Proposed Amendment: Extension of Endorsement Privledges

[The Valeyard]

It has been proposed that parents of our Scholars, or Academy Students (youngsters with costumes) should be accorded the rights of Endorsed members.
I am not opposed to this personally, but as we have a democratic process here, what say you?

-Alex

[heartofthetardis]

I think I'm unclear as to what the purpose of that would be? If the parents are cosplayers no doubt they would be on their way to getting their own cosplays endorsed and if they're not then why would they have the same status as an endorsed cosplayer? Maybe a separate ranking of Active Parent or if they are making costumes for their kid a status of Parent Crafter or something along those lines.

[TwelfthDoctor]

My main answer for this would be "No". There are reasons though. Please hear this out… Now, I am not opposed to child or "Scholar" endorsements, or parents there of, being endorsed, but they should be in a separate category from the standard adult endorsements. Reason being, kids grow. Plain and simple. An endorsement one year could be expired and unusable the next, simply due to the growth of the child. Though I have not put my own up for endorsement, I have had to remake or change up the outfits for my kids a few times over the past few years for the same reasons. Though adults "may" change or fluctuate in their own body type, it's still an almost constant, for the most part. Children will always grow out of their outfits, regardless. Part of the endorsement process is for us, as a community, to have a tally on which and what costumes we have at our disposal for events, gatherings, etc. As a fellow parent of cosplaying kids, I do commend those kids and parents for their efforts, and they SHOULD be recognized. Though, I do believe it should be a separate category since that endorsement is, in all reality, temporary. It will only be a matter of time before the use of the child’s outfit expires. The child might submit new or have alternate outfits endorsed that will sustain the child/parent endoresement, but they must continue to have a working outfit in order to hold their rank. Even with adults, I'd assume anyone who sold all their outfits might still remain a memeber of the community but lose endoresment due to no longer having an outfit to hold rank. Again, I'm not opposed to a separate endorsement category for kids or the parents of kids. I just believe it should be in a separate category/listing from the primary adult endorsements. Just my two cents.

[Blue Rainman]

I really like this and I support it in spirit, but there are some concerns.  

• I can understand that since it is largely the crafting effort of the parents, they should have the credit and status of those who craft for themselves. And perhaps, while they are great fans and talented in costuming, they have little interest in themselves wearing a costume. Should we fault them for that?
• If we are allowing parents to get endorsed for building their child's costume, what of individuals who build a costume for someone who would otherwise receive endorsement? Who get's the endorsement then? On the other hand, if we there are no rules that n% of a costume has to be collected/built by the individual requesting endorsement, the question is moot.
• When the child does come of age, what will become of the endorsement?
  

If someone has gone to the effort to build a costume that gets endorsed, they should be allowed to vote on further endorsements, in addition to those privileges afforded Time Lord status. Beyond that, I'm not so sure. Perhaps Audra is right; that we should designate an additional endorsement class. I also agree with TwelfthDoctor on his points.

[heartofthetardis]

That's a good point.  I feel like endorsement is for those who are actually cosplaying. Not the manufacturer, not the seamstress/tailor who creates a purchased handmade costume, but the wearer. If I made a costume for someone in the order then I wouldn't get that endorsement, it would go to the wearer. Perhaps a "crafter" title reflected on a separate list for those who are making costumes either of their own and for others but an endorsed membership to me isn't appropriate. Perhaps crafters could have limited rights as they're supportive of a cosplayer but not actually an active cosplayer.  Supporter is another idea for a status.  Again I have to ask what would be the point of giving them an endorsed status?  Is there something they need to do but can't without that status?  If they're not an active cosplayer then to me they're the same as someone you order a costume from on Etsy.  Also like was mentioned if you sell a costume or it gets ruined you would no longer have endorsed status on that costume.  So in theory someone could be an endorsed member but then perhaps drop to an inactive status if say that was their only costume.  Then when they acquire another endorsed costume their status would be reinstated. Perhaps with the same member number.  

[TwelfthDoctor]

I don't have any objection to any member who crafts outfits or props being given a title, so long as they actually crafted/sewed the object in question themselves. Reason being, a "Seamstress" title (or whatever we may call it), might be handy as we grow. It would allow for those who love to create costumes, but do not wish to be a cosplayer themselves (for whatever personal reasons they may have), to participate and obtain recognition for their amazing efforts. This would also allow for the community to have a tally of members they could turn to when they have questions about crafting outfits. It would also come in handy if someone has an idea that they cannot do themselves and are looking for someone trustworthy to commission it out to. I have no personal objection to giving a separate title to costume makers or prop builders (that do not use they items for themselves). As an all-inclusive community, I think it only right to recognize the people behind the scenes as well. My two cents (now up to 4 cents in this thread)

[Blue Rainman]

Mar 24, 2015 6:30:47 GMT heartofthetardis said:

That's a good point.  I feel like endorsement is for those who are actually cosplaying. Not the manufacturer, not the seamstress/tailor who creates a purchased handmade costume, but the wearer. If I made a costume for someone in the order then I wouldn't get that endorsement, it would go to the wearer. Perhaps a "crafter" title reflected on a separate list for those who are making costumes either of their own and for others but an endorsed membership to me isn't appropriate. Perhaps crafters could have limited rights as they're supportive of a cosplayer but not actually an active cosplayer.  Supporter is another idea for a status.  Again I have to ask what would be the point of giving them an endorsed status?  Is there something they need to do but can't without that status?  If they're not an active cosplayer then to me they're the same as someone you order a costume from on Etsy.  Also like was mentioned if you sell a costume or it gets ruined you would no longer have endorsed status on that costume.  So in theory someone could be an endorsed member but then perhaps drop to an inactive status if say that was their only costume.  Then when they acquire another endorsed costume their status would be reinstated. Perhaps with the same member number.  

 
Just to be clear Audra, my point was not that the non-cosplaying crafter/parent should not be endorsed, but that perhaps such endorsement should carry a different title with only voting privileges. The same would go for someone who does both, but only cosplays outside the scope of the guidelines. It is their effort and eye that is creating a costume that meets standards, so should they be afforded the privilege to critique others.

[BankOfMom]

Here's my thoughts, coming from someone who started making her kids costumes while they were still kids:

1. The original question - should parents of Scholars be granted the rights of endorsement? Sure, but I like Audra's suggestion of creating a category of Parent Crafter or something similar (after all, I'm creating the costumes for my grandson). To Nate's point, said parent will probably be making new costumes for when those kiddos outgrow previously endorsed costumes.

2. The second question that has come up is that of the crafter, seamstress, etc. that actually created the costume - should they be granted endorsement rights? We already kind of cover this as Artizan membership. And if the seamstress has a business where they create complete costumes, they should apply to for Vendor membership.

For example, I did the actual sewing that made Kayle's 8th Doctor costume. Should I have been endorsed for the work? No. She is the one that pulled it all together and was the 8th Doctor, not me.

Another example, a member has an etsy shop where they make complete costumes should apply for Vendor membership. Now if they also cosplay, they should become personally endorsed for whatever costume as well.

I can see an extension of the Artizan/Vendor memberships that could easily develop into a list of seamstresses, tailors, prop crafters, etc that could be used as a resource to help other members. This list should be self-nominated. And they could be granted full endorsement rights. They should still have a poll for endorsement (unlike Artizan/Vendor memberships) and should provide examples of their work for endorsement consideration.

[heartofthetardis]

I see an endorsed artisan/vendor/crafter as being endorsed for the purpose of knowing that they do quality work and won't screw you over after taking payment. I think that would have a lot of benefits to the group as a whole as you'd know who is trusted as well as who you can go to with technical questions.

I'm wondering if by giving the non cosplaying parent voting rights it discourages them from becoming an active cosplaying member of the community. If they can't vote it may encourage them to become more active and not just basically sitting back and watching their kids.

Honestly I like the idea of Crafters or support staff that are endorsed in the sense of the quality of their work but I don't know how I feel about full voting rights within the club itself. To me if you're not actively cosplaying you're kind of outside of that part of the group. Not that we reject people who just want the social aspects of it but to me that's not the purpose. The purpose is to have a place for cosplayers and resources for cosplayers not just a fan club or a social club.

[TwelfthDoctor]

All in all, I still think any vendor/artisan/prop builder/etc who puts a prop or outfit up for endorsement should be given the same rights within the group as anyone else. Yes, a cosplayer, or someone who wears an outfit that someone else made for them, might be the spotlight… but not everyone has a desire to be in the spotlight. Some people might simply enjoy creating outfits or props for other people. Maybe even for their children. I have seen a decent number of parents at conventions who outfit their kids in WONDERFUL cosplays but do not cosplay themselves because they are either taking care of their kids when they aren't in front of a camera, love to take pictures of their kids themselves, or just love to see their children have the spotlight in something they crafted and have no desire to cosplay themselves. They do it for their kids and are fully satisfied with being behind the scenes. This goes the same for someone who might make outfits or props for adults. Not everyone has the desire to dress up, stand in front of a camera (potentially), and attract the attention that a cosplayer might attract. I don't think this should make someone any less active (without vote) or important in the community. Does this mean one cosplay outfit could have dual endorsement? In my eyes, yes. A cosplayer could be voted on and endorsed as a Doctor/Nemesis/etc for an outfit. It could also be placed under endorsement, separately, by the "artisan/etc" who crafted the outfit, using the cosplayer as a model of their work, for their own title. Basically, my whole view is inclusion within the community. Just because someone might not wish to cosplay, for their own personal reasons, does not mean they should not have the right to obtain a title or vote. My Two Cents (now at 6 cents total )

[BadWolfGirl]

I think a Parent Crafter type with voting rights might be a good compromise approach. We already endorse Prop Builders. So someone who makes, say, a Moment Cube or Rose Tyler's Dalek Blaster, could be endorsed as a prop builder even if they never costume as Rose or the Moment or the War Doctor. So we already have precedent for giving endorsed status to people who may or may not wear costumes. Not that I'm suggesting kids are living props, mind you But in some cases, like that amazing baby Dalek stroller at Gallifrey One, maybe it is kinda like that. In any event, I think it does create an odd result if a kid (especially a really young one) could participate at a level that the parent who makes the costumes couldn't.

[Deleted]

Mar 25, 2015 5:38:31 GMT BadWolfGirl said:

I think a Parent Crafter type with voting rights might be a good compromise approach. We already endorse Prop Builders. So someone who makes, say, a Moment Cube or Rose Tyler's Dalek Blaster, could be endorsed as a prop builder even if they never costume as Rose or the Moment or the War Doctor. So we already have precedent for giving endorsed status to people who may or may not wear costumes. Not that I'm suggesting kids are living props, mind you But in some cases, like that amazing baby Dalek stroller at Gallifrey One, maybe it is kinda like that. In any event, I think it does create an odd result if a kid (especially a really young one) could participate at a level that the parent who makes the costumes couldn't.

I agree with this.  

The only caveat that I haven't seen mentioned specifically (and I admit that I'm skimming a bit due to be busy getting ready for ReGeneration Who this weekend) is whether not the parties would then get two separate votes? 

I feel like if we are affording a parent/guardian a rank based on collaboration with their minor that we need to ensure that they aren't both getting to vote.   I think this is probably covered under the voting age requirements, but I do feel it's an important distinction.  

[Keely Graesser]

Once the minor has reached voting age, I think the voting ability should transfer to them (hopefully by that age they'd be making/purchasing most of the costume themselves anyway!)

[heartofthetardis]

So the parent would have voting rights until the kid comes of age and then voting rights transfer to the kid? If the parent wants to retain the right to vote do they then have to become endorsed of their own accord? I agree with the statement that they shouldn't have a dual vote, it would be one or the other.

[Blue Rainman]

Here's some language I thought up that while is not yet completely organized, most of the points are there and should cover the major concerns I've read. 

First, a general definition under endorsement would be added:

An endorsement shall be considered expired when the costume can no longer be worn by the associated member.  
            While primarily created for Scholars, this would also allow the rule to apply to any endorsement that is dispose of or can no longer be worn by the             associated member

Also somewhere under voting:

At no time shall any member, regardless of rank(s) held, be granted more than one (1) vote
            Self explanatory

The rank of Artizan shall be granted to any member who meets the following conditions:

1. The member assembles and or builds costumes fitting the endorsement guidelines, for other members, known as Cardinals
2. The member does not own or operate a business dedicated to building/creating props/costumes. This condition may be excused if any services to other members are provided without charge or at a nominal rate.
3. The rank may be granted in addition to the rank of Cardinal
4. Not withstanding the rank of Scholar, the rank shall carry ... voting rights.    
5. The rank shall remain in effect until such time that all associated endorsements have expired.

            This addresses additional discussion and allows anyone who creates costumes that fit our guidelines, for others, to be endorsed, regardless of whether             or not they have a personal costume endorsed, while allowing them to be recognized if they do both. It also addresses (though perhaps rather crudely)             those that own a business related to costume/prop building; referring them to Vendor.


Notwithstanding the ranks of Cardinal and/or Artizan, the Order shall grant the rank of Parent Crafter under the following conditions:

1. The member has assembled and/or built a costume for a member with the rank of Scholar, that is recognized as a family member.
2. The rank shall carry ... voting rights.
3. No more than one (1) Parent Crafter rank will be assigned for each Scholar.
4. The rank shall remain in effect until such time that all associated Scholar members come of age, or all active endorsements assigned to the associated Scholar(s) have expired, whichever comes first. 
5. At the expiration of the rank, the member may retain voting rights by following the procedures listed under Cardinal or Artisan ranks.
6. At such time that any Scholar comes of age with at least one active endorsement, the member formerly with the rank of Scholar, shall be granted the rank of Cardinal.

            This applies to the matter at hand. While I realize that it is nearly identical to that of Artizan, the rank of Parent Crafter (or whatever we decide to call             it) carries with it the expiration of rank at the time the associated Scholar comes of age. Basically this rank is an optional rider to the rank of             Scholar And to help discourage the stacking of votes in case of multiple Scholars in the same family, the activity requirement for endorsements             currently being discussed shall also apply.


I left the definition of voting rights open for further discussion. Should they have full or limited voting rights?