I am just not sure how to set the minimum. I do not think that this is just about your score so starting off with a minimum score of 20 means that you haveMessage 1 of 38 , May 27View SourceI am just not sure how to set the minimum. I do not think that this is just about your score so starting off with a minimum score of 20 means that you have just made it all about score. If someone has bad hands and it hurts them to shoot why are we going to make them shoot and hurt themselves when it serves no purpose.I have a gentleman in my barony, he was the Archery Marshal for 7 years, but health has not been kind to him so shooting archery hurts him. He has a wealth of knowledge and likes archery but since he does not have a score of 20 he is out. I know you say that if you can "Prove" that you had a score at some point you can get in. What about for those that used to shoot, or those that never actually shot, we have no "Proof" that they ever did, are they excluded? Why can't they be a member? They know they will never rise up through any type of rank system but why can't they still participate?And while we are talking about it how are we doing these ranks? Do we have several avenues? Maybe a rank that you can gain from score, maybe one for making period items (bows, corssbows, bolts, arrows, garb), maybe one for entering and / or winning A&S contests using archery related or items (as listed above).And for those that are looking at St Huberts, the number 2 Ranger, Lance Paulson, who helped encourage the formation, and was there at the beginning, has no awards. Why??? Because he has health issues, 3 kids, and does not really get to go hunting. I see him and talk with him on a regular basis and he helps be all the time with archery and leather working. He LOVES archery, and will sit and talk with you for hours on it. But he does not care about the ranking system, and has no illusion about trying to be the top of it. But since he has not recorded any KILLS, should he be kicked out?So I am not opposed to a minimum requirement, but what would it be? Using a score as THE minimum is, IMHO, a mistake.VincentiOn Mon, May 27, 2013 at 7:17 AM, The Greys <cogworks@...> wrote:
Folks, this PC talk of no minimum requirement to become a member of an SCA wide archery guild is about to make me vomit! If there are NO minimum requirements to become a member of an archery guild then we simply recreate the problem the SCA is currently facing - people wearing cotton tunics over jeans with Nikes and sunglasses calling themselves Vikings, or Celts or [pick any persona]or heavies on the lyst field wrapped in silver duct tape. We should have minimum requirements for membership but they can be set low enough to be easily achieved. I personally believe the purpose of this proposed guild is to encourage folks to become more period in their kit, skill and knowledge. Thus the very well outlined process of entry then move up through the ranks is a most excellent idea. I would add the requirement of a minimum to be reached for initial membership. Hey! If it works for the boy scouts why not us? This type of a guild would accommodate everyone, those who shoot well, those with great knowledge, and those with complete kits. But only those who can achieve all are at the top, as it should be, in my opinion.
I will leave the poll open till 12:00 PDT tonight to allow any last minute votes. JonMessage 38 of 38 , May 28View SourceI will leave the poll open till 12:00 PDT tonight to allow any last minute votes.Jon