Westmarch Audit

General information, announcements, and discussions about Westmarch, Amtgard, and the LARPing life

Postby Dame Ailanthus » Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:02 am

You are a dork :)
User avatar
Dame Ailanthus
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:12 pm

Postby LucasTheLost » Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:16 am

sir blackthorn wrote:8. Where is the bank account and PO box information for Westmarch? These are requirements according to the DS Corpora.


I'd just like to point out that WM doesn't actually exist yet, so lacking either a bank account or PO box strikes me as "forgivable" at worst.

The numbers thing is a bit more... iffy.

And not having Amtgard because you had <5 people? Bah! Less than 2? Sure (unless someone out there has developed some Amtgard-legal "personal lubricant")! But "where two gather in Amtgard's name" and all that. Back in Siar Geata's "Bad Old Days" (when we were "Nazzeroc"), 2-3 people was par for the course. 6 was a big day.

Why, when I was your age... Damn kids, get off my lawn! Don't make me turn this car around! Pass the prune juice! Bah... Humbug! *Wheeze* Up hill! Both ways! This is why we can't have nice things! Now where's my damn dentures...

(Don' it make you feel old when you run into players who WEREN'T BORN when you started playing? Half way to seventy. Woo-freakin'-hoo. )
BS Lucas the Lost
Siar Geata
I'm a DADDY!

<wheeze>Get off my lawn.</wheeze>
User avatar
LucasTheLost
I made a baby
 
Posts: 2444
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 11:09 am
Location: Siar Geata (Escondido, CA)

Postby Dame Ailanthus » Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:26 am

I'll resond to all of Blackthorn's concerns, even though we've had some good responses already, just so that they are all addressed in the same place.


1. This proposal shows that Westmarch is in violation of its own Corpora by having members of the Monarchy holding multiple positions. Three members of the monarchy are doing this.

Who would those be? I see that Euric is holding PM and GMR, in the SHIRE of Falcon's Reach, but otherwise I do not see any conflicts. Would you be referring to myself, Grix and Hawk, who will be taking office after we are approved, and a new reign starts?

2. Unique per week not provided at the Westmarch level. Our Kingdom, Dragonspine, looks for unique per week not unique per month.

We were asked to submit audits for each of the lands. The weekly average is on each land's page. The numbers at the confederacy level are intended to give an easy view, but are not a part of the required audit. We could just add the average attendance of each of the lands and include that. However, because individual lands cancelled days for various reasons, a true weekly average of all lands combined would not be an accurate indication of Westmarch's actual attendance.

3. What happened with the elections that has a different number of votes for each member of the Westmarch Monarchy? They range between 11 and 29.

Prime Minister elections happened at a different time than the other offices. Not as many people voted in that election. GMR does not allow for all voting members to vote, only the reeve qualified ones, so there would be fewer there. As for the 1 vote difference between monarch and regent, I suspect it came from one of the absentee voters who just voted for monarch and did not say anything else. They did not really abstain, they just didn't vote for regent.

4. I looked at random sign-in sheets for each of the lands. I found multiple of each sign-in where number of signatures does not match the number reported for that week. It appears that we are both under and over reporting the numbers.

We took the numbers from the ORK, and scanned the sign-ins to match. The discrepancies are unsurprising considering I have often seen people forget to sign in, and just tell the PM later, or sign in on a later week. This is something we will have to remind each Prime Minster to be more careful about in the future, but we are working with what we have for this year.
As for undercounted weeks, as Grix said, we did not count visitors, so even if they are on the sign-ins they would not be in the weekly attendance number.

5. There is no explination of missing sign-in sheets

Yes we have already heard that, and it was easily explained. Some PM's did not keep track of all their paperwork for the last year. It is something we will need to work on in the future. Hopefully having a confederate Prime Minister, and the realization that it does matter will help each land in the future.

6. Falcon’s Reach has 0 attendance for streaks of 4 and 5 weeks within the last six months. There is no explanation for this or the results of the Monarchy members missing four weeks in a row. Is this a failure of the Audit for this land?

Neither. FR is a small land and has often had to cancel weeks due to mundane issues. A cancelled week does not count towards a missed one. You are talking about a shire, not a duchy.

7. Are there contracts that each land signed with Westmarch? If so, why are they not included? If not, why not?

As is in our corpora, and was agreed upon by DS. We do not need a 3rd contract in addition to DS, and BL. As long as we are under their sponsorship, their contract is all we will be using. You were part of the discussion when we discussed this. If at some point in the future DS decides we need our own contract we will deal with that then. In the mean-time, let's not bring up issues that you already saw resolved.

8. Where is the bank account and PO box information for Westmarch? These are requirements according to the DS Corpora.

The King of DS has been very clear that he is uncomfortable with WM acting as a full land until AFTER DS approves us. Even the quals and election was more than was expected at this point. We did those because, as long as we don't give any awards, or claim anything from them, they are not stepping over any boundaries. Starting a bank account, and maintaining a treasury would be stepping past that line. Once we get the OK from DS, and have our first coronation we will be dealing with all those issues. Until that time I think it would be very disrespectful to proceed without the blessing of our sponsoring kingdom.

9. Did anyone check with DS to see if it would be acceptable to put this report on a web page instead of a mailed copy?

Yes

We need to step up and do stuff properly if we want respect.

We are working hard to pull 4 lands together that have admittedly fallen short of perfect on occasion. I appreciate all the work that people have done to get us to this point. If a person cannot respect that we have admitted that we have a long road ahead of us, and are working to improve our lands, well then, guess we'll keep working.
User avatar
Dame Ailanthus
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:12 pm

Postby Niveus » Mon Aug 06, 2007 11:10 am

Randall wrote:Hello, Princess. I think you might just be the regent of Crimson Wood. :)


LOL. Nope, It was a title given to me a couple of reigns ago, before we realized that regent was also prince/princesses, and it has been in my Sig ever sense. Just have not taken it off. :o

Grix wrote:
deimos wrote:What happens to the Crimsonwood Road on the heraldry?


We color it pink in honor of Niveus.


YAY! Pink.
User avatar
Niveus
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 11:16 am

Postby Kronk » Mon Aug 06, 2007 1:37 pm

Just so's we're clear on my point: Dame Ailanthus is right, I was speaking purely on the basis of what the Corpora demands. For those who have been around me for the past several months, I've been one of the more outspoken individuals wanting to see Crimsonwood join us, and I still feel that way. But the Corpora became our governing document as soon as the scheduled vote was tallied in favor of its adoption. This is what it is.

And about the heraldry - no, I see ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to change it to reflect the number of lands who were original signators. Crimsonwood did not skimp in the least in it's pursuit of this goal, and worked as hard as any other land during this process. And, again, the heraldry is what it is.

I am not in favor of an informal acceptance of Crimsonwood because our Corpora does not allow for it, but there's nothing in there that says we can't call them a Founding Land should we vote to let them in. That's my feeling on the matter.
ad astra per alia porci
User avatar
Kronk
ad astra per alia porci
 
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:37 pm

Postby deimos » Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:18 pm

Can someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't our corpora nothing without official recognition of our principality-ness from DS?
Deimos
GMR of SSD
User avatar
deimos
 
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 3:22 pm
Location: SSD, Cullyfornia

Sir Blackthorn's issues

Postby SirEuric » Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:42 pm

1. This proposal shows that Westmarch is in violation of its own Corpora by having members of the Monarchy holding multiple positions. Three members of the monarchy are doing this.

Who would those be? I see that Euric is holding PM and GMR, in the SHIRE of Falcon's Reach, but otherwise I do not see any conflicts. Would you be referring to myself, Grix and Hawk, who will be taking office after we are approved, and a new reign starts?

Don't know where it came to be that I am Guildmaster of Reeves. When we discussed it at my election as Prime minister, I seem to remember no one jumping up until Squire Torbjorn and Sir Cream Puff started discussing which one of them was to take it with as I remember no resolution ever being concrete. I made up the Reeves/Corpora test for Westmarch as I was quals Coordinator and there was not the Principality Guidmaster of Reeves in Place so I stepped up to do the job. As far as I am concerned Torbjorn or Cream Puff is the Falcon's reach G O R.

2. Unique per week not provided at the Westmarch level. Our Kingdom, Dragonspine, looks for unique per week not unique per month.

We were asked to submit audits for each of the lands. The weekly average is on each land's page. The numbers at the confederacy level are intended to give an easy view, but are not a part of the required audit. We could just add the average attendance of each of the lands and include that. However, because individual lands cancelled days for various reasons, a true weekly average of all lands combined would not be an accurate indication of Westmarch's actual attendance.

Seems this is already rectified.

3. What happened with the elections that has a different number of votes for each member of the Westmarch Monarchy? They range between 11 and 29.

Prime Minister elections happened at a different time than the other offices. Not as many people voted in that election. GMR does not allow for all voting members to vote, only the reeve qualified ones, so there would be fewer there. As for the 1 vote difference between monarch and regent, I suspect it came from one of the absentee voters who just voted for monarch and did not say anything else. They did not really abstain, they just didn't vote for regent.

Some people abstained!

4. I looked at random sign-in sheets for each of the lands. I found multiple of each sign-in where number of signatures does not match the number reported for that week. It appears that we are both under and over reporting the numbers.

We took the numbers from the ORK, and scanned the sign-ins to match. The discrepancies are unsurprising considering I have often seen people forget to sign in, and just tell the PM later, or sign in on a later week. This is something we will have to remind each Prime Minster to be more careful about in the future, but we are working with what we have for this year.
As for undercounted weeks, as Grix said, we did not count visitors, so even if they are on the sign-ins they would not be in the weekly attendance number.

SEE ABOVE!

5. There is no explination of missing sign-in sheets

Yes we have already heard that, and it was easily explained. Some PM's did not keep track of all their paperwork for the last year. It is something we will need to work on in the future. Hopefully having a confederate Prime Minister, and the realization that it does matter will help each land in the future.

There is, as Falcon's reach as A whole travels a lot. With Dame Ailanthus' very frequent Traveling, Sir Casting's mundane work/college etc , My health issues, Squire Torbjorn's health issues, if there are not enough to fight we tend to not meet. We are working on that as I can fight a bit now, and we have Squire Grix here.

6. Falcon’s Reach has 0 attendance for streaks of 4 and 5 weeks within the last six months. There is no explanation for this or the results of the Monarchy members missing four weeks in a row. Is this a failure of the Audit for this land?

As to the stretch in May we had my sons birthday, then the next week Was Darkshore, Then Mother's day and there was no attendance at the park. There is no vehicle I have seen on the ORK to show Attendance at events not in our park as we are trying to support the confederacy and make other groups in the confederacy's events as often as possible and usually the Entire Shire. We have been at Wyvernspur en masse 3 times I can think of and Crimsonwood 2 times in the last 6 months besides Darkshore.



Neither. FR is a small land and has often had to cancel weeks due to mundane issues. A cancelled week does not count towards a missed one. You are talking about a shire, not a duchy.

7. Are there contracts that each land signed with Westmarch? If so, why are they not included? If not, why not?

As is in our corpora, and was agreed upon by DS. We do not need a 3rd contract in addition to DS, and BL. As long as we are under their sponsorship, their contract is all we will be using. You were part of the discussion when we discussed this. If at some point in the future DS decides we need our own contract we will deal with that then. In the mean-time, let's not bring up issues that you already saw resolved.

8. Where is the bank account and PO box information for Westmarch? These are requirements according to the DS Corpora.

The King of DS has been very clear that he is uncomfortable with WM acting as a full land until AFTER DS approves us. Even the quals and election was more than was expected at this point. We did those because, as long as we don't give any awards, or claim anything from them, they are not stepping over any boundaries. Starting a bank account, and maintaining a treasury would be stepping past that line. Once we get the OK from DS, and have our first coronation we will be dealing with all those issues. Until that time I think it would be very disrespectful to proceed without the blessing of our sponsoring kingdom.


AS someone stated, we are not official so no need for those items and we don't want to step on toes assuming more than we have.

9. Did anyone check with DS to see if it would be acceptable to put this report on a web page instead of a mailed copy?

Yes


As to Crimsonwood being allowed in no questions asked, I was pretty sure that we stipulated they could have time with no reprocussions at the talks at Darkshore. Even if a vote is necessary only a foolish person would not want to include them as they were with us every step of the way. Yeah they didn't just smile and nod at every issue but that is a good thing. If your eyes are never forced open you run into a brick wall and sometimes pretty hard.

I vote that when Crimsonwood is fully ready they be allowed to join us as a founding land as they WERE TOLD they could.

Sir Euric Bloodstone[/i]
SirEuric
 
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Thor's Freakin Refuge Baby!!!

Postby Kronk » Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:52 pm

I vote that when Crimsonwood is fully ready they be allowed to join us as a founding land as they WERE TOLD they could.

Sir Euric Bloodstone


They were told they'd be able to just hook in at any ol' time? Well, if that's the case - and they were told so by the formation Autocrat - I guess that settles that. It certainly simplifies matters.
ad astra per alia porci
User avatar
Kronk
ad astra per alia porci
 
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:37 pm

Postby Dame Ailanthus » Mon Aug 06, 2007 4:31 pm

There is no need for a vote at this point. A few people have brought concerns to me that as our corpora states we need to vote on adding CW. I responded by asking for a petition to that effect. Therefore, if the petition does not materialize there will be no need to vote, and CW will join when they are ready.
User avatar
Dame Ailanthus
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:12 pm

my comments

Postby ElSpeth Sharrisselva » Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:40 pm

The bank account and post office box are requirements of the DS corpora and must be provided if the petition has hope of being accepted. Before because without them, there may not be an after.

I'd also like the numbers to be adjusted to remove the fighting credits of Ailanthus' toddler, Alex. Even with his mother's and monarch's permission, the WM corpora forbids any under ten on the field. He could definitely sign in as color.

Most of CW has problems with this. Just last month, I had to ask her to remove him from our field. It's not safe. There need be no other reason than that. I've talked with others in WH who are also upset over it. The rumor mill says SSD has upset members too.
It's time to start doing things right and honestly folks. Yes, I know that won't change the uniques per week/month.

CW's BOD met after the vote Saturday. We are taking care of what needs to be done with Dragonspine first and once we get accepted by them (since without their acceptance, we cannot join WM), we will be petitioning WM.

As for our schedule conflicts. We made the schedule with the reality in mind that the majority of our members do not/cannot/will not travel and so those who choose to, can; but the numbers of those who don't, tell us we need to have things going on for them.

It occurs to me that with an entire month of FR not having any park meetings, perhaps they're traveling too much. Can't expect new people to stay if no one is ever there to play with. I'm not dissing FR. I've just been in the lion's share of shires that size. It takes a serious committment by everyone when you're that small to survive and grow. There's so much more work for a little land. I understand that all too well and have a ton of respect for anyone who pulls it off successfully.
User avatar
ElSpeth Sharrisselva
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:22 pm

Postby sir blackthorn » Mon Aug 06, 2007 9:14 pm

See my responses below in Blue.

I'll resond to all of Blackthorn's concerns, even though we've had some good responses already, just so that they are all addressed in the same place.


1. This proposal shows that Westmarch is in violation of its own Corpora by having members of the Monarchy holding multiple positions. Three members of the monarchy are doing this.

Who would those be? I see that Euric is holding PM and GMR, in the SHIRE of Falcon's Reach, but otherwise I do not see any conflicts. Would you be referring to myself, Grix and Hawk, who will be taking office after we are approved, and a new reign starts?

Yes I am referring to all of these. No where in this proposal does it mention that anyone is stepping down in the local lands. Just mentioning this fact would help an outsider understand what is going on. Keep in mind that DS will be viewing this from the outside. Now that it has been stated that a new reign is starting in August, where are the election results for each land?

2. Unique per week not provided at the Westmarch level. Our Kingdom, Dragonspine, looks for unique per week not unique per month.

We were asked to submit audits for each of the lands. The weekly average is on each land's page. The numbers at the confederacy level are intended to give an easy view, but are not a part of the required audit. We could just add the average attendance of each of the lands and include that. However, because individual lands cancelled days for various reasons, a true weekly average of all lands combined would not be an accurate indication of Westmarch's actual attendance.

Yes I know you could go to all of the individual lands do some math and get the total. Wouldn’t it be nice to have each of the pages consistent with all the same type of information. We should included this in both formats.

3. What happened with the elections that has a different number of votes for each member of the Westmarch Monarchy? They range between 11 and 29.

Prime Minister elections happened at a different time than the other offices. Not as many people voted in that election. GMR does not allow for all voting members to vote, only the reeve qualified ones, so there would be fewer there. As for the 1 vote difference between monarch and regent, I suspect it came from one of the absentee voters who just voted for monarch and did not say anything else. They did not really abstain, they just didn't vote for regent.

I realized during my lunch today that I blew this one for the above reasons. Sorry.

4. I looked at random sign-in sheets for each of the lands. I found multiple of each sign-in where number of signatures does not match the number reported for that week. It appears that we are both under and over reporting the numbers.

We took the numbers from the ORK, and scanned the sign-ins to match. The discrepancies are unsurprising considering I have often seen people forget to sign in, and just tell the PM later, or sign in on a later week. This is something we will have to remind each Prime Minster to be more careful about in the future, but we are working with what we have for this year.
As for undercounted weeks, as Grix said, we did not count visitors, so even if they are on the sign-ins they would not be in the weekly attendance number.

Just mentioning the fact that the numbers are coming from the ORK would go a long way when inaccuracies are noticed. This would of course bring up questions about why the ORK is different than the sign-in sheets? This could also be explained as above.

5. There is no explination of missing sign-in sheets

Yes we have already heard that, and it was easily explained. Some PM's did not keep track of all their paperwork for the last year. It is something we will need to work on in the future. Hopefully having a confederate Prime Minister, and the realization that it does matter will help each land in the future.

6. Falcon’s Reach has 0 attendance for streaks of 4 and 5 weeks within the last six months. There is no explanation for this or the results of the Monarchy members missing four weeks in a row. Is this a failure of the Audit for this land?

Neither. FR is a small land and has often had to cancel weeks due to mundane issues. A cancelled week does not count towards a missed one. You are talking about a shire, not a duchy.

Both the DS Corpora and the Westmarch Corpora require a shire to meet at least twice a month. Can we say oops for the months of March and May? If the monarchy is not making an effort to hold Amtgard in their own land then they have missed those weeks. Trying to use canceling of the weeks should not be grounds for lack of leadership. Once again explaining this in advance would help.

7. Are there contracts that each land signed with Westmarch? If so, why are they not included? If not, why not?

As is in our corpora, and was agreed upon by DS. We do not need a 3rd contract in addition to DS, and BL. As long as we are under their sponsorship, their contract is all we will be using. You were part of the discussion when we discussed this. If at some point in the future DS decides we need our own contract we will deal with that then. In the mean-time, let's not bring up issues that you already saw resolved.

If we are going to have lands under us and expect them to follow this Corpora then we need to have a contract. To my knowledge this was never voted on by the lands.

8. Where is the bank account and PO box information for Westmarch? These are requirements according to the DS Corpora.

The King of DS has been very clear that he is uncomfortable with WM acting as a full land until AFTER DS approves us. Even the quals and election was more than was expected at this point. We did those because, as long as we don't give any awards, or claim anything from them, they are not stepping over any boundaries. Starting a bank account, and maintaining a treasury would be stepping past that line. Once we get the OK from DS, and have our first coronation we will be dealing with all those issues. Until that time I think it would be very disrespectful to proceed without the blessing of our sponsoring kingdom.

With this being said perhaps we should seriously consider holding quals and elections again after DS approves Westmarch. This would show that we are willing to correct our prior mistakes.

9. Did anyone check with DS to see if it would be acceptable to put this report on a web page instead of a mailed copy?

Yes

We need to step up and do stuff properly if we want respect.

We are working hard to pull 4 lands together that have admittedly fallen short of perfect on occasion. I appreciate all the work that people have done to get us to this point. If a person cannot respect that we have admitted that we have a long road ahead of us, and are working to improve our lands, well then, guess we'll keep working.

I understand that we are trying to bring the lands together, but we also need to do stuff properly. When preparing a report like this we should come put and explain any kind of deficiency so that those reviewing it don’t see inconsistencies. This does three things for you, 1) shows your audience that you know your deficiencies 2) allows you to explain them and 3) allows you to explain your plan to resolve the issue.

Let me close this with a quote: “The truth shall set you free.â€￾

Blackthorn.

User avatar
sir blackthorn
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 7:16 pm

Postby Laoric » Mon Aug 06, 2007 9:42 pm

There are a lot of things that can, and probably will be said here, but I think this is all I have.

It seems to me that both Blackthorn and Elspeth are spending more time scolding us for something that was the culmination of a lot of hard work and second guessing the actions of Westmarch. I know for a fact that this cannot be how Crimsonwood feels as several of their members have posted very positive happy things.

My question is, is it possible to offer your criticism in a more constructive way? I personally was not directly involved in the audit creation, but I read your posts as attacks, not advice.

I'm almost tempted to split off some of these posts into new threads so that we can have a more structured discussion but I know that the internet being what it is that probably won't work. :P

I think that both Blackthorn and Elspeth have insight that should not be ignored, but by the same token as they are not members yet of Westmarch I would ask them to be a little more polite in their criticism of another land. This is not e-sam, and I would hope we would remain more civil.

And yes, I know this is a bit of the pot and the kettle. Just shoosh and play nice. :)
Laoric
Robbie Suxxorz
 
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:43 pm

Postby deimos » Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:18 pm

I don't think he's scolding anyone. There is not many polite ways to bring up some of those issues, and instead of dancing around the point or trying to baby people, he's calling it like he sees it. Seeing that he has been around the block a few times, maybe we should read what he's saying instead of jumping on the defensive.

All the glad handing in the world won't save us from a bad audit. If being a perceived jerk gets issues fixed so this thing gets done, so be it.
Deimos
GMR of SSD
User avatar
deimos
 
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 3:22 pm
Location: SSD, Cullyfornia

Postby Laoric » Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:34 am

deimos wrote:
All the glad handing in the world won't save us from a bad audit. If being a perceived jerk gets issues fixed so this thing gets done, so be it.


I so live by this motto. :P
Laoric
Robbie Suxxorz
 
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:43 pm

Postby Kronk » Tue Aug 07, 2007 9:26 am

Choose your battles. Apply successful tactics. Maneuverability is preferable to force.

Sun Tzu knows his <expletive deleted>
ad astra per alia porci
User avatar
Kronk
ad astra per alia porci
 
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:37 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests

cron