[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]
Re: SCA Insurance
Poster: Mark Schuldenfrei <schuldy@abel.MATH.HARVARD.EDU>
Greetings from Tibor.
Jonathan Blackbow wrote:
probably the most valid justification I can think of for pay-to-fight
is that if Joe Schmuck comes to an event, fights, gets somebody hurt,
and isn't a member, then the Society (last I heard, but correct me when
I'm wrong) doesn't have to pay diddly to anybody. The reply "We only
cover members..." when asked wouldn't surprise me a bit, by Occam's
Razor of Murphy's Law:
The insurance (in general) only covers people who are NOT attending or
participating, and who are harmed.
To be slightly more precise: anyone can sue the SCA for anything: and maybe
even win. Under SOME of those circumstances, the insurance has agreed to foot
the bill, instead. Those circumstances include when the person suing is not a
Fighting and insurance have almost nothing to do with one another.
"The least complicated explanation is the one that's going to
get you in the most trouble at the least opportune moment."
Oh, so very true.
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
Admin. requests: firstname.lastname@example.org