I agree with Al no need to alter rules prior to the vote. Go to the vote if yes then all good and if no then we alter.
In the end these rules are not much different other than the 'leadership voting' from the old ones.
I don't think they are too long either. Actually for rules that govern a club of this size they are probably about right.
As for Scott's comments about declining role this is speculation is it not? Its not actually a fact at present?? I suspect the total player numbers of the club are fairly constant since I have been a member around 8-9 years. The forums are certainly more active than they used to be and the club feels like it has lots of new names but still plenty of old guard. I don't see a declining club I see a club transitioning from its old ways to a more inclusive approach.
The allied armies are in need of reinvigoration but as I have said I believe the leadership of those armies is stagnant and new blood is needed. The elections will facilitate this necessary refresh.
There are many new names in the club and they continue to grow. I believe the demise of the INWC may well have brought us a group of new membership but also I believe there is a large untapped pool of players out there should we need it.
If we did some market analysis (which is my profession) I think we could grow our membership substantially if we needed to. After all we perhaps have 250 active players at present and I would suggest the 'Ai' market segment of players is massively bigger than that. HPS/JTS/Matrix's sales of the games would be in the thousands of copies. We need only a small % of converts to reinvigorate our ranks.
In essence we have a very small share of this much larger market. Not hard to tap better if we need too. If that day comes I can offer my expertise to assist on that.
Bring on the elections sir's - liberty, fraternity and inclusion for all!
