdom for the purposes of officer jurisdiction and attendance." This is a cumbersome sentence, I believe I know what is trying to be said, but the way it is written it is not entirely clear.

What part is unclear?

"Westmarch sponsors several smaller chapters that also play Amtgard, but are not autonomous kingdoms". I think this could be made more clear by simplifying: "Westmarch also sponsors other Amtgard chapters that are not autonomous kingdoms." ... or something similar.

Not sure what needs changing here? The current statement is fairly straight.

The previous sentence is also confusing in light of the last sentence: "All chapters sponsored by the Kingdom are considered to be part of the Kingdom and under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom officers and these bylaws." I guess I'm getting hung up on the idea of the lands that make up Westmarch proper, and the groups that Westmarch is sponsoring, which I view as separate. The way this is written it implies (to me, obviously) that sponsored groups are also part of the kingdom. I think I am misunderstanding the intent of the language, but it seems to be written that way.

All lands that sign a contract with Westmarch, are part of the Kingdom. This is no different than DS, IM, or any other kingdom. The ability to vote or run for office do not disculde it from beign part of our kingdom.

I hope that sheds some better light on the concerns.
Baron Sir Keluric Tryst
Prince of Westmarch

Bellator Adamas
Rutgers Jugging Team
Grand Vizier of the Briny Deep
User avatar
Keluric
 
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Duchy of Wavehaven

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Fiks » Tue Dec 06, 2011 8:24 pm

Keluric wrote:
evil Randy wrote:
Hannoske wrote:I recommend we change "whose members participate in California." This seems absolute, and with the option of adding two new lands in Nevada, seems counter intuitive. My thoughts are something like "the majority of which reside in California."

I am a bit fuzzy about the second part of 2.3, what if we added "regardless of location." or something like that to clarify the intention (or at least how I interpret it)?

Will putting our name as "Amtgard, Kingdom of Westmarch, Inc." affect our non-profit in any way?
Slightly off, but I do like the Confederacy of Westmarch, it is unique, and not necessarily out of place for a Kingdom (creating a different thread to discuss this further here).



I don't think Westmarch should be looking outside California. If anything, the Arizona/Nevada group makes more sense. If it does come up later, that its a good idea to add Nevada then a vote to ammend the copora wouldn't be hard to accomplish.


I agree. I think dealing with things that come up in the future can be delt with then. Currently, we are not outside of California. Also, there is no reason a corpora cannot be changed in the future. :)

No reason we can't head off a situation we see brewing on the horizon though. Then again, I think the first official announcement about the Nevada lands was made Saturday, (I think I had heard of one of the lands' interest, only as a rumor mebbe?) which was after the committee rubber-stamped this article. Since this could be an issue in the future, is it worth a revisit? Perhaps as a final run-down towards the end?

I'll also quickly note that Euric (I think) mentioned at the feast (and on the boards somewhere too, I believe) that one of the lands interested is in Reno, and as such is actually closer to Sacramento than any of the other AZ or NV lands. Definitely still far away from the core of Westmarch's lands.
"How harmful overspecialization is. It cuts knowledge at a million points and leaves it bleeding."—Hari Seldon
Grass grows, birds fly, sun shines, and brotha', I hurt people. Bonk!
User avatar
Fiks
 
Posts: 2564
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 9:57 pm
Location: Wavehaven

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Keluric » Wed Dec 07, 2011 10:01 am

In hindsight, I think that we can have both aspects.

Westmarch will always 'focus' on California, but that does not require us to ignore potential additions just outside that border. I think in the long run, having some groups join that are closer to us that to other kingdoms is not only a good move, but will help strengthen Westmarch as a Kingdom.

I think changing the wording now is a worth the effort, still having it focused on California, but allowing for future growth.
Baron Sir Keluric Tryst
Prince of Westmarch

Bellator Adamas
Rutgers Jugging Team
Grand Vizier of the Briny Deep
User avatar
Keluric
 
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Duchy of Wavehaven

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Collin the Red » Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:50 am

So maybe add the add "but not limited to" in the line:
"1. Westmarch is a collection of Amtgard chapters whose members participate primarily in California."
to read:
"1. Westmarch is a collection of Amtgard chapters whose members participate primarily in, but not limited to, California."

Hence leaving the door open to our current (and future) petitioners to the east.
Baron Collin MacAbee current King of Westmarch
Squire to Sir Smiley
User avatar
Collin the Red
 
Posts: 2359
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 4:11 pm
Location: Thor's Refuge

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby SirEuric » Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:42 pm

The reason we even are considering the two Nevada groups is they came to us and I have spoken with King Fitz of Desert winds and he says it only makes sense considering they are 5 hours from the Heart of Westmarch and over 9 hours from any Large Desert Winds parks. He implied that he kind of suggested they look here.

And yes I agree that we should look to the future and alter the wording , it is an easy fix and the Nevada groups just started seriously asking to join within the last few weeks, after we had ok'ed the copy. They are not even a shoe in, they have to petition and get althing approval.
Sir Euric Bloodstone
SirEuric
 
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Thor's Freakin Refuge Baby!!!

Re: ARTICLE I - Name and Purpose

Postby Keluric » Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:24 pm

I think the change to "primarily", covers the open door there, without additional wording.
Baron Sir Keluric Tryst
Prince of Westmarch

Bellator Adamas
Rutgers Jugging Team
Grand Vizier of the Briny Deep
User avatar
Keluric
 
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Duchy of Wavehaven


Return to Westmarch Kingdom Corpora

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron