[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]
Re: coat of arms
Poster: Jeffrey Sussman <JSussman@Erols.com>
Dave Montuori wrote:
Greetings from Duke Richard, EMA
Marshals have enough to worry about. It's the same reason we don't
police tennis shoes and the like. Way too complicated for simple souls
like most marshals.
Marshals have no authority over heraldry. In an attempt to resolve
problems, they have no more, and no less, recourse to heralds and
autocrats than anyone else.
While it sounds a tad ludicrous, someone who felt wronged, could demand
a court of chivalry from the Crowns. In theory, a CoC could find
someone guilty of intentional violation of the rules of the SCA and levy
Also, a Court of Courtesy could be called. Such a court could find
someone guilty of intentional discourtesy. While this kind of court
can't do much in the way of concrete santions, they could issue a PUBLIC
REPRIMAND. If you think that wouldn't carry any weight, you might not
really understand the SCA.
> Poster: Dave Montuori <email@example.com>
> > > > If they refused I would head to the best herald I know and
> > > > lodge a formal complaint.
> > > [I noted that I'd take it to the royal representative]
> > If the offensive (and obviously conflicting) non-registered device is on
> > the field......when I was a herald, I had good cooperation with the
> > marshallate and have asked that they have the fighter use another shield
> > that day. If the person is blatant about it and has refused to
> > cooperate with the gentle on site who conflicts, they had no problem
> > with this. Comments, marshals?
> Good point. Marshals too have a certain amount of authority in this.
> List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
> Submissions: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Admin. requests: email@example.com
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
Admin. requests: firstname.lastname@example.org