A possible alternate proposal?

I've been following this lively, healthy, and interesting debate. I don't have much to add, but do want to share my brief perspective on *my* membership in the North American Guild of Change Ringers and, more to the point, my joining the North American Guild of Change Ringers.

I learned to ring at The Kent School in the late 90s under the excellent tutelage of Tom Holcombe. Each year, a small group of students inevitably would recognize either the awesomeness that is ringing, or the practical reality (as I did!) that the ringing satisfied the required winter term extracurricular activity in the least amount of time with one of the most interesting, friendly and relaxed teachers on campus. I spent that first winter learning to handle and ring rounds, but didn't truly come to appreciate the art of ringing until the end of that year, when, as most of us are, I was "bitten" by the ringing bug. Soon I was traveling to Brewster to practice on a more advanced level, and shortly thereafter on to long day trips in Philly and Boston.

What strikes ME about this debate is that in my early ringing, I was NOT a member of the Guild. This neither bothered me, nor slowed my progress, nor changed the way I was treated by other ringers. I am confident that what counts in ringing are having the tenacity to want to ring, to improve, and to contribute to the group.

I DO remember with absolute clarity was the day Tom presented me with a North American Guild pin, having put me up for membership. It was a day I continue to feel strongly about, and something that I think we should all reflect on. Being a member of the Guild is not just about "growing membership" for the sake of growth but it is about creating a membership with responsibility to the Guild and the mission of the Guild. The day I received my Guild pin, I knew I belonged to a organization that was interested in me (by action that someone had thought about the implications of my membership) and in turn, I felt a sense of responsibility to it.

I DO NOT THINK we should abandon the requirement that new members be proposed/sponsored by a current member.

Where is that notion of RESPONSIBILITY to the Guild if all one has to do is pay dues? While I recognize it is unlikely that the floodgates would open and hordes of ill-meaning non-ringers would join, this amendment does enable that possibility. Are such unvetted members, however few or many their numbers, going to attend AGMs, vote by proxy, and if so, vote with a clear understanding of the issues? It's hard to tell, but I would expect not (call me a cynic)... I believe it is a sign of strength in the Guild that we DO take an interest in our membership.

If we really feel "associate membership" is so awful, let's abandon it. I'd be curious to know, in any case, how many actually Associate Members we have in our roll (cue Tom Miller). Personally, I don't think it is so bad (but perhaps we could ease dues?) as it open up the conversation: "Hey, you're interested in the Guild? That's great! Why don't you join as an associate member (friend of, etc), and if you want to learn to ring or take an active role then let's see about putting you up as Resident Member." Special Campaigns to recruit "Friends of Guild" (do you like bells, church, beer or ancient arts...JOIN US) could then easily be turned into "Learn to Ring." They already have one foot in the door...

Do Resident Members need to be active current ringers? Nay. But should they be able to demonstrate an active interest, a responsibility to the Guild and the ringing community (and hopefully have at least a rudimentary understanding of what ringing is all about), absolutely YES. Is it unreasonably, too difficult or at all unwelcoming to expect a new potential resident member to demonstrate their commitment to the Guild either through actions of their ringing or by a simple conversation regarding their interest? I truly think not.

I personally don't support the amendment as is, but would welcome debate to opening the language of the membership requirement to: Resident Membership is open to PERSONS residing in North America who are sponsored by a Resident Member currently in good standing. At events and practices, I see spouses, partners, girlfriends, boyfriends and friends who certainly are not "ringers" in that they pull on ropes or sling hand bells, but are certainly ringers as part of the ringing community.

-Alex Taft

Washington, DC

<too much coffee this morning, this rambled on a bit longer than I expectedJ >