Gentle Spiders,
Lesssee if I can bundle everyhting into a single - miles long - message this time...
Devon wrote:
The mission statement of the International Old Lacers includes people who
make lace, study lace and collect lace. What word incorporates all three? [...]
Now I tend to say we are "an organization of roughly 1600 Lace Enthusiasts".
I think not only the demographics (old vs young/new) might have changed in 52 yrs, but other factors as well. If you go to any IOLI Convention, you'll have 150 people or more (and it's been more and more every year). Of those, 12-15 take the Lace ID class - they're the "students" and the "collectors". The rest are lace *makers* (and some in the lace ID classes are makers also). 52 yrs ago, I expect the proportion was different - lacemaking was an expiring art, so *study* was of primary importance in order to pass the results on and keep lace going. And you couldn't study unless you had samples, which is where the collectors came in. We're all grateful for those beginnings "without which not" but, well, "the times, they are a-changing" and "lacemakers" might not be out of place any more. Though "lace" might be better yet.
I'm not overly happy with "Lace Enthusiasts"... While most of us (all of us?) definitely *are* tyros, I see no reason to stress the point :) Ditto stressing the ephemeral aspect of "enthusiasms" (how many times, within your lifetime, have you been told to eat/not eat eggs?). "Enthusiasm" tends to walk hand-in-hand with "lack of judgement" (like my getting a *mother* of all bees in the bonnet about Rosalibre <g>), and that wouldn't be the face I'd want to present to the world at large (even if it *is* true <g>)
From another message, Devon/Jeri:
At one point in the long tortuous discussion of this issue, someone made the
thrifty suggestion that if the name were changed to International
Organization of Lacers, Inc., we wouldn't have to throw away the IOLI
stationery and order new.
That would have been me. And perhaps others? I recall saying that the
initials "IOLI" would not have to be changed with this name and that perhaps a lot
of stationery that was out-and-about would not have to be replaced
immediately.
It *is* a thrifty idea, and thrifty ideas always appeal to me :) I don't think it's a good *final* solution, but an excellent one for the "time in flux" (please note Jeri's: "not have to be replaced *immediately*"). It would serve very well for the few (2? 3? more?) years that it'd take to finalise the change (if, indeed, the "body" agreed on the change)
Clay wrote:
Yes, I agree that it may be time to revisit the subject! BUT... my inner
voice cautions that it has to be done in a fair, equitable, and legal
manner.
Well, *of course*, how else? But many of us will be going to Denver this summer and - hopefully - attending the general meeting. Nothing to stop one of us (I'll be happy to, if someone reminds me closer to the time) putting in the suggestion and another few seconding it. After which, the mills of IOLI will grind exceedingly fine for however long it takes and, eventually, a change may be achieved (hopefully, during the discussion period, the stationery etc will be printed only *as much as necessary* <g>)
OTOH, it wouldn't hurt if we could come up with some *constructive* proposals for possible new names beforehand; "just saying no" doesn't seem to have a high ratio of success, wherever it's applied :) The arguments against "International Old Lacers" are old but have been shown to be impotent. Perhaps a *positive* approach - a new, and more resonant name might strike a chord. And that's something that many of us *could* bat around until we came up with few more palatable versions to present to IOLI AGM (though I wonder if we should continue doing it on Arachne, seeing as IOLI and its name is not of interest to everyone)...
But while I'm on the subject... I've been a member of IOLI long enough to
appreciate the "cachet" of the acronym.
Yeah, well... It's not as if IOLI is as well known as UNESCO, so "cachet" of it doesn't really "enter" <g> If we could come up with a better name, for all I know, its acronym might be more catchy and gain some recognition *beyond* IOLI and Arachne; parochial is nice and comfortable, but... :)
From Devon again:
Since the name was arrived at in the 1950's I can think of several new laces
that have been invented since then. Withof, Swanleigh (Pat Read), Lutac,
Rosa Libre and Mossoloid (Susan Lambiris). Perhaps we should change the name to
the International New Lacers.
Withof, Swanley, Lutac, Rosalibre and Mollosoid. Having spent a couple of years writing "Whithoff" and several months referring to "Rosa Libre", I've now reached the stage of self-righteousness which gives no quarter - if *I* can learn it, so can a native speaker of English :) International New Lacers is a good name, but the acronym - even with the final "i" added (never forget the "incorporated"; that's where our tax breaks come from <g>) - is uninspiring. Without the final "i" its unpronounceable.
From Aurelia:
Let's be grandiose, while we're at it! How about Lacemakers of the World? (i.e., neither old nor new but lacemakers with all sorts of lace tastes) -- Aurelia
LOW(i)? <g> I don't know what the *exact* numbers/proportions are, but I've always derived a certain amount of amusement from the "International" bit of our name... In the current IOLI Directory, the names of US members are listed on pp5-32 (all but last listing on p32). The names of the overseas members cover p33 (plus one entry from p32) through p35, and that seems to be better than what it used to be a few years back. Granted, I passed math in highschool only because the teacher wanted to make sure she wouldn't have to suffer my presence through another year, but it looks to me like we're grandiose already (9 to 1?)... :)
From Lorri Ferguson , referring to Aurelia's "25 years ago" disciussion of the name-change:
I thought there was a vote just 3-4 years ago.
Can't remember *when* it was, but definitely within my memory, and I've been an IOLI member only since '89 (16 yrs, or almost)
From Alice Howell:
The name of an organization is part of their by-laws. Changing the name would require whatever steps are needed for a by-law change. Since they are available on the webpage, I just checked. Officially, it requires 30 days notice in the Bulletin prior to a meeting, and a majority vote for a by-law change. Or -- if presented at the meeting, takes a 2/3 vote.
Well, either is do-able. The next Bulletin deadline is May 15 (for publishing around July 1), and that gives - just - enough of a "warning rattle" to the AGM. I won't be publishing a pattern in that issue and feel very guilty about it (despite the dispensation from Debra); I could start the ball rolling (send a small notice of intent) to get *somewhat* squared with my conscience (though, naturally, I'd prefer that someone else did it; I'm enjoying my time off playing with Rosalibre <g>)... And, if the bomb was dropped at the AGM without warning, all we'd ask for was *considering* a name change, before all the other mechanisms (polls to ascertain: 1) *if* members wanted a change, and polls to vote for a new name if #1 had been met). I don't think getting 2/3 of a vote for *that* (ie think about it) is impossible...
Yours, off to bed in Virginia suddenly gone riot with colour - 3 days of sunshine (the temps were over 80F today) - nudged our spring into being :)
--
Tamara P Duvall http://t-n-lace.net/
Lexington, Virginia, USA (Formerly of Warsaw, Poland)
- To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
