FW: Authenticity & competitions

[Becky McEllistrem <beckymc@MICROSOFT.com>]

Poster: Becky McEllistrem <beckymc@MICROSOFT.com>



-----Original Message-----
From: Becky McEllistrem 
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 1998 2:47 PM
To: Becky McEllistrem
Subject: RE: Authenticity & competitions




-----Original Message-----
From: Rowanwald Central [mailto:rownwald@gte.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 1998 1:41 PM
To: 'atlantia@atlantia.sca.org'
Subject: Re: Authenticity & competitions



Poster: "Rowanwald Central" <rownwald@gte.net>


Rebecca the Contrary writes
> ...I would think the only reason
> to accept/deny a person to a Pearl/Laurel would be because of their work.
> Whether they know who that person is or not would be irrelevant.  I would
> think it was the quality of their work that decided such things.  Then
> again I tend to ask for an idealistic world.

Sorry, Lady Rebecca, but you've pushed one of my buttons. I'm not a member
of the Order of the Laurel, (but did just become a new Pearl), but it's
always been my understanding that the Society Orders are there to recognize
Peers, persons of courtliness, courtesy, and honor who have knowledge of
Courtly living - and who also possess outstanding talent in one of three
venues; fighting, crafting, or serving. To disregard their qualities as a
Peer (found in Copora and well explained there) in deference to their
single outstanding talent would be a disservice to the Society and the
potential Laurel (Knight, Pelican).
   
On this much we mostly agree. I misspoke.  Yes you do want your peers to
be an example of courtly living.  You don't want someone who possesses an
outstanding talent and a total jerk to everyone to be a peer.  However what
is the deciding point.  If someone offends a couple of people and does out-
standing work are they still not a peer?  Ideally everybody would be
perfectly
courteous to every one.  We know that this is not a possibility because of
human nature.  What is the deciding point then?  Is it an overall longterm
average of behavior that you seek or is it merely current behavior that you
discuss?  When does one answer a polling and say "No they're too
discourteous."
and when does one answer a polling and say "They've made some controversial
statements but overall their intentions are correct?"

Excuse me if I'm still just as confusing as before.

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