Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [E_Rapier] Val Day / Peerage

Expand Messages
  • thltoymaker
    So you would cut its legs off before it has a chance to stand ? We only have the roots just planted. The requirements need to be formulated. Its heraldry !
    Message 1 of 100 , Feb 13, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      So you would cut its legs off before it has a chance to stand ?
      We only have the roots just planted. The requirements need to be
      formulated. Its heraldry !

      The current status of things has led to unsafe play ..etc ?
      I would state the opposite ! we play in Better Kit / and Excellence
      while still having fun!
      I'm certain that if there were unsafe play Our Kingdom Rapier Marshal
      would have acted upon it !
      Smoking as peachy keen thing !! I highly doubt that a peerage will
      prove cancerous !
      People moving in large groups ... What large groups ?
      Mass thoughts are invalid? So single mindednes is better ??
      Again ... We only have the roots just planted. The requirements
      need to be formulated. Its heraldry !
      Many aspects will be considered. I'm certain that Safety of play will
      not even need to be mentioned as its part of our rules already.
      How many responded. If you didn't respond then you have no say !
      Authorized or unauthorized.
      I needn't defend my position.
      Again and for the last time.
      We only have the roots just planted. The requirements need to be
      formulated. Its heraldry !
      Many aspects will be considered. I'm certain that Safety of play will
      not even need to be mentioned as its part of our rules already.
      In my opinion is not Honourable to cut the legs off something that
      has not yet formed.
      Cookies ?? I dont have any cookies, I have Awards !!
      If you wish to debate further please contact me off list.

      At 11:22 AM 2/13/2012, you wrote:
      >There is cookie chasing in the current state of things and that has led to
      >unsafe play and generally embarrasing behaviour displayed on the list. I
      >think that anything that potentially increases these things is a very very
      >very bad idea.
      >
      >As to the argument, "this is what most people think" is absurd, once upon a
      >time people thought smoking was a peachy keen thing to do too. To argue
      >that mass opinion equates to cautious and sober second thought is invalid.
      >In general, people moving in large groups tend not to think about the
      >consequences of actions.
      >
      >Also, an important fact to be considered in this is how many
      >respondents did the survey get? And what is this number in comparison to
      >the total number of authorized fencers in the SCA. Also how many of the
      >respondents were not authorized fencers? I suspect that like Canadian
      >voters those not interested in the poll simply didn't bother to fill
      >anything out.
      >
      >Until you can provide answers to these questions your position is
      >not defensible.
      >It is also because of such lines of argument that I MUST state clearly my
      >opposition to the idea, as there might be alot of people out there
      >intimidated by your line of argument. If you will take it as a slight, so
      >be it. To mince words will only water down my argument.
      >So... is there any rational argument in favour of a fencing peerage? Or
      >are people just seeing a tasty looking cookie and not thinking of what it
      >will do to our diet?
      >
      >
      >
      >On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:01 AM, thltoymaker <thltoymaker@...> wrote:
      >
      > > **
      > >
      > >
      > > What the Lovely Hounourable Lady Cainder inghen Hui Chatharnaig said !
      > > Simply put ,if you dont wish to participate then dont.
      > > The overwhelming consensus is that Most do. ( By the census taken )
      > >
      > >
      > > At 10:23 AM 2/13/2012, you wrote:
      > >
      > > >Those are some awfully general statements and quite disparaging
      > > >towards your fellow fencers, Aaron. I'm sure that there will be some
      > > >negative aspects to the as yet "proposed" change however, there are
      > > >also some really good things that I read in statements from people
      > > >completing the SCA survey that discussed these things a year or two
      > > >ago. It's only after much discussion that this seems to finally be
      > > >moving toward an actual proposed change in corpora however it will
      > > >undoubtedly be a few years setting up the
      > > >changes to do so. So I'm certain that all the plusses and minuses
      > > >will have been weighed by then.
      > > >
      > > >I'm certain that you didn't mean to disparage or dishonour your
      > > >worthy Ealdomere compatriats however some may not take your
      > > >statements with as much good humor as I.
      > > >
      > > >Regards,
      > > >Cainder
      > > >
      > > >---------------------------------
      > > >Kelly Wyatt
      > > >SCA: Cainder inghen Hui Chatharnaig
      > > >
      > > >k.wyatt59@...
      > > >---------------------------------
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >To: E_Rapier@yahoogroups.com
      > > >From: govianus@...
      > > >Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:02:20 -0500
      > > >Subject: Re: [E_Rapier] Val Day / Peerage
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >Fencing Peerage. 100% bad idea. Fencing is made unsafe by
      > > >hyper-competitiveness and politics. This will do little but increase
      > > >both. In the long run I can see it doing little but making the game
      > > >political and hyper-competitive. On the plus side it should be a boon for
      > > >WMA and HEMA.
      > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >Aaron Miedema, B.F.A., B.A., M.A.
      > > >Historian
      > > >Author of *Bayonets and Blobsticks, The Canadian Experience of Close
      > > Combat
      > > >1915-1918*, available from Legacy Books Press.
      > > >http://www.legacybookspress.com/books.html#Bayonet
      > > >
      > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >------------------------------------
      > > >
      > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >--
      >Aaron Miedema, B.F.A., B.A., M.A.
      >Historian
      >Author of *Bayonets and Blobsticks, The Canadian Experience of Close Combat
      >1915-1918*, available from Legacy Books Press.
      >http://www.legacybookspress.com/books.html#Bayonet
      >
      >
      >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >------------------------------------
      >
      >Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
    • Aaron Miedema
      Irene, thanks again for you input and weighing the contrary points of view. I too have seen the sence of it taking too long for elevation. But, typically it
      Message 100 of 100 , Feb 21, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Irene, thanks again for you input and weighing the contrary points of view.

        I too have seen the sence of it taking too long for elevation. But,
        typically it is on the part of person who is seeking the rank "Hells bells,
        what do I have to do to get noticed." =) Living on the edge of a Kingdom
        for much of my time in the SCA, I chalked it up to being on the edge of a
        Kingdom. Although, to be frank the ins and outs of the awards system has
        not ever irked me, it has left me alone, and I have left it alone.

        You are correct that "peers behaving badly" is a personality and case by
        case experience. The counter question would be, how many individual
        cases does it take to form a theme? =) Once again it is a glass half
        empty half full kind of discussion. One can acknowledge individual trees,
        but sometimes trees are part of a forest. =)

        I think that there might be regional/kingdom differences. I'll go out on a
        limb and express my opinion, I suspect Ealdormere suffers from more
        fractious and passive-aggressive politics than in most kingdoms. Two
        things make me suggest this. First, the Kingdom has a fairly hight level
        of membership, but only slightly more than half of that membership is
        active in the cantons. In other words, there are alot of people who like
        the SCA but aren't interested in participating in the administration of the
        kingdom. Now this is only one potential broad readings of the statistics.
        The second is that I am having this discussion with peers from out of
        kingdom. Not that I mind that, the out of Kingdom perspective is good. I
        suspect there is a certain amount of insecurity within the kingdom that
        motivates people prefer to not engage in such discussions of cabbages and
        kings. =) In the end I think that this may simply add to isolation and
        resentment. But that is merely my opinion. =)

        Thanks again Irene.
        --
        Aaron Miedema, B.F.A., B.A., M.A.
        Historian
        Author of *Bayonets and Blobsticks, The Canadian Experience of Close Combat
        1915-1918*, available from Legacy Books Press.
        http://www.legacybookspress.com/books.html#Bayonet


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.