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

Re: [SCA-Siege] Re: Kaz the Authenticity Nut

Expand Messages
  • Chris Nogy
    Thank you, Dietmar. Trying to make a point, and you helped significantly. I mentioned a barely significant point, and lots of people went significantly
    Message 1 of 16 , Nov 1, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Thank you, Dietmar.

      Trying to make a point, and you helped significantly.

      I mentioned a 'barely significant' point, and lots of people went 'significantly overboard'

      Significantly overboard enough that I felt justification in using words that are, by tradition, thread-stopping.

      It was my intent to slam on the breaks on that thread - I gather information before making decisions, and I was looking for some information. I wanted to see how people would respond not to a rule or regulation, but to an idea that actually showed participants that we as a group wanted them to build good machines, but were not going to regulate them into it. Also that we showed more consideration and interest in those who would take our activity seriously and work hard to help us build our image than we do for those who do not have the betterment of the activity in mind. And in return for our request, we would provide officially sanctioned support in the way of information - good, high quality information presented for those who were actually interested enough to build engines, and not just devices that were on the field..

      Well, I got my answers.

      I expected a little more than I got - after all, engineers (those who have the mental capacity and the physical skills through years of training) to design and build an engine are usually just as passionate, but a little more articulate, a little more logical, and a little more thoughtful and less knee-jerk.

      I can make decisions in this office in two basic manners - with or without help. If people think that influence can be exerted through rudeness, well, it cannot. If the majority of posts on any topic are inflammatory or rude, I throw them out the window and make a decision on my own.

      Please remember that I have been put into this job to get some things done. Many of those things are already pretty well determined. What I do with them (within limits, of course), is up to me. So we can start to approach things in a logical manner, able to admit if not agree that there might be other points than our own, but that they must have logical justification behind them, or I can begin dictating (which will achieve the goals set out for me, but will cost me more than I would like to spend). The choice is up to you.

      So here is a test.

      Thing that has already been decided needs to be done: Ban bungeelista from use.

      Considerations: phase-out vs. immediate removal, possible methods of converting bungeelista to more acceptable machines

      I don't have any intention of getting back into the bungeelista vs. no bungeelista arguement - that has been hashed out and I have collected a significant enough data sample to get a good idea of what's going on. I have an item that needs attention, and I want input on how to handle it.

      So let's start with this first example, and see how it goes.

      Kaz
    • Patrick Cuccurello
      Thing that has already been decided needs to be done: Ban bungeelista from use. Considerations: phase-out vs. immediate removal, possible methods of
      Message 2 of 16 , Nov 1, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Thing that has already been decided needs to be done: Ban bungeelista from
        use.

        Considerations: phase-out vs. immediate removal, possible methods of
        converting bungeelista to more acceptable machines

        I don't have any intention of getting back into the bungeelista vs. no
        bungeelista arguement - that has been hashed out and I have collected a
        significant enough data sample to get a good idea of what's going on. I
        have an item that needs attention, and I want input on how to handle it.

        So let's start with this first example, and see how it goes.

        Kaz


        You realize that you are taking out of service a good number of the siege
        engines that are used, or are being constructed by members in Ansteorra for
        Gulf Wars. Where I can appreciate the motive behind the move, you will be
        alienating a number of people in this Kingdom who may have moved to more
        Period construction on their own. Not to mention that the expense they have
        entailed for completed or works in progress will be for not. If these
        engines fall within the safety considerations of the siege engine rules,
        legislating them out for esthetic reasons is going to rub some serious fur
        the wrong way I'm afraid.

        Petruccio


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Bill Schongar
        ... First step - Define what is and is not a bungeelista in a clear manner. For me, the term bungeelista encompasses two possible items - 1) A T with a
        Message 3 of 16 , Nov 1, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          Kaz scribed:

          > So here is a test.
          >
          > Thing that has already been decided needs to be done: Ban
          > bungeelista from use.
          >
          > Considerations: phase-out vs. immediate removal, possible methods
          > of converting bungeelista to more acceptable machines

          First step - Define what is and is not a bungeelista in a clear
          manner.

          For me, the term "bungeelista" encompasses two possible items -

          1) A "T" with a bungee cord and simple lock mechanism.

          2) A siege weapon which has its power derived from non-torsion bungee
          power, through the use of fixed arms and a bungee "string", but a
          period appearance.

          As a note, the latter is actually what I have seen _called_ the
          bungeelista, but one cannot be mistaken for the other when put next to
          each other. (I've built a few of each, and from 20 yards you can't
          tell #2 isn't torsion powered.

          Second step - Find a suitable minimal engine that provides period
          appearance and safety while being buildable by backyard or basement
          hobbyists without more than hand tools (Hammer, saw, drill,
          screwdriver.. no drill presses, bandsaws, table saws, lathes, etc).
          Make the design widely (and freely) available.

          Third Step - Try to get multiple copies of the minimal engine built
          and used for recruiting Siege Engineers, so they can see the entry
          level and then either build to that level or beyond it at their
          leisure.


          My two fletchings worth..

          -Liam
        • Chris Nogy
          Good, well thought out ideas Logical, helpful input Saved for use in solution Kaz *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
          Message 4 of 16 , Nov 1, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Good, well thought out ideas

            Logical, helpful input

            Saved for use in solution

            Kaz

            *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

            On 11/1/2000 at 9:53 AM Bill Schongar wrote:

            >Kaz scribed:
            >
            >> So here is a test.
            >>
            >> Thing that has already been decided needs to be done: Ban
            >> bungeelista from use.
            >>
            >> Considerations: phase-out vs. immediate removal, possible methods
            >> of converting bungeelista to more acceptable machines
            >
            >First step - Define what is and is not a bungeelista in a clear
            >manner.
            >
            >For me, the term "bungeelista" encompasses two possible items -
            >
            >1) A "T" with a bungee cord and simple lock mechanism.
            >
            >2) A siege weapon which has its power derived from non-torsion bungee
            >power, through the use of fixed arms and a bungee "string", but a
            >period appearance.
            >
            >As a note, the latter is actually what I have seen _called_ the
            >bungeelista, but one cannot be mistaken for the other when put next to
            >each other. (I've built a few of each, and from 20 yards you can't
            >tell #2 isn't torsion powered.
            >
            >Second step - Find a suitable minimal engine that provides period
            >appearance and safety while being buildable by backyard or basement
            >hobbyists without more than hand tools (Hammer, saw, drill,
            >screwdriver.. no drill presses, bandsaws, table saws, lathes, etc).
            >Make the design widely (and freely) available.
            >
            >Third Step - Try to get multiple copies of the minimal engine built
            >and used for recruiting Siege Engineers, so they can see the entry
            >level and then either build to that level or beyond it at their
            >leisure.
            >
            >
            >My two fletchings worth..
            >
            >-Liam
            >
            >
            >Get medieval at Mad Macsen's
            >http://www.MedievalMart.com/
            >
            >Sponsored by House Wyvern Hall, BBM, East Kingdom, SCA
            >[Email to SCA-Siege-unsubscribe@egroups.com to leave this list]
          • Chris Nogy
            Any time you tell someone they can no longer use what they have, it will rub some fur the wrong direction. Just a fact. I have laready considered that, but
            Message 5 of 16 , Nov 1, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              Any time you tell someone they can no longer use what they have, it will rub some fur the wrong direction. Just a fact.

              I have laready considered that, but the task at hand will rub people wrong either way.

              So one path was chosen, based on several well thought out pieces of information and facts.

              I wish I could do things wihout making anyone upset, but nothing can be changed without ruffling some people.

              But the change cn be made in such a way as to minimize the disturbance and maximize the possibility for improvement and positive effect in the end.

              That is what I am after.

              Kaz

              *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

              On 11/1/2000 at 8:14 AM Patrick Cuccurello wrote:

              >Thing that has already been decided needs to be done: Ban bungeelista from
              >use.
              >
              >Considerations: phase-out vs. immediate removal, possible methods of
              >converting bungeelista to more acceptable machines
              >
              >I don't have any intention of getting back into the bungeelista vs. no
              >bungeelista arguement - that has been hashed out and I have collected a
              >significant enough data sample to get a good idea of what's going on. I
              >have an item that needs attention, and I want input on how to handle it.
              >
              >So let's start with this first example, and see how it goes.
              >
              >Kaz
              >
              >
              >You realize that you are taking out of service a good number of the siege
              >engines that are used, or are being constructed by members in Ansteorra for
              >Gulf Wars. Where I can appreciate the motive behind the move, you will be
              >alienating a number of people in this Kingdom who may have moved to more
              >Period construction on their own. Not to mention that the expense they have
              >entailed for completed or works in progress will be for not. If these
              >engines fall within the safety considerations of the siege engine rules,
              >legislating them out for esthetic reasons is going to rub some serious fur
              >the wrong way I'm afraid.
              >
              >Petruccio
              >
              >
              >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              >
              >Get medieval at Mad Macsen's
              >http://www.MedievalMart.com/
              >
              >Sponsored by House Wyvern Hall, BBM, East Kingdom, SCA
              >[Email to SCA-Siege-unsubscribe@egroups.com to leave this list]
            • Alex Hazlett
              I d favor a phase-out period, to allow engineers who had committed to upcoming events a last chance to use them, but with a clear end date, after which they
              Message 6 of 16 , Nov 1, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                I'd favor a phase-out period, to allow engineers who had committed to
                upcoming events a last chance to use them, but with a clear end date,
                after which they were no longer legal. And publicize the hell out of
                that date, post it to the marshallate, put it in all the kingdom papers,
                email every branch, so its clear that nobody can say, aggrievedly, "I
                didn't know."
                On conversion-- in the SCA spirit of utilizing modern equipment to
                simulate period products, I would allow bungee powered period looking
                devices (like ballistae that had fixed arms and used the bungee as the
                bowstring), so I guess you could consider that conversion. I think this
                sort of thing fits our game in the same way the rubber-powered cannon
                do, or plywood shields. I don't think the more rudimentary bungeelistas
                could be converted, weren't those the totally non-period t-bar
                quasi-slingshot devices? I'm not quite clear on the design, we didn't
                have any out here in hawaii.
                Selling the ban-- instead of flatly saying 'these devices are
                banned', I'd point out how they fail to meet any standards of period
                design or appearance, in the same way tennis shoes and nike t-shirts
                fail to do. That way it's not seen as a unilateral decision from on
                high, instead its the application of a well established standard. Shows
                reasonable intent, and how the decision fits the spirit of the SCA.
                Alejandro the Far Traveler

                Chris Nogy wrote:

                >
                > Thing that has already been decided needs to be done: Ban bungeelista from use.
                >
                > Considerations: phase-out vs. immediate removal, possible methods of converting bungeelista to more acceptable machines

                > Kaz
              • Chris Nogy
                More good input What I am currently considering bungeelista are the devices that have no method of providing or attenuating power to the projectile except
                Message 7 of 16 , Nov 1, 2000
                • 0 Attachment
                  More good input

                  What I am currently considering bungeelista are the devices that have no method
                  of providing or attenuating power to the projectile except elastic strings.

                  perhaps someone has mounted one of these on a wheeled carriage, but appearance
                  is only part of it. Functionality is another part.

                  Siege engines were not simple devices if they were effective in period. Maces
                  were simple devices, longbows were simple devices, siege engines were not.

                  So a certain expectation of complexity is a legitimate thing, especially in the
                  light of the fact that we give siege engines more effect in general than any
                  other weapon.

                  Again, good input, I appreciate it.

                  Kaz


                  > From: Alex Hazlett <arexu@...>, on 11/1/2000 12:19 PM:
                  > I'd favor a phase-out period, to allow engineers who had committed to
                  > upcoming events a last chance to use them, but with a clear end date,
                  > after which they were no longer legal. And publicize the hell out of
                  > that date, post it to the marshallate, put it in all the kingdom papers,
                  > email every branch, so its clear that nobody can say, aggrievedly, "I
                  > didn't know."
                  > On conversion-- in the SCA spirit of utilizing modern equipment to
                  > simulate period products, I would allow bungee powered period looking
                  > devices (like ballistae that had fixed arms and used the bungee as the
                  > bowstring), so I guess you could consider that conversion. I think this
                  > sort of thing fits our game in the same way the rubber-powered cannon
                  > do, or plywood shields. I don't think the more rudimentary bungeelistas
                  > could be converted, weren't those the totally non-period t-bar
                  > quasi-slingshot devices? I'm not quite clear on the design, we didn't
                  > have any out here in hawaii.
                  > Selling the ban-- instead of flatly saying 'these devices are
                  > banned', I'd point out how they fail to meet any standards of period
                  > design or appearance, in the same way tennis shoes and nike t-shirts
                  > fail to do. That way it's not seen as a unilateral decision from on
                  > high, instead its the application of a well established standard. Shows
                  > reasonable intent, and how the decision fits the spirit of the SCA.
                  > Alejandro the Far Traveler
                  >
                  > Chris Nogy wrote:
                  >
                  > >
                  > > Thing that has already been decided needs to be done: Ban bungeelista
                  from use.
                  > >
                  > > Considerations: phase-out vs. immediate removal, possible methods of
                  converting bungeelista to more acceptable machines
                  >
                  > > Kaz
                  >
                  >
                  > Get medieval at Mad Macsen's
                  > http://www.MedievalMart.com/
                  >
                  > Sponsored by House Wyvern Hall, BBM, East Kingdom, SCA
                  > [Email to SCA-Siege-unsubscribe@egroups.com to leave this list]
                  >
                  >
                  >


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • YPLairge@aol.com
                  In a message dated 11/1/00 7:44:22 AM Central Standard Time, ... have ... I would request that we phase out the bungeelista design. Simply because this way we
                  Message 8 of 16 , Nov 1, 2000
                  • 0 Attachment
                    In a message dated 11/1/00 7:44:22 AM Central Standard Time,
                    cnogy@... writes:

                    > Thing that has already been decided needs to be done: Ban bungeelista from
                    > use.
                    >
                    > Considerations: phase-out vs. immediate removal, possible methods of
                    > converting bungeelista to more acceptable machines
                    >
                    > I don't have any intention of getting back into the bungeelista vs. no
                    > bungeelista arguement - that has been hashed out and I have collected a
                    > significant enough data sample to get a good idea of what's going on. I
                    have
                    > an item that needs attention, and I want input on how to handle it.

                    I would request that we phase out the bungeelista design. Simply because
                    this way we won't lose all those people who have spent the past few months
                    building them to meet their king's (whichever kingdom they may belong to)
                    requests for Gulf Wars. If they do lose all the effort that they've put into
                    them, chances are good that we'll never see them again.

                    Y Port Lairge
                  • Patrick Cuccurello
                    More good input What I am currently considering bungeelista are the devices that have no method of providing or attenuating power to the projectile except
                    Message 9 of 16 , Nov 2, 2000
                    • 0 Attachment
                      More good input

                      What I am currently considering bungeelista are the devices that have no
                      method
                      of providing or attenuating power to the projectile except elastic strings.

                      perhaps someone has mounted one of these on a wheeled carriage, but
                      appearance
                      is only part of it. Functionality is another part.

                      Siege engines were not simple devices if they were effective in period.
                      Maces
                      were simple devices, longbows were simple devices, siege engines were not.

                      So a certain expectation of complexity is a legitimate thing, especially in
                      the
                      light of the fact that we give siege engines more effect in general than any
                      other weapon.

                      Again, good input, I appreciate it.

                      Kaz


                      My main problem with this is that it is the responsibility of the Society
                      (tm) and especially the Marshallate Office to regulate the safety aspects of
                      this organization. It is not the duty of the Marshallate to tell the
                      individual Kingdoms how to play their game, or what they should look like
                      when they do it, as long as they fall within those safety guidelines. That
                      has been my experience with this organization, and the decision by a number
                      of Marshal and BoD rulings over the years.

                      A case in point: Minimum armor standards. These are provided for safety
                      reason yet they do not require that all armor be made of period materials
                      and in a period fashion. Only that the armor be an attempt and pre-1600
                      armor. Hence, you have people walking out in plastic armor. Has this cause
                      a great a great trauma in the fighting community? No it has not, it is
                      handled on a Kingdom basis within the traditions and structure of those
                      Kingdoms without interference from the Society. Are these people less
                      safe? No. Has this caused any curtailment in the fighting community of
                      loss of prestige? No. Do people in plastic armor change into more Period
                      armor and they get more involved and expect more recognition? Yes! This is
                      comparable to the Society Marshal saying, "Only period armor using period
                      construction methods and period materials will be accepted upon the field in
                      the future." Where that might be a great way to make tournaments more
                      visually appealing, you limit your involvement by new fighters and those who
                      may not be a seriously committed--but still looking for a good time.

                      The duty of the Society Marshal is to provide an umbrella of safety
                      guidelines for the safe enjoyment of this organization by it's members. It
                      is not it's responsibility to legislate how individuals use those guidelines
                      to play this game. The Board of Directors has always tried to stay out of
                      the business of how this game is played in the individual Kingdoms.
                      Especially if the actions of those Kingdoms fall within Board Policy and the
                      safety procedures.

                      I am sorry Kaz, but I think you need to rethink this. I believe that you
                      are exceeding your authority in determining how this game should be played
                      within the Kingdoms. Especially since many of the devices that you are
                      choosing to scrap not only appear more period than someone running around in
                      plastic armor. All of these devices meet or exceed the safety provisions
                      that have been laid down. A great deal of personal expense has been put
                      into creating them, and they fall within the expectations of the Crown and
                      Kingdom Marshal who have okayed their use. I do not believe that it is your
                      job as Deputy Society Siege Marshal to decide what goes on the field and
                      what doesn't because you don't like the way it looks. It is also not the
                      purview of the Society Siege Marshal to decide how to limit the number of
                      siege weapons on the field by making them more difficult to build and man.
                      That is the decision of the Crowns, Their retainers, and how *they* choose
                      to structure *their* Wars. If they want to limit the number of siege
                      weapons on the field during a battle, that is *their* choice. Again, it
                      would be comparable to the Society Marshal saying that only 5% of the
                      fighters can have spears in bridge battles because they so devastating and
                      people don't like to die by them..

                      I think that you are trying to make decisions that are better made by the
                      Kingdoms, and their Crowns. If Ansteorra and Trimaris decide to have an
                      "artillery battle" during one of their battles at Gulf Wars, that is their
                      decision. You can't make a decision to change that because it doesn't fit
                      within you concept of how siege weapons should be played. If it is done,
                      and no fighters show up, do you really think that Crown's will not change
                      the battle rules in the future? But again, that is the Crowns decision to
                      make, not yours. Under closer inspection, and discussion with the Kingdom
                      Crowns and Marshals you may want to reconsider this concept.

                      In Service,
                      Maestro Petruccio Alfonso Maria Cuccieri de Cataluna, OL, OP. OLA, CSP

                      cc: Duke Eringlin Aldhelm, Society Marshal
                      Their Majesties, Timotheos and Allyson, Crown Ansteorra
                      Sir Kief av Kiersted, Marshal Ansteorra






                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • James Mcadams
                      ... And as a counter-example: Compound Bows. There is a (admittedly minor) role for the Society Marshallate to extrapolate the minimum standards of our Society
                      Message 10 of 16 , Nov 2, 2000
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Patrick Cuccurello wrote:

                        > My main problem with this is that it is the responsibility of the Society
                        > (tm) and especially the Marshallate Office to regulate the safety aspects of
                        > this organization. It is not the duty of the Marshallate to tell the
                        > individual Kingdoms how to play their game, or what they should look like
                        > when they do it, as long as they fall within those safety guidelines.

                        > A case in point: Minimum armor standards.

                        And as a counter-example: Compound Bows.

                        There is a (admittedly minor) role for the Society Marshallate
                        to extrapolate the minimum standards of our Society and make more
                        specific rulings. Compound Bows are an example of this - something
                        so modern in appearance that it doesn't even qualify as a
                        'reasonable attempt.

                        The question is whether a 'bungeelista' is a similar case,
                        and it seems obvious that Kaz believes it is.


                        Back to the original question about how to handle a ban on
                        'bungeelistas' - I'll give 2 more arguments for permitting them
                        until a future date (approx 1 year?).

                        1) It allows time for an appeals campaign to be mounted by
                        anyone who feels the decision is too extreme. Appeals to Kings,
                        Letters to the Earl Marshal, BoD, etc.

                        2) Whatever damage may happen to siege combat due to an
                        over-proliferation of 'bungeelistas', I'm willing to bet that even
                        more would be done by enforcing this decision too quickly. Anyone
                        who's enthused and starting will not only get a rude awakening, they
                        may be made nervous by the prospect that the rules can change without
                        warning in the future. One of the surest ways to reduce interest is
                        to have the rules changing too quickly.

                        Thank you for your time,

                        Louis de Xavier de Navarre
                        Midrealm.

                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Jim McAdams | Do,
                        jmcadams@... | or Do Not.
                        630-859-6902 | There is no "Try". - Yoda
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      • Patrick Cuccurello
                        And as a counter-example: Compound Bows. There is a (admittedly minor) role for the Society Marshallate to extrapolate the minimum standards of our Society and
                        Message 11 of 16 , Nov 2, 2000
                        • 0 Attachment
                          And as a counter-example: Compound Bows.

                          There is a (admittedly minor) role for the Society Marshallate
                          to extrapolate the minimum standards of our Society and make more
                          specific rulings. Compound Bows are an example of this - something
                          so modern in appearance that it doesn't even qualify as a
                          'reasonable attempt.

                          The question is whether a 'bungeelista' is a similar case,
                          and it seems obvious that Kaz believes it is.



                          The "bungeelistas" I am concerned with are the ones that resemble a ballista
                          in every way except
                          instead of the arms deriving their energies from a torsional loop, the arms
                          are stationary and get their energies
                          from the elastic product held between the arms.

                          Consequently, the are very period in appearance to the untrained eye and
                          quite possibly indistinguishable
                          when viewed from the front.

                          Petruccio


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Hugh Prescott
                          ... From: Chris Nogy To: Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 4:00 PM Subject: RE: [SCA-Siege] Re: Kaz the
                          Message 12 of 16 , Nov 2, 2000
                          • 0 Attachment
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: Chris Nogy <cnogy@...>
                            To: <SCA-Siege@egroups.com>
                            Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 4:00 PM
                            Subject: RE: [SCA-Siege] Re: Kaz the Authenticity Nut


                            > Maestro Petruccio
                            >
                            > This is being sent privately - not publically. And notice nobody else is
                            being
                            > copied in on it.

                            BUT YOU DID SEND IT TO THE NET!

                            Hugh
                          • Patrick Cuccurello
                            Maestro Petruccio This is being sent privately - not publically. And notice nobody else is being copied in on it. [Non-text portions
                            Message 13 of 16 , Nov 2, 2000
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Maestro Petruccio

                              This is being sent privately - not publically. And notice nobody else is
                              being
                              copied in on it.

                              <<<<replied privately>>>


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Chris Nogy
                              Maestro Petruccio This is being sent privately - not publically. And notice nobody else is being copied in on it. First, I assure you that the Society Earl
                              Message 14 of 16 , Nov 2, 2000
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Maestro Petruccio

                                This is being sent privately - not publically. And notice nobody else is being
                                copied in on it.

                                First, I assure you that the Society Earl Marshal and I are in complete
                                agreement that there have to be some limiting factors each time you introduce a
                                new 'super weapon' or 'super combattant'. Siege engines as an organized
                                activity are in their infancy - and most of what has been done is to determine
                                that these weapons are more 'deadly (game-play term, not actual safety concern)
                                than any other weapons on the field. Little has been done to regulate their
                                use or integration into the already established game, and in several instance
                                (many of which I have been present for) the lack of forethough and regulation
                                has caused more headaches than the benefits fo having the engines

                                I would rather those limiting factors be things that are set as minimum
                                philosophy with good logic behind them than to have the limiting factors be set
                                as specific rules and regulations that kill ingenuity.

                                I also assure you that we do not intend to require 'Laurel-class' weapons -
                                just that our minimums will be set one step off the dirt. There will be engine
                                designs provided during the phase-out that will fit the beginning engineer and
                                the garage craftsman, but that are more believable siege engines

                                It is no different than the requirements for rattan weapons. An axe has to
                                look like and function like an axe within safety requirements. Any new weapon
                                must be proven to be based on a period example. They must not only look like
                                the weapon represented, but they must present reasonably equivalent striking
                                area, must be within weight standards, etc... Even the profile and plan views
                                of these bungee engines do not represent any period engine (though efforts have
                                been made to make them look like period construction - it is certainly not
                                accurate representation of period engines). Not to mention the power source
                                (even the representation of the power source). Not to mention the lack of size
                                and mass, the lack of self-regulating rate of fire, the lack of suitably period
                                release methods. There are many reasons to ban these most simple of engines -
                                and very few to keep them that cannot be met with other, more authentic, and
                                almost as simple and inexpensive options.

                                You are correct, it is not the right of any marshal to go overboard in
                                restricting activity. But if something can be shown to fall outside the scope
                                of the Society, and options that meet the same criteria are available that
                                fiall within the scope of the Society, then it is within the right of the
                                marshallate to specify those options that are acceptable.

                                Kaz, OL
                                Society Siege Engine Marshal
                              • Chris Nogy
                                Louis I have every intention of providing a schedule that is least disruptive to the activity and provides the best opportunity for positive options. That
                                Message 15 of 16 , Nov 2, 2000
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Louis

                                  I have every intention of providing a schedule that is least disruptive to the
                                  activity and provides the best opportunity for positive options. That means
                                  starting now getting information out and people prepared, but waiting AT LEAST
                                  until after Gulf Wars, so as to allow promises made to be kept and agreements
                                  to be fulfilled.

                                  I also intend to provide (I am currently building prototypes now) designs that
                                  can be built by beginners with gaarage workshop tools that do meet with the
                                  'one step above bare minimum' requirements we are adopting. I will not publish
                                  the designs until they are built and tested, but they are a priority.

                                  There have been people who have provided positive input into these discussions
                                  - their voices are being heard. There are people who are providing input in a
                                  negative way - they are being ignored.

                                  You have made some very logical and valid points in your suggestions - you are
                                  not alone in these points (I am even in agreement).

                                  Some things are going to be done - the manner in which they will be done is
                                  still in question. That is where I am in need of input, and where everyone can
                                  be a part of the process as long as they are willing to be polite and
                                  thoughtful (even if they don't agree).

                                  Kaz
                                  Society Siege Engine Marshal
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.