[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]

Re: group size, status, was Principalities

Poster: Dave Montuori <damont@wolfstar.com>

Jonathan wrote:
> > I'm not going to get into who done what, but the above is (IMO) a 
> > fairly good example for baronial vs. shire status.  A shire that
> > expects to be around should go ahead and move towards baronial status;
> > there's no reason not to (except for the politics that this move would
> > engender) and many reasons to do so.

Gregory responded:
> there are many reasons why a shire might want to stay that way for a
> long time -- Isenfir is 22 years old...
> A quick look through the mailing list archive ought to show you
> quite a few postings from shire denizens about what they like about
> shires.... If you're going to rehash the discussion, you should remember
> that there are two sides to it.

Yes, there are two sides to this question (I'm an Isenfiri-in-Exile now
living in Stierbach and have been through both sides myself). The
difference appears to have something to do with the shire's psychological
proximity to baronies: how close by the members of each group think the
other group(s) is/are. Isenfir, when I lived there, was not "near" any
baronies; Stierbach most emphatically is, and from Jonathan's anecdote,
so are the groups in question there.


List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org