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

Curious

Expand Messages
  • Sher M
    How many are going to Gulf Wars and would be willing to find the time to get together and at least meet in person so we have some idea who we re talking to?
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 8, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      How many are going to Gulf Wars and would be willing to find the time to get together and at least meet in person so we have some idea who we're talking to?
       
      Runa
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: okami49
      Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 4:11 PM
      Subject: [SCA-Archery] Re: The Fourth Peerage Apples Versus Oranges?

       

      If it were completely up to me (and it seldom is), I would prefer a committee selected to represent the diversity of archery styles and mentalities in the SCA rather than selecting only high ranking members. Even if there is a charter for feed back and input from the overall archery community, it is ultimately up to that individual.

      I would think 2 senior and 1 junior archery member from each kingdom. Also, a mix of period bow users, open bow users, crossbow users, and combat archers. Each kingdom should, on their respective forums, nominate and vote (via polling perhaps) or simply agree on and select representatives rather than have one selected for them. It might muddle things just a bit, but it would also make the community feel more involved rather than having someone just arbitrarily pick for them.

      -Eógan
      Archery Captain, Shire of Mynydd Seren
      http://www.wix.com/rangersofmynyddseren/archery

      --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Cipra" <cipram@...> wrote:
      >
      > My dear Oblio:
      >
      >
      >
      > I realize you are a heretic, but does that heresy extend to the belief that *every* representative form of government is inherently anti-democratic? Of course this is true, but only by the very narrowest definition of democracy. Even *within* the small elected council of my small city there are committees to hash out the details of legislation. There may be some pure democracies out there, but the reason we don't know anything about them is that they are completely ineffective.
      >
      >
      >
      > Whether or not a committee for a cross-border archery GOA agreement is *inherently* democratic will depend on its charter. I hope that charter includes provisions for frequent reporting back to (and soliciting opinion from) the archery community at large.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > With respect,
      >
      > Llywelyn Glyndyverdwy (Mark Cipra)
      >
      > __
      >
      > "When in doubt, end with a jig" - Robin McCauley
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > From: SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Oblio of Abertwidr
      > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 1:38 PM
      > To: SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: The Fourth Peerage Apples Versus Oranges?
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > On 08/03/2012, James of the Lake <jotl2008@... <mailto:jotl2008%40dishmail.net> > wrote:
      >
      > > I think archers (both target and combat) known across the several kingdoms
      > > should certainly meet and quickly -- on a restricted list -- and come up
      > > with Peerage-related standards especially those in addition to prowess in
      > > target competition; it seems to me some GoA-level archers or the equivalent
      > > should be asked-- maybe 3 from each kingdom. They should also work to fold
      > > in the combat archers as both groups are opposite faces of the same coin.
      > >
      >
      > I am disappointed and I believe that this disenfranchises the general
      > archer community.
      >
      > It is unfortunate that the SCA prides itself on being undemocratic,
      > and proposals such as above, make it moreso, that the SCA is for the
      > benefit of the people in power; the ruling class.
      >
      > In the wikipedia (which I am aware, is not recognised by the SCA
      > College of Heralds), at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy , is
      >
      > "
      > Oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía) ; from ὀλίγος (olígos) ,
      > meaning "a few", and ἄρχω (archo) , meaning "to rule, to rule, to
      > command")[1][2][3] is a form of power structure in which power
      > effectively rests with a small number of people. These people could be
      > distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, corporate, or military
      > control. Such states are often controlled by a few prominent families
      > who pass their influence from one generation to the next.
      >
      > Throughout history, some oligarchies have been tyrannical, relying on
      > public servitude to exist, although others have been relatively
      > benign. Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule
      > by the rich, for which the exact term is plutocracy, but oligarchy is
      > not always a rule by wealth, as oligarchs can simply be a privileged
      > group, and do not have to be connected by bloodlines as in a monarchy.
      > Some city-states from ancient Greece were oligarchies.
      > "
      >
      > If we as archers can have no say in something like bodies related to
      > us, then those bodies have nothing to do with us, other than imposing
      > the will of others, upon us.
      >
      > Hence, we have situations such as where different types of bows are
      > required to compete against each other, regardless of the fairness or
      > lack of it, involved, because we have no say in setting such policies.
      >
      > If we are to have no say in the setting of some standards, then what
      > degree of respect are we to have, for standards that we may regard as
      > inappropriate?
      >
      > If standards and policies are to be made, that apply to us, then we
      > should have a say in the creation of those standards and policies.
      >
      > If we are proscribed from having any say in the process, then, why
      > should we respect the result?
      >
      > I think the question needs to be asked, whether this will be for the
      > archers of the SCA, or, for the ruling class, and, not for we
      > peasants.
      >
      > This goes back to the issue; "All animals are equal, and, some are
      > more equal than others"; we are told that, in the SCA, there are no
      > peasants - all members are regarded as nobles, yet, we, the general
      > membership, are oft treated as peasants whose role is to serve the
      > ruling class.
      >
      > So, if decisions are to be made about archery in the SCA, without the
      > process involving the archers of the SCA, then I believe that the
      > outcome cannot be expected to be taken seriously by the archers of the
      > SCA.
      >
      > --
      > Oblio the Unregistered,
      > Heretic of Abertwidr
      > of the Western Shores
      > In the Kingdom of Lochac
      >
      > Per fructu, non folii
      > ................................
      >

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.