Re: Discussion list?
> Society is not known to be particularly gun friendly and most re-enactors
> are NMLRA/NRA to the max. I've witnessed this particularconfrontation too
> many times to think it won't be a problem.I hadn't thought about that, Rod. You're right. Although I was just
involved in a gun law argument on the Armour Archive and it was
surprizingly one-sided although most of the participants are SCA
> Tight monitoring will be needed and clearly defined rules. But allin all,
> yes, i think it's worth the effort.There have been a couple interesting threads about different
reenactment groups and SCA-type groups on the Armour Archive last
week and that got me thinking. The problems only seem to arise when
someone gets personal and insults someone personally. I mean, people
react less to "people in the SCA are all farbs" than they do to "you,
Master Hawkyns, are a farb. And I don't like your uncle Fred..."
(for example only, of course!)
How about this for a start:
Rule #1: No personal attacks. A personal attack is a one-way ticket
Rule #2: Do not take (perceived) attacks upon your organization
personally. "Living history is full of snot-nosed fascists" doesn't
mean "You are all snot-nosed fascists". Find the reason and correct
Any other ideas?
- At 09:32 PM 2/6/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>One of my very few complaints about the SCA is that this outfit hasAh, but it has greatly improved my appreciation for those who do it
>totally ruined my sense of wonder at seeing people in archaic dress.
correctly. Those who wear proper clothing and have the proper deportment
for the clothing/time/area they are representing are more of a joy for me