Yet more data!

[mariedeblois]

Having seen the chart things I did this weekend for the Outlands, cortejo gleefully tallied up things for Ealdormere for me for their Peerages (I went ahead and did the Grants as well). These charts have many of the same stipulations as the ones for the Outlands - only awards given by the Crown of Ealdormere are counted.

Note: 2011 is less than half-way

Comments

[demonlurking]

I wonder if the drops you're seeing in the peerages since 2004 might have to do with a drop off in membership?

[mariedeblois]

Hard to say, but three of four kingdoms I've seen peerage data showed declines in the last few years.

It's also possible that
- there was a push, post-going-kingdom to increase the numbers of "home grown" peers
- there was a mundane migration of people out of kingdom (interestingly, since Ealdormere is 100% Canadian, they aren't (as?) affected by the American war (which might be pulling away potential Chivalry candidates))
- their economy is also having a downturn that's affecting the ability of folks to travel (and be 'seen' enough to be elevated)
- standards creeping higher
- other things I can't think of because I'm not in Ealdormere

[cortejo]

I think there is a lot of creep in standards, especially for the grant levels. We joke that the next candidate has to be better than the last made peer to be considered.

There is a visual slope, but I think the weighted averages show that there isn't one aspect of SCA culture that is dominate in the Kingdom. The numbers are really too small to run statistical analysis on I think.

[cortejo]

ooo I wonder if you added in the court baronies that it would take up the space that the drop off shows?

I am going to go mod my chart to look at those numbers.

[damedini]

With peerages, it was inevitable that there would be a lot of elevations immediately after we went kingdom. There were many viable candidates who simply weren't visible on the Midrealm radar, whether due to travel issues or because their focus was within Ealdormere (Pelican candidates maybe, who had been deep in the kingdom effort), or because the Midrealm was preparing to lose us. And there were some that we just wanted to elevate here.

Also the time around the birth of the kingdom was so very intense, everyone was working hard, playing hard, deeply involved. After all the intensity, many were simply exhausted and stepped back. A bunch of us had kids, divorces, or other...

[mariedeblois]

Thank you for sharing - those seemed like likely factors, but I'm not there, so I knew I didn't know (if you know what I mean). The length of time that Ealdormere has been a kingdom is one reason not to take these "trends" too seriously - in terms of data, it hasn't been all that long.

[bend_gules]

What damedini said.
Also - look at the full height of the graph.

It's illustrating a space from 0-5 people. A single reign without making a Laurel, after five are made in one year, appears as a dramatic plunge in numbers, when in fact it could simply be a single reign of six months when no Laurel was made. It's not a crisis, just a change.

[mariedeblois]

Indeed. I tried to mention the "this is really not a lot of data and the numbers are very small, so very small" issues in one of the introductory paragraphs, but I think the text gets a bit lost in the graphy goodness.