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

more horse beating!!

Poster: Phillip Jones <jonesj@InfoAve.Net>

Yep. Another reply....

By the drafters own admission, this document is not truly concerned with
matters of dress. Dis-obedience of corpora and site rules have long been
grounds for expulsion, as have gate crashing and criminal activity. Both
have long had structures which deal with the problems. This new structure,
then, can be needed only to deal with some newly discovered problem, or to
focus upon some newly troublesome problem, and that problem is centered in
section 4 or 5 (or distributed across them).

The Seneschal's court is by its own charter not designed to deal with An
attempt at pre-17th century dress (elf-ears, etc.) "Please note that for
this requirement only, we are depending on the personal honor of attendees
for compliance.

We urge gentles who are confronted with the dress of those who fail to
comply with these standards to courteously remind them that this is not the
game we are playing here."

What does this leave?

2. "Conforms to the provisions of the By-Laws and Corpora:" Hard to have a
problem with this. We buy into the rules, change them, or find another game.

3. "Complies with any other requirements (such as site fees and waivers)
which may be imposed by the Society" The gloss explains that this includes
the Cooper rules, etc. Again, as long as the rules have been
well-distributed, this is hard to argue with. Except, as someone noted, that
alleged criminal activity would get you booted from site. That part seems
pretty draconian.

4. "Behaves as a lady or gentleman" @#$%^& this one. This section is
absolutely bulging with nastiness, and could easily pop all over someone
innocent. Courtesy and Chivalry are ill-defined, and if you are going to
haul me up on spurious charges, or be so free to, I want to know what your
definitions will be beforehand. We don't even have a poorly articulated "I
can't define it but I know it when I see it" guideline.

5. "Groups that create trouble at Pennsic:" This section has obviously
consumed most of the time of the drafters, and so is , in my educated
opinion, the crux of the biscuit. Important questions include 1)When did the
Cooper's express a desire for such rules. 2) To whom did the express that
desire. and 3) who are "we" who created the rules? Other less obvious
questions would include how many groups are identifiably problem groups. And
does the behavior at last year's Pennsic by the King of the East and His
allies fall into "Encouragement and promotion of anti-SCA behavior amongst
members of the group"

Phillip Jones

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