From nordmark-request Thu Feb 24 19:57:09 1994 Received: from sunic.sunet.se (sunic.sunet.se [192.36.125.2]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA16133 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 1994 19:57:08 +0100 Received: from hjds90.hj.se by sunic.sunet.se (8.6.4/2.03) id TAA07392; Thu, 24 Feb 1994 19:57:05 +0100 Received: by hjds90.hj.se (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.38) id ; Thu, 24 Feb 94 19:57 MET Received: from TRISSE/M_QUEUE by trisse.hj.se (Mercury 1.11); Thu, 24 Feb 94 19:58:34 GMT+100 Received: from M_QUEUE by TRISSE (Mercury 1.11); Thu, 24 Feb 94 19:58:29 GMT+100 From: Organization: H”gskolan i J”nk”ping To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se Date: Thu, 24 Feb 1994 19:58:27 MET+1 Subject: Kommentarer till lagf”rslaget Priority: normal X-mailer: PMail v3.0 (R1) Message-ID: <17478A3796@trisse.hj.se> Status: RO Hej hopp, Padde h„r. I stort sett tycker jag att lagen verkar vettig. Det finns dock ett par saker som jag „r lite fundersam p†. I mitt fall „r allts† tystnad ett tecken p† att det „r OK. Eftersom s† mycket i lagen verkade s† vettigt hade det bara blivit f†nigt att skriva "bra" efter n„stan varje paragraf. N†v„l, till saken. - Rent generellt anv„nds det f”r blandat spr†k. Jag tycker det „r extremt charmigt med det „ldre spr†ket. Dessutom s†g jag inga direkta m”jligheter till misstolkningar av den anledningen. P† vissa st„llen kan man dessutom inte l†ta bli att dra p† mungiporna, vilket jag bara ser som positivt. - "Denne" borde anv„ndas ist„llet f”r "han". LAGBALKEN Anv„nd "medeltiden" eller "tiden innan 1600-talet med tonvikt p† medeltiden" eller liknande ist„llet f”r 600-1600. D† ingen exakt definition finns i SCA's lagar om tidsperioden „r det dumt att vi sj„lva instiftar s†dana. Varf”r inte g”ra en officiell ”vers„ttning av SCA's regler till Svenska? Žven om inte resurser kan avdelas nu, s† „r det v„l ganska dumt att inte l„mna m”jligheten ”ppen i framtiden. Alla i v†rt fagra blivande furstend”me „r inte lika bra p† det engelska. Man borde kunna r”sta i enskilda fr†gor via ombud eller †tminstonde via bevittnade skriftliga brev. Varf”r skall bara fursteparet ha r„tt att f”resl† „ndringar i lagen??? Mitt demokratiska inre uppr”rs av denna i mitt tycke meningsl”sa regel. Som jag ser det s† „r fursteparets fr„msta uppgift att f”rgylla den medeltida biten av f”reningen, inte den mer bakomliggande praktiska. D„r borde alla kreativa anakronister f† l„mna f”rslag. HŽRSKAREBALKEN Žger fursteparet r„tt att neka n†gon att deltaga i krontorneringen? Detta st†r n„mligen inte angivet n†gonstans. Om det skulle st† i Corpora eller n†gon annan SCA-lag, s† borde d„r v„l „ven st† att man m†ste skriftligen skicka en ans”kan till fursten. Har jag fel, eller „r det lite f”rvirrat? Citat paragraf 3 "Minst en av dem skall ock n„rvara vid alla Ting som h†llas under deras regeringstid.". Inneb„r inte detta, enligt syftningen att om A och B „r ett furstepar, s† m†ste antingen A eller B n„rvara vid _alla_ Ting, inte s† att det r„cker med att n†gon av dem finns vid varje enskilt tillf„lle. Kan verka petigt, men det k„nns som om n†got blev konstigt med svenskan. Vad inneb„r furstefrid??? Det m†ste nog f”rtydligas, ety i alla fall jag fann mig helt off-side. Citat paragraf 4 "Minst en av tronf”ljarna skall n„rvara vad vart Ting som h†lls.". Oj, det h„r blev „nnu konstigare. Inneb„r det att n†gon m†ste g† p† Ting i all evighet, allts† efter regeringstiden „r slut sedan l„nge, eller tas det f”r givet att det bara g„ller s† l„nge de „r tronf”ljare? Paragraf 5, stycke 4: Varf”r m†ste man h†lla ny krontornering om n†gon av tronf”ljarna bortfaller. Man „gde ju r„tten att sj„lv f”rs”ka vinna kronan, och d† var det ju OK att regera ensam. Hur allvarligt „r kravet p† att tronf”ljare och furstepar skall n„rvara vid Ting ??? Vad h„nder om de inte skulle kunna dyka upp, eller helt enkelt struntar i det? Borde inte det framg† av lagen? TINGSBALKEN Žven tronf”ljarna b”r r†dfr†gas om l„mplig tid och plats f”r tinget, ety de f”rv„ntas n„rvara. ŽMBETSBALKEN Borde inte f„ltsk„ren ha r„tt att st„lla krav f”r sitt „mbetes skull vid exempelvis k„mpalekar (krav p† vatten, f”rsta f”rband etc.). Visserligen har Nordmark en l†ng tradition av fint samarbete mellan marsk„mbetet och f„ltsk„rs„mbetet, men det vore „nd† bra om f„ltsk„ren officiellt fick en viss best„mmander„tt. Varf”r skall f„ktmarsken f”lja marskens anvisningar ??? Ren„ssansf„ktningen „r en i princip helt frist†ende del som marksen har f”ga aff„rer med. Mer naturligt vore att s„tta b†gskyttekaptenen att f”lja marskens anvisningar, ety man d„r spelar samma spel. Tja, det var allt jag kan komma p† just nu. H”r g„rna av er med kommentarer. Jag hoppas att jag inte varit alltf”r petig. Padraig / Anders "It was a night, oh what a night, LA burning bright, oh what a night" - Shock to the system Billy Idol From nordmark-request Thu Feb 24 20:41:50 1994 Received: from meryl.csd.uu.se (meryl.csd.uu.se [130.238.11.31]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id UAA16724 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 1994 20:41:47 +0100 Received: by meryl.csd.uu.se id AA16406 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4 for nordmark@ludd.luth.se); Thu, 24 Feb 1994 20:41:45 +0100 Date: Thu, 24 Feb 1994 20:41:45 +0100 Message-Id: <199402241941.AA16406@meryl.csd.uu.se> To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se Subject: kommentar till kommentar From: Sender: vader@csd.uu.se X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Status: RO William h{r. N}gra kommentarer till Deirdres kommentarer till lagen: >Spr}ket {r tyv{rr f|r blandat, en del meningar mycket moderna, b}de >till ord och stil, andra p}minner mer om medeltid. Blandningen ger >inte ett genomt{nkt intryck, tyv{rr. Mer konsekvens }t n}got h}ll >vore bra. Det var d{rf|r vi efterlyste hj{lp med att g|ra spr}ket mer klangfullt. Allts}: {r det n}t som inte l}ter r{tt, skriv sj{lv en alternativ formulering! Jag tycker det vore mycket synd om hela iden med ett arkaiserat spr}k gick f|rlorad. >Jag h}ller inte med Frithiof om att texten "600-1600" ska bytas ut mot >"medeltid". Eftersom Nordmark inte kan {ndra SCAs tidsperiod, vad vi {n skriver i v}r lag, s} trodde jag det skulle framg} att den meningen var deskriptiv, inte normativ. Avsedd som information f|r eventuella utomst}ende som kommer |ver ett ex av v}r lag. "Medeltiden" {r tyv{rr inte sanningen. "Medeltiden och ren{ssansen" kunde vara acceptabelt. >Eftersom h{r tas upp hur man g|r om n}gon grupp vill ansluta sig till >Nordmark borde man v{l ocks} ta upp hur det ska g} till om n}gon grupp >vill utg} fr}n Nordmark?! (S} vitt jag vet kan grupper sortera direkt >under ett Kungad|me.) Jag tror att detta {r reglerat |ver v}ra huvuden, fast {rligt talat har jag inte kollat eftersom jag inte {ger Drachenwalds lag. >Att man inte ska kunna r|sta genom ombud tycker jag inte om. Det ger >f|rdelar till de som antingen har r}d att resa till Tingen eller som >r}kar bo p} platsen. Jag h}ller med om att det kan vara sv}rt att ta sig till Tinget. Om vi ska ha r|stning p} avst}nd tycker jag dock INTE att man ska kunna utn{mna n}gon annan till sitt ombud. D{remot kan jag t{nka mig att man skriver ett brev och s{ger sin mening i n}gon viss fr}ga. Lagen kr{ver ju att fr}gor som ska beslutas, ska finnas med i kallelsen. Det blir d} "postr|stning", inte ombudsf|rfarande. >Dessutom s{gs senare att {mbetsm{n kan s{nda en ers{ttare med fullmakt! Det {r inte en fullmakt att r|sta, utan en fullmakt att tala f|r {mbetet vid Tingets diskussioner. >I 4:e stycket st}r "...befr{mjar S{llskapets of Furstend|mets m}l." >Vad betyder of? Det {r ett skrivfel, ska st} "och". >(Vilka {r f|r |vrigt Furstemd|mets m}l??) Frukost, lunch och bankett. >I 9:e stycket st}r att fursteparet ska g{lda prenumeration p} >Silversparren. Min f|rsta tanke var "m}ste man skriva i att de >ska g{lda f|r prenumerationen, borde de inte kunna f} den gratis?" >T{nk om n}n annan g{ldar f|r dem? Okej, en vettig {ndring. "Under hela sin regeringstid skola de h}lla sig underr{ttade om det som skrivs uti Silversparren." Eller n}t s}nt. >I andra delen, tredje stycket st}r "R{tten att ensamma att till Tinget..." >[r det inte n}got "att" extra d{r? Eller {r det bara klumpigt formulerat? {nnu ett skrivfel som uppst}tt i redigeringen. >Ting h}lles var sj{tte m}nad. Jaha, ska det vara exakt eller finns viss >planeringsm}n inr{knad? Detta har vi avsiktligt l{mnat vagt eftersom vi k{nde oss os{kra. >S} st}r att drotsen ska r}dg|ra med fursteparet om l{mplig dag och >plats, men eftersom {ven n}gon av vicomterna f|rv{ntas n{rvara s} >kanske {ven de skall tillfr}gas! Du menar tronf|ljarna. Jomen, det kan man v{l t{nka sig. >"I tingsbud skall utskrivas var sak som vid tinget s{rskilt skall >beslutas." Inneb{r detta att tinget inte kan fatta beslut om n}got >annat {n vad som st}tt i tingsbudet? Tinget kan inte *besluta* om n}got annat {n (a) lag{ndringar och (b) regalier. I b}da fallen ska det st} i kallelsen vilka f|rslag som har v{ckts. >7:e stycket f|rst}r jag inte. Vad {r bakgrunden till detta? Vad menas? Regalier tenderar att ackumuleras. Det beh|vs en mekanism f|r att g|ra sig av med dem n{r det tj{nat ut. >Att r{kna upp alla extra t{nkbara {metsm{n {r intressant men >formuleringen l{mnar inte |ppet f|r om furstend|met beh|ver >inr{tta n}n helt ny typ av {mbetsman. [r inte det lite synd? Om lagen alls ska handla om {mbetsm{nnen och deras plikter, fordrar ju s}dant inr{ttande {nd} en lag{ndring, eftersom lagen beskriver {mbetenas funktioner. (Om {mbetsm{nnens fullmaktshavande ers{ttare:) >Borde f.|. inget s{gas om dessa ers{ttare, t ex att de ska vara >medlemmar i SCA (eller s}...:-). Bra, det ska vi skriva in! >Skattm{staren: Om man tolkar meningens slut lite vidlyftigt s} f}r >ordet "samtliga" en mycket vidare betydelse {n vad man vill. Okej, det {r l{tt justerat. >Begreppen "The Dragon's tale" och "Silversparren" anv{nds utan att >definieras. T{nk om n}n tidning byter namn? Eller n}t... Riktigt. Vi kan skriva "Furstend|mets och Kungad|mets officiella medlemsblad" eller n}t. Fast det l}ter ju v{ldigt byr}kratiskt. William From nordmark-request Thu Feb 24 23:38:07 1994 Received: from bronze.lcs.mit.edu (BRONZE.LCS.MIT.EDU [18.30.0.254]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA19171 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 1994 23:37:48 +0100 Received: by bronze.lcs.mit.edu id AA06881; Thu, 24 Feb 94 17:33:38 EST Date: Thu, 24 Feb 94 17:33:38 EST From: greg@bronze.lcs.mit.edu (Greg Rose) Message-Id: <9402242233.AA06881@bronze.lcs.mit.edu> To: NORTH@bransle.ucs.mun.ca, antir@kwantlen.bc.ca, calontir@unl.edu, carolingia@bloom-beacon.mit.edu, e5@uriacc.uri.edu, jaymin@maths.tcd.ie, lgrant@lanczos.maths.tcd.ie, nordmark@ludd.luth.se, northshield@stolaf.edu, sca-reform@mit.edu, sca-west@ecst.csuchico.edu, scahrlds@pucc.princeton.edu Subject: Message from HRM Inman Status: RO Unto the good gentles of the Known World does Hossein Ali Qomi send greetings! I have been asked by His Majesty Inman of Ansteorra to post the following message to the populace of Known World. Hossein Ali Qomi Baron, Lion of Ansteorra (Gregory Rose) *****TEXT FOLLOWS***** Unto the Populace of the Known World comes greetings from Inman, by Right of Arms, King of Ansteorra! Since the January 22, 1994 Board of Directors meeting, there has been a great deal of talk about what they did there. Much of that talk has expressed the legitimate outrage of the populace at the Board's decisions. Much of it has advanced our understanding of those decisions and how those of us who oppose them can effectively do so. Some of it has attacked Directors personally, and that is unfortunate and I wish that it would stop. I am convinced that some of the Directors made their choices in good faith. This matter has gone far beyond personalities. It is about fundamental principles. It is about differences in fundamental philosophy. The Board of Directors believes that it must manage the corporation like any other mundane corporation. They believe that the concerns of the corporation -- insurance, legal standing, legal counsel, accounting, fiscal well-being, and maintaining the standards of a modern, mundane business -- must come first. The decisions on January 22 reflect this. They may have done the best job that corporate managers can do, but they have forgotten that the corporation is not the Society. The Board was once merely our interface the mundane world. Their new corporate "professionalism" has changed this. They now believe that they must "manage" the Society like any other business. They are to be the managers, and we are to be the managed. From a strictly business perspective, this may be the wisest course. But we are not just a business. It is why I must fight them in every honorable way I know. Many ideas have been put forth as to how we might win over the Board of Directors, even the idea that we withhold monies from them until we get our way. Blackmail? Or even the threat of it? Where is the honor in that? I will not become my enemy in order to defeat him. This is not about us against the Board. The battle is inside each one of us. I am a man, not an asset, not goods or money, and I refuse to be treated as a chattel. I am not merely an entry in the corporation's debit or credit columns. My worth and the worth of the people of my kingdom cannot be measured by the bottom-line. No one has the right to judge our character by whether we are paid members or not. Mundane corporations may exist by the sale of goods and services. We are not goods, nor are our services given save by our leave. Our greatest resource is our people. Whether they contribute by work in their local groups and events or they contribute by paying money to the corporation, we still value them and appreciate their contribution. We will not turn our backs on our friends because the corporation tells us to do so. The people are precisely what makes each kingdom unique. The "legends" and the anonymous, the loud and the silent, the easy and the hard-to-bear, friends and enemies, and those who simply, quietly play their game -- all are woven into the tapestry of each realm. All are valuable. All are welcome. God bless each kingdom and its people. I will not stand by and allow this to be "managed" away. The alternative to the Board's philosophy is free choice. Are we free or are we slaves? Do we manage our own lives or do we require a manager? Are we competent or are we the Board's wards? I resist the Board's decisions because accepting tyranny and retaining self- respect are mutually exclusive. I have faith in the people of the SCA that they will make the right choices. We need rules that serve us. We will not serve the rules. The SCA, Inc. is here for us, not us for it. The coming days will show what must be done. I pray that the Board sees reason and accepts that they must put the people of the SCA first. Without us -- the people of the Society -- and what we stand for, there is a very large and empty space in the world. For the Society, and with Love and Honor, Inman Rex Ansteorrae From nordmark-request Fri Feb 25 09:09:12 1994 Received: from hplb.hpl.hp.com (hplb.hpl.hp.com [15.255.59.2]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id JAA25794 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 09:09:08 +0100 Received: from hpustoix.sweden.hp.com by hplb.hpl.hp.com; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 08:07:29 GMT Received: by hpustoix.sweden.hp.com (1.36.108.7/15.5+IOS 3.22) id AA07599; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 09:09:00 +0100 From: Morgan Broman Message-Id: <9402250809.AA07599@hpustoix.sweden.hp.com> Subject: (fwd) re:protest shirt (fwd) To: nordmark@mother.ludd.luth.se (Nordmark mailing list (SCA)), jaymin@salmon.maths.tcd.ie (Drachenwald Mailing List) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 9:09:00 MET Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25] Status: RO Path: hpscit.sc.hp.com!sdd.hp.com!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.kei.com!world!mv!stile!tinhat!meg From: meg@tinhat.stonemarche.org (meg) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: re:protest shirt Message-ID: <2DXqHc4w165w@tinhat.stonemarche.org> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 94 11:38:00 EST Organization: Stonemarche Network Co-op Lines: 22 The "I protest "Pay-to-Play" " shirt is available from Claus of Burzee...send $10.00 plus $1.00 for postage for each shirt to: Dennis Anfuso PO Box 1195 Wilton, NH 03086 sizes large and x-large are $10.00, 2x-4x are $2.00 extra. Wholesale prices for orders of 2 dozen or more=$7.00 each, 10% shipping. Allow 2 weeks for delivery. Checks or MO, foreign cashiers checks only, or visa/master card. The first printing is almost sold out, but he is printing a second batch, or as many as needed. == In the Current Middle Ages: Megan ni Laine de Belle Rive In 1994: Linda Anfuso YYY YYY meg@tinhat.stonemarche.org | YYYYY | |____n____| >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>insert pithy saying here<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< -- HP : Morgan Broman mabr@sweden.hp.com SCA : Morgan deGrey, Master of the Freehold Ravens Crag APD-I: Shade Amtgard : Morlacad ShadowHawk a.k.a Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is life, but a sequence of fragments of time put together in a random fashion, to create eternity... [R] Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nothing stated here is an official statement by the Hewlett-Packard Corp. -- HP : Morgan Broman mabr@sweden.hp.com SCA : Morgan deGrey, Master of the Freehold Ravens Crag APD-I: Shade Amtgard : Morlacad ShadowHawk a.k.a Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is life, but a sequence of fragments of time put together in a random fashion, to create eternity... [R] Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nothing stated here is an official statement by the Hewlett-Packard Corp. From nordmark-request Fri Feb 25 10:50:36 1994 Received: from hplb.hpl.hp.com (hplb.hpl.hp.com [15.255.59.2]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id KAA27383 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 10:50:32 +0100 Received: from hpustoix.sweden.hp.com by hplb.hpl.hp.com; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 09:48:52 GMT Received: by hpustoix.sweden.hp.com (1.36.108.7/15.5+IOS 3.22) id AA08230; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 10:50:19 +0100 From: Morgan Broman Message-Id: <9402250950.AA08230@hpustoix.sweden.hp.com> Subject: (fwd) Re: Light reading (fwd) To: nordmark@mother.ludd.luth.se (Nordmark mailing list (SCA)), jaymin@salmon.maths.tcd.ie (Drachenwald Mailing List) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 10:50:19 MET Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25] Status: RO Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Path: hpscit.sc.hp.com!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!gatech!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.kei.com!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu!ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu!v081lu33 From: v081lu33@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu (Ken Mondschein) Subject: Re: Light reading Message-ID: News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.50AXP Sender: v081lu33@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu (Kenneth C Mondschein) Nntp-Posting-Host: ubvmsa.cc.buffalo.edu Organization: University at Buffalo Date: Fri, 25 Feb 1994 05:08:00 GMT Lines: 27 Do you want *history* or *SCA's view of history*? For the latter, read "Nomads of Gor" and "The White Raven" and you'll be fine :) . For the former, you need to read a *whole* lot more. Vikings (Norse): Grettir's Saga, Njal's Saga Italian Rennaissance (late 15th century/early 16th): The Book of the Courtier " " (14th C.): The Decameron Elizabethan: Shakesphere Generic: The Oxford Medieval reader Tourney societies of 15th century: Le Morte de Arthur Earlier knighthood stuff: Christain de Troyes Even earlier Arthurian: History of the Kings of Britain Celts: the Mabignion 14th C. England: Canterbury Tales The Khazars: Khazarian Documents from the 10th century These are all what we call primary sources, that is, stuff written by medieval people (or excerpts thereform). My advice is to pick a time and place and start there. Then, branch out into the peoples that they had contact with-- that is, if you're a Khazar, start with that and then move into Byzantium and the Rus. From the Rus go to Iceland, etc. This gives a more together view. --Tristan -- HP : Morgan Broman mabr@sweden.hp.com SCA : Morgan deGrey, Master of the Freehold Ravens Crag APD-I: Shade Amtgard : Morlacad ShadowHawk a.k.a Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is life, but a sequence of fragments of time put together in a random fashion, to create eternity... [R] Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nothing stated here is an official statement by the Hewlett-Packard Corp. -- HP : Morgan Broman mabr@sweden.hp.com SCA : Morgan deGrey, Master of the Freehold Ravens Crag APD-I: Shade Amtgard : Morlacad ShadowHawk a.k.a Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is life, but a sequence of fragments of time put together in a random fashion, to create eternity... [R] Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nothing stated here is an official statement by the Hewlett-Packard Corp. From nordmark-request Fri Feb 25 10:52:35 1994 Received: from madonna.Kemi.UU.SE (madonna.kemi.uu.se [130.238.66.25]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id KAA27404 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 10:52:30 +0100 From: frithiof@oorgan.dnet Received: from OORGAN.DECnet MAIL11D_V3 by madonna.Kemi.UU.SE with SMTP id AA28519 (5.65c+/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Fri, 25 Feb 1994 11:00:06 +0100 Date: Fri, 25 Feb 1994 11:00:05 +0100 Message-Id: <199402251000.AA28519@madonna.Kemi.UU.SE> To: mlfrja@semil.se, era.eraaina@memo.ericsson.se, vader@csd.uu.se Cc: nordmark@ludd.luth.se, mlfrja@ml.hkv.semi, FRITHIOF@madonna.Kemi.UU.SE Subject: Fler lagkommentarer fr}n Frithiof Status: RO Hej alla, h{r {r mina kommentarer till det lagf|rslag som skickades ut till SCA-medlemmarna: Om pronomen genus: H{r tycker jag det vore p} sin plats att nyttja det f|r svenskan praktiskt taget unika _realgenus_, det vill s{ga anv{nda ordet denne i st{llet f|r han/hon. Det arkaiserade spr}ket {r charmigt, men kan nog bli sv}rt att begripa f|r en del medlemmar. Dessutom fick en lingvist i min omgivning kl}da av att l{sa det. LAGABALKEN $1. Byt ut "under tiden 600-1600" mot "under medeltiden". Alltf|r skarpa gr{nser {r on|digt, och den tidiga gr{nsen finns s} vitt jag vet inte fast- slagen n}gon annan stans. $2. Bra formulerat. $3. Ocks} bra, vill n}gon svensktalande grupp i till exempel Finland g} med m} det v{l vara h{nt. Likas} begripliga danskar och norrm{n. $4. Bra att "Constitution of the US" och "American Military Law" kom bort! $5. Enligt tillg{nglig litteratur om svensk heraldik (Dahlby: Svensk heraldisk uppslagsbok, Sparre-Lindhe: Variera heraldiska vapen mera, Raneke: Svensk medeltidsheraldik, m.fl. titlar) torde Nordmarks vapen blasoneras: P} sk|ld kluven i svart och bl}tt, en silverne sparre, och |verallt en gyllene lagerkrans. "Per pale" blir allts} "kluven" p} svenska. (Detta var en kommentar fr}n Silversparre Persevant. Nu }ter till Frithiof.) $6. Ingen tid angiven f|r tinget. Avsiktligt? H[RSKAREBALKEN $1. Okej f|r en regeringstid p} nio m}nader (jag antar att den tiden beh|vs f|r att producera arvingar? ;-). De kan ju alltid f|resl} {ndring.... > Hur kommer det sig att m}nga furstepar brinner upp p} 6 m}nader medan > baroner kan sitta i flera }r utan att d| ihj{l? Baronier {r i allm{nhet mindre {n furstend|men, oftast bara en stad eller s}. Nordmark {r groteskt stort. Har n}gon av er f|rresten sett Ragnvald p} ett event sendan Visby -92? Jag tr{ffade honom f|r ett tag sedan, och han l{t f|rst} att det nog dr|jer innan han ens b|rjar t{nka p} att komma tillbaka till SCA. Edela {r ju f|rsvunnen, men jag tr{ffade hennes syster i Torsheim sistlidna h|st, och hon vill h}lla en l}g profil tillsvidare. $2. > K{mpe {ger att s|ka vinna kronan f|r egen del, tillsammans med en > medkandidat av motsatt k|n, eller att g|ra det som f|rk{mpe f|r ett annat > par av kandidater. Inneb{r detta att man kan k{mpa f|r egen del utan medkandidat? F|rtydliga! > Ett furstepar m} ej l|na sin f|rk{mpe med furstliga utm{rkelser. Kan denne forts{tta vara deras f|rk{mpe under regeringstiden, eller {r det en utm{rkelse? $3. Vicomter och vicomtessor finns i Danmark }tminstone sedan 1500-talet. Specificera kraven f|r att bli vicomte/ssa. Vad s{gs om r{tten att utf{rda edikt, g{llande under deras regeringstid? $4&5. Standardm{ssigt, men bra. TINGSBALKEN (Ingen paragrafindelning?) Verkar enkelt nog f|r att fungera. Kanske antyda att b}de Nordmarks {mbetsm{n, och lokalgruppernas {mbetsm{n borde m|tas? D.v.s. dels Nordmarks drots, h{rold, marsk, magister, etc. och dels Nordmarks drots och h{radsdrotsarna, h{rold och h{radsh{rolder, marsk och h{radsmarskar, etc, osv, mm, in absurdum, ad nauseam.... [MBETSBALKEN $1. Borde inte konst- och hantverksministeriet sl}s ihop med vetenskapsmini- steriet? [r {mbetet s} betungande att f|rdelarna med en delning uppv{ger f|rdelarna med att samordna? On|digt att specifiera de {mbeten som kan till- s{ttas n{r s} beh|vs; kan leda till att inga andra {mbeten kommer i fr}ga. $2. Kungen!?!? Jag trodde att furstend|mets {mbetsm{n utn{mndes av fursten? $3. Bra riktlinjer. $4. Borde inte den finnas h{r n}gonstans? $5. Jaha, h{r st}r att samma person kan vara b}de konst- och vetenskaps mininster. (Borde det inte heta magister f|rresten?) Hoppsan, h{r har Kastellanen flyttats till "[mbeten vilka kunna tills{ttas eller l{mnas vakanta..." Vilket {r r{tt? Borde vara under "skall finnas", men {r kanske viktigare i lokalf|reningar d{r den direkta kontakten med nyb|rjarna finns. $4. ]h, h{r fanns den. Skall inte {mbetsm{n tills{ttas av sin n{rmaste |verordnade och drots eller kronor p} samma niv}? BEL\NINGABALKEN Inget nytt h{r, och bra s}. Frithiof Sigvardsson Sk{gge, medlem nr: 56107 (30 JUN 1994) From nordmark-request Fri Feb 25 10:58:32 1994 Received: from hplb.hpl.hp.com (hplb.hpl.hp.com [15.255.59.2]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id KAA27466 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 10:58:28 +0100 Received: from hpustoix.sweden.hp.com by hplb.hpl.hp.com; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 09:56:48 GMT Received: by hpustoix.sweden.hp.com (1.36.108.7/15.5+IOS 3.22) id AA08295; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 10:58:19 +0100 From: Morgan Broman Message-Id: <9402250958.AA08295@hpustoix.sweden.hp.com> Subject: (fwd) Imperium Compound (fwd) To: nordmark@mother.ludd.luth.se (Nordmark mailing list (SCA)), jaymin@salmon.maths.tcd.ie (Drachenwald Mailing List) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 10:58:18 MET Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25] Status: RO > Newsgroups: rec.org.sca > Path: hpscit.sc.hp.com!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.intercon.com!udel!news.sprintlink.net!direct!locksley > From: locksley@indirect.com (Joe Bethancourt) > Subject: Imperium Compound > Sender: news@news.direct.net (Internet Direct News) > Organization: Internet Direct Inc (602)274-0100 > Date: Thu, 24 Feb 1994 17:35:26 GMT > X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] > Message-ID: > Lines: 39 > > Here's a few verses and alternate choruses that might be useful..... > > Now here's a story, a little bit gory, > A little bit happy, a little bit sad. > About a drink called Imperium Compound > And how the SCA's been had! > > AltChorus: Oh we fink, we fink, we fink, > The Khan and the Kink, the Kink, the Kink, > And the Board, their Great Senilities! > The Western Irgun, drinks Imperium Compound > And we're BACK, with results you'll see! > > The Board of Directors styled themselves The Electors > And another con they tried to swing > Now the BoD drinks Imperium Compound > So we no longer need a King! > > AltChorus: Oh the Bod, the BoD, the BoD, > It thinks it is God, is God, is God, > The figure of Supreme Authority! > And if we O.D.'d on Imperium Compund > there'd be no need for Royalty! > > Oh, on the InterNet, we thought it was all wet > With witty remarks, and other kinds of sass > We'll feed our computers on Imperium Compound > And BYTE the BoD right on its' righteous ass! > > > > > -- > locksley@indirect.com PO Box 35190 Locksley Plot Systems > White Tree Productions Phoenix, AZ 85069 USA CyberMongol Ltd > "Do not ascribe your own motivations to others: > at best it will break your heart, at worst, get you dead." > > -- > HP : Morgan Broman mabr@sweden.hp.com > SCA : Morgan deGrey, Master of the Freehold Ravens Crag > APD-I: Shade > Amtgard : Morlacad ShadowHawk a.k.a Shade > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > What is life, but a sequence of fragments of time put > together in a random fashion, to create eternity... > > [R] Shade > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Nothing stated here is an official statement by the Hewlett-Packard Corp. > -- HP : Morgan Broman mabr@sweden.hp.com SCA : Morgan deGrey, Master of the Freehold Ravens Crag APD-I: Shade Amtgard : Morlacad ShadowHawk a.k.a Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is life, but a sequence of fragments of time put together in a random fashion, to create eternity... [R] Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nothing stated here is an official statement by the Hewlett-Packard Corp. From nordmark-request Fri Feb 25 16:27:46 1994 Received: from world.celsiustech.se (world.celsiustech.se [139.58.1.3]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA01705 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 16:27:44 +0100 Received: from localhost (leeu@localhost) by world.celsiustech.se (8.6.4/8.6.4) id QAA16992 for nordmark@ludd.luth.se; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 16:27:38 +0100 From: Leif Euren Message-Id: <199402251527.QAA16992@world.celsiustech.se> Subject: Kommentarer till lagf|rslaget To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se (Nordmark Mailing List (Prath|gen)) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 16:27:36 MET DST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL11] Status: RO Hej alla p} Prath|gen. Pierre ici! H{r kommer mina kommentarer till lagf|rslaget ============================================================================ > LAGABALKEN > 1. Om Nordmarks plats i v{rlden Jag f|rst}r vad man f|rs|ker s{ga. Men jag tycker att eftersom SCA's regler (Corpora) redan talar om v}rt syfte, beh|vs det inte n{mnas h{r. Kanske ska man h{nvisa dit? > 4. Om lagar : > Ej kan n}gon r|sta genom ombud. Jag tycker att man }tminstone ska kunna r|sta genom brev. Det g}r, eftersom fr}gorna m}ste vara k{nda och uts{nda i f|rv{g. > Lag b|rjar g{lla n{r den varit skriven och uts{nd i bladen "The Dragon's > Tale" och "Silversparren" samt utropats vid ett furstligt hov. N}gra har tyckt att man inte ska skriva tidningarna namn i lagen. Men det tycker jag. Ingen av dem kommer att byta namn inom |versk}dlig framtid, och den enda m|jlighet jag ser n{r detta m}ste {ndras, {r n{r Nordmark blir eget kungarike. Och d} m}ste vi i alla fall skriva en ny lag. > 6. Om furstend|mets evenemang Jag tycker vi ska ta bort 47:e-dagsafton och Majgrevetornering och Visby Medeltidsvecka som Nordmarksevenemang, och bara beh}lla Ting, Korntornering, Investitur och F|rk{mpetornering (ev. ocks} Krigsherre-tornering). Det {r sv}rt nog som det {r idag att f} n}gon att h}lla Tinget, och ska vi d{rut|ver h}lla evenemang f|r fursteparet, s} kommer ingen att orka g|ra fler evenemang f|r Nordmark. Man h}ller hellre evenemang efter egna ideer! Se {ven min kommentar till "Om hur furstar utses". > H{rskarebalken > > 1. Om regenterna : > I Nordmark regera furstepar uti nio m}nader. Vart tog f|rslaget om variabel regeringsl{ngd v{gen? I och f|r sig var det jag som f|rst kom med f|rslaget om nio m}nader, men mitt huvudsakliga argument f|r detta var att man d} skulle slippa ha evenemanget vid samma }rstid }r efter }r; n}got som jag upplever som v{ldigt trist med Drachenwalds mostvarande ordning. Ska vi ha en l{ngre regerings-period {n nio m}nader, s} f|resl}r jag 11, 13 eller 15 m}nader. Men inte ett }r! > 2. Om hur furstar utses Man kan h}lla Investituren p} samma evenemang som Torneringen. S} g|rs i ett flertal kungariken, och {r inget konstigt eller unikt. (Jag ska ta fram statistik till Tinget!) Ett s}dant f|rfarande f}r {ven till f|ljd (tror jag) att de som st{ller upp i torneringen t{nker sig f|r lite extra innan de best{mmersig, eftersom de inte f}r n}gon ink|rningsperiod, vilket g|r att vi slipper de v{rsta r|t{ggen. Dessutom kan vi strunta i alla lagar f|r tronf|ljare. Styckena om f|rk{mpe var kanske en aning kn|ligt formulerade, men samtidigt utan kryph}l (mycket bra). Kanske f}r man ta den ol{genheten f|r att f} en lag som ingen kan missbruka. > 3. Fursteparets skyldigheter och r{ttigheter : > 4. Tronf|ljarnas skyldigheter och r{ttigheter : > 1. Tronf|ljarna hava f|ljande skyldigheter: : > Under tiden mellan krontornering och investitur skola de skaffa > ers{ttare till de {mbeten de hava och som de m}ste avst} under sin > regeringstid. Om f|rslaget med investitur vid samma tillf{lle som torneringen tas, m}ste denna punkt t{ckas p} n}got annat st{lle. > [mbetsbalken : > 3. Om {mbetsm{nnens skyldigheter F|r kungariken i SCA g{ller numera att drots, skattm{stare och kr|nik|r m}ste bo var f|r sig, eftersom det i SCA 'worldwide' visat sig att vid alla de tillf{llen pengar f|rsvunnit ur ett kungarikes kassa, har s} inte varit fallet. Kanske n}got f|r oss att ta efter (redan nu). > 5. [mbetsbeskrivningar : > Konst- och hantverksminister, Vetenskapsminister, Konst- och > vetenskapsminister : > Konst- och hantverksministern : > Vetenskapsministern Lite r|rigt, men vad g|r man... > Skattm{stare [ven drotsen b|r kunna teckna konto i SCA's namn. Men kanske ska vi ha det i en separat f|renings-stadga? > 2. [mbeten, vilka kunna tills{ttas eller l{mnas vakanta allt efter > furstend|mets behov: > > Kastellan > Historiker > Fogde > B}gskyttekapten > Pr{ntare > F{ktmarsk > Universitetskansler M}ste vi lagstifta om alla dessa? Kan vi inte ha dem {nd}? Vissa av ovanst}ende {mbetsm{n g|r idag ett utomordentligt viktigt jobb, och g|r det v{l, men vi har ingen pr{ntare, och det fungerar {nd}. D{remot har vi en "inofficiell" universitets-kansler, och det fungerar ocks}. N}ja, det {r i alla fall bra att ha {mbetsbeskrivningarna samlade. > Bel|ningabalken Jag s}g helst att v}ra gamla utm{rkelser fr}n baroniet Nordmark st{ngdes, och att nya skapades f|r furstend|met Nordmark. Men jag tror inte jag har s} m}nga med mig i den s}'n }sikt. ============================================================================ Dessutom f|rutsp}r jag ett livat Ting... Skugga och friska kameler }t er alla! /Peder (i egenskap av SCA-medlem, och inget annat) From nordmark-request Fri Feb 25 18:33:47 1994 Received: from sunic.sunet.se (sunic.sunet.se [192.36.125.2]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA03732 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 18:33:46 +0100 Received: from hjds90.hj.se by sunic.sunet.se (8.6.4/2.03) id SAA29063; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 18:33:42 +0100 Received: by hjds90.hj.se (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.38) id ; Fri, 25 Feb 94 18:33 MET Received: from TRISSE/M_QUEUE by trisse.hj.se (Mercury 1.11); Fri, 25 Feb 94 18:35:12 GMT+100 Received: from M_QUEUE by TRISSE (Mercury 1.11); Fri, 25 Feb 94 18:34:59 GMT+100 From: Organization: H”gskolan i J”nk”ping To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se Date: Fri, 25 Feb 1994 18:34:56 MET+1 Subject: Re: Kommentarer till lagf|rslaget Priority: normal X-mailer: PMail v3.0 (R1) Message-ID: <2DE3E955EE@trisse.hj.se> Status: RO Hej hopp! Padde h„r. Bara en liten kommentar... > > Bel|ningabalken > > Jag s}g helst att v}ra gamla utm{rkelser fr}n baroniet Nordmark st{ngdes, > och att nya skapades f|r furstend|met Nordmark. Men jag tror inte jag har > s} m}nga med mig i den s}'n }sikt. Jomen, jag h†ller med. Jag vet dessutom att m†nga andra g”r det ocks†. Hur blir det egentligen med bel”ningarna ??? Om man f†tt exempelvis en ljusorden innan vi blir furstend”me, hur ser man p† den efter†t ??? F”r att undvika detta borde man instifta helt nya ordnar. > Skugga och friska kameler }t er alla! Potatis och gr„sl”k †t folket! > /Peder (i egenskap av SCA-medlem, och inget annat) Padraig / Anders "It was a night, oh what a night, LA burning bright, oh what a night" - Shock to the system Billy Idol From nordmark-request Fri Feb 25 19:26:22 1994 Received: from columba.udac.uu.se (columba.UDAC.UU.SE [130.238.4.133]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id TAA04387 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 1994 19:26:21 +0100 From: Lennart.Ryman@nordiska.uu.se Received: from strix.UDAC.UU.SE by columba.udac.uu.se with SMTP id AA19894 (5.67b8/IDA-1.4.4 for nordmark@ludd.luth.se); Fri, 25 Feb 1994 19:26:18 +0100 Received: from [130.238.158.17] by strix.udac.uu.se with SMTP id AA01859 (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 25 Feb 1994 19:31:32 +0100 Message-Id: <199402251831.AA01859@strix.udac.uu.se> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 1994 18:27:59 +0100 To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se X-Sender: nordlr@strix.udac.uu.se X-Charset: LATIN1 X-Char-Esc: 29 Status: RO Hej! H{r f|ljer n}gra spridda synpunkter. SPR]KET Spr}ket b|r vara korrekt nutida svenska. Lagen {r knappast en del av den k{nda v{rlden och kommer aldrig att ge n}gon en k{nsla av medeltid hur man {n g|r. ]tskilliga moderna f|reteelser som waivers, auktoriseringskort, prenumeration, medlemskap och officiella dokument behandlas. Varje f|rs|k att f|rena dessa f|reteelser med ett "}lderdomligt" spr}k leder till l|jev{ckande stilbrytningar. Pronomenet "han" syftande p} b}da k|nen {r bra. LAGABALKEN #1. Om det h{r {r t{nkt f|r utsocknes s} {r spr}ket en katastrof. Inneh}llet bra. #4. Det {r m|jligen rimligt att fursteparet har vetor{tt, men f|rst efter diskussion. De b|r inte kunna hindra att ett f|rslag f|rs upp p} dagordningen. [MBETSBALKEN Skall det beh|vas en lag{ndring f|r att tills{tta ett {mbete som inte har f|rutsetts i lagen? BEL\NINGAR Det {r v{l helst personer som {r outtr|ttliga. Stryk ordet! M}ste g{rningar komma alla till gagn f|r att de skall vara bra nog? [r f|rfinad karakt{r det man fr{mst associerar med k{mpar? V{lj g{rna en karakt{rsbeskrivning som f|r tanken till medeltida dygder och inte till 1700-tal. Vad {r dr|mmen och vad {r den bra f|r? Annars har jag tills vidare svalt f|rslaget. Tinget b|r enligt min }sikt ta st|rre h{nsyn till argumentens b{rkraft {n till hur m}nga som skriftligen har framf|rt en viss }sikt. From nordmark-request Sat Feb 26 01:11:31 1994 Received: from meryl.csd.uu.se (meryl.csd.uu.se [130.238.11.31]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id BAA08651 for ; Sat, 26 Feb 1994 01:11:30 +0100 Received: by meryl.csd.uu.se id AA06551 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4 for nordmark@ludd.luth.se); Sat, 26 Feb 1994 01:11:26 +0100 Date: Sat, 26 Feb 1994 01:11:26 +0100 Message-Id: <199402260011.AA06551@meryl.csd.uu.se> To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se Subject: kommentera kommentanten From: Sender: vader@csd.uu.se X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Status: RO William h{r. N}gra kommentarer till Kaetilmunds kommentarer: >Spr}ket b|r vara korrekt nutida svenska. Lagen {r knappast en del av den >k{nda v{rlden och kommer aldrig att ge n}gon en k{nsla av medeltid hur man >{n g|r. Det var en grundtanke i laggruppens arbete att lagen *ska* vara en del av den k{nda v{rlden. Lagar fanns ju som bekant p} medeltiden, och {r n}got som kan skapa st{mning och }terspegla den anda vi efterstr{var. En modernt skriven lag l}ter bara byr}kratisk och lockar inte till l{sning. Det var d{rf|r vi f|rs|kte ge den en gammaldags spr}kdr{kt. Vi har f|rs|kt skilja ut moderna f|reteelser ur den, och meningen {r att de ska h{nf|ras till SCA-Nordmarks STADGA som {r t{nkt att bli en helt vanlig demokratisk f|reningsstadga. Laggruppen {r mycket medveten om att spr}ket i lagen inte {r perfekt eller helt genomarbetat. Vi hade dock r{knat med att detta skulle inspirera folk till att hj{lpa oss, inte att man skulle ta det till int{kt f|r att f|rkasta hela iden med en "landskapslags-h{rmande" spr}kdr{kt. >]tskilliga moderna f|reteelser som waivers, auktoriseringskort, >prenumeration, medlemskap och officiella dokument behandlas. Varje f|rs|k >att f|rena dessa f|reteelser med ett "}lderdomligt" spr}k leder till >l|jev{ckande stilbrytningar. Medh}ll om iakttagelsen, inte om slutsatsen. Jag skulle helst vilja se att spr}kkunniga Nordmarkare sl}r sina kloka huvuden ihop och uppfinner formuleringar som st{mmer in med resten av texten. H{r {r n}gra f|rslag: waiver riskhandling, farogillande, fribrev auktoriseringskort k{mpebrev prenumeration k|peavtal (g{lda) medlemskap (g{lda) avg{ld, lega, bodpenning officiellt dokument laga urkund En annan tanke {r att vi kanske inte har varit tillr{ckligt str{nga n{r det g{ller att rensa ut mundana ting. Eventuellt kunde beskriv- ningarna av {mbetsm{nnens plikter l{ggas i stadgan i st{llet f|r i lagen. D} bleve vi av med waivers och auktoriseringskort, i alla fall. >Skall det beh|vas en lag{ndring f|r att tills{tta ett {mbete som inte har >f|rutsetts i lagen? Tja, Nordmark har funnits i 10 }r utan att vi har beh|vt n}got {mbete ut|ver de som r{knas upp h{r. Jag har sv}rt att t{nka mig en situation d{r vi pl|tsligt f}r ett br}dskande behov av ett helt nytt {mbete, som inte kan v{nta till n{sta Ting. >Det {r v{l helst personer som {r outtr|ttliga. Stryk ordet! >M}ste g{rningar komma alla till gagn f|r att de skall vara bra nog? >[r f|rfinad karakt{r det man fr{mst associerar med k{mpar? V{lj >g{rna en karakt{rsbeskrivning som f|r tanken till medeltida dygder >och inte till 1700-tal. Texterna som beskriver ordnarna {r praktiskt taget exakt tagna fr}n ordnarnas egna dokument, som jag f|rmodar {r skrivna av baron Erik. Det var en stark |nskan fr}n honom att f} med beskrivningarna. Personligen skulle jag helst se att de h|lls mycket kortare, t.ex. "Vita Portens V{ktare. Gives f|r d}d och skicklighet i stridens konst." >Vad {r dr|mmen och vad {r den bra f|r? Fr}ga Baronparet, det var de som instiftade DrO. William From nordmark-request Sat Feb 26 13:36:38 1994 Received: from meryl.csd.uu.se (meryl.csd.uu.se [130.238.11.31]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id NAA15317 for ; Sat, 26 Feb 1994 13:36:37 +0100 Received: by meryl.csd.uu.se id AA10406 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4 for nordmark@ludd.luth.se); Sat, 26 Feb 1994 13:36:34 +0100 Date: Sat, 26 Feb 1994 13:36:34 +0100 Message-Id: <199402261236.AA10406@meryl.csd.uu.se> To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se Subject: mera kokokommmentarer From: Sender: vader@csd.uu.se X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Status: RO William h{lsar er alla. Kommentarer till Padraigs kommentarer: >Anv{nd "medeltiden" eller "tiden innan 1600-talet med tonvikt p} >medeltiden" eller liknande ist{llet f|r 600-1600. Okej. "Medeltiden och ren{ssansen" borde v{l kunna duga? >Varf|r inte g|ra en officiell |vers{ttning av SCA's regler till >Svenska? {ven om inte resurser kan avdelas nu, s} {r det v{l ganska >dumt att inte l{mna m|jligheten |ppen i framtiden. Paragrafen {r fr{mst deskriptiv, inte normativ. Laggruppen ville p}peka att det finns andra regler som g{ller parallellt med v}r egen lag, och som man ocks} m}ste ta h{nsyn till, och att dessa {r p} engelska. Som en ren service kan man f|rst}s g|ra en |vers{ttning av de engelska reglerna, men sist och slutligen kan en s}dan aldrig bli "officiell" eftersom det {r den engelska versionens om G[LLER precis som den svenska versionen av Nordmarks lag g{ller i Nordmark, oavsett vad som st}r i en engelsk |vers{ttning. >Man borde kunna r|sta i enskilda fr}gor via ombud eller }tminstonde >via bevittnade skriftliga brev. Denna synpunkt har kommit fr}n fler, och det blir nog s} gissar jag. >Varf|r skall bara fursteparet ha r{tt att f|resl} {ndringar i >lagen??? Redan detta att Tinget har r{tt att best{mma om lagen, inneb{r ett kraftigt avsteg fr}n SCAs traditioner, d{r fursteparet p} m}nga st{llen stiftar lagar helt env{ldigt, p} andra st{llen stiftar env{ldigt efter att ha pratat med ett "r}d" (curia). Best{mmelsen {r till f|r att bevara n}got lite av den verkliga makt som de flesta furstepar i SCA har. Vem som helst kan f|resl} {ndringar i lagen! Till fursteparet allts}. Sedan {r det de som best{mmer om f|rslaget ska l{ggas inf|r Tinget. I praktiken betyder det att fursteparet har vetor{tt, fast p} ett snyggare s{tt. >[ger fursteparet r{tt att neka n}gon att deltaga i krontorneringen? Oops. Det har vi gl|mt att ta upp. >...s} borde d{r v{l {ven st} att man m}ste skriftligen skicka en >ans|kan till fursten. Har jag fel, eller {r det lite f|rvirrat? Alla ska skicka ett brev, st}r i H{rskarebalken paragraf 2, stycke 2. >Vad inneb{r furstefrid??? Det m}ste nog f|rtydligas, ety i alla fall >jag fann mig helt off-side. Okej, det kan vi g|ra. Det {r ett omr}de runt dignit{rer, inom vilket man inte f}r komma utan till}telse. Detta f|r att h{rskarna inte ska bli helt |verlupna av folk vid evenemangen. >Citat paragraf 4 "Minst en av tronf|ljarna skall n{rvara vad vart >Ting som h}lls.". Oj, det h{r blev {nnu konstigare. Inneb{r det att >n}gon m}ste g} p} Ting i all evighet, allts} efter regeringstiden {r >slut sedan l{nge, eller tas det f|r givet att det bara g{ller s} >l{nge de {r tronf|ljare? N{r ens regeringstid b|rjar, {r man inte l{ngre tronf|ljare, och p}verkas d{rf|r inte l{ngre av denna paragraf. >Paragraf 5, stycke 4: Varf|r m}ste man h}lla ny krontornering om >n}gon av tronf|ljarna bortfaller. Man {gde ju r{tten att sj{lv >f|rs|ka vinna kronan, och d} var det ju OK att regera ensam. D{rf|r att det st}r i Corpora att furstend|men ska styras av ett furstepar. Vid bortfall under regeringstiden {r det knappast meningsfullt att }tg{rda detta p} studs, eftersom regeringstiderna {nd} {r r{tt korta. H{nder det f|re regeringstiden finns dock tid att reparera skadan. >Hur allvarligt {r kravet p} att tronf|ljare och furstepar skall >n{rvara vid Ting ??? Vad h{nder om de inte skulle kunna dyka upp, >eller helt enkelt struntar i det? Borde inte det framg} av lagen? Tja, vad h{nder om man inte lyder lagen? T{nkbara p}f|ljder {r att man blir bannlyst fr}n furstens/kungens n{rvaro, utsatt f|r en Court of Chivalry, inte erh}ller Vicomte-titeln, inte erh}ller Patent of Arms, osv. S} l{nge vi inte m{rker att folk f|rs|ker smita fr}n sina plikter tycker jag vi kan utg} fr}n att en eventuell fr}nvaro beror p} force majeure, och mot s}dan hj{lper inga straff. >[ven tronf|ljarna b|r r}dfr}gas om l{mplig tid och plats f|r tinget, >ety de f|rv{ntas n{rvara. V{l sk}dat. >Borde inte f{ltsk{ren ha r{tt att st{lla krav f|r sitt {mbetes skull >vid exempelvis k{mpalekar (krav p} vatten, f|rsta f|rband etc.). Menar du att f{ltsk{ren kunde kr{va att n}gon annan ska fixa fram vatten och f|rband? Vem, i s} fall? Jag tycker att man m|jligen kan l{gga in en uppmaning i autokrathandboken, att autokraten ska hj{lpa f{ltsk{ren med t ex att skaffa vatten. F|rbandsl}dan tycker jag att det {r f{ltsk{rens sak att ta med. >Varf|r skall f{ktmarsken f|lja marskens anvisningar ??? >Ren{ssansf{ktningen {r en i princip helt frist}ende del som marksen >har f|ga aff{rer med. The Marshal of the Society ansvarar f|r n{rvarande f|r ALL stridskonst och allt b}gskytte. Detta {r antagligen vettigt p} korporations-niv}n d{r man vill h}lla nere antalet {mbetsm{n till ett absolut minimum. B}de b}gskytte och ren{ssansf{ktning {r s} pass sm} aktiviteter att man inte haft behov av s{rskilda {mbetsm{n f|r dem. Tyv{rr har det blivit s} att kungad|men och mindre grupper utformat sina {mbeten i analogi med korporationens, och d{rf|r lagt b}gskytte och f{ktning under marsk{mbetet. Det finns m|jligen en vettig tanke i att en enda person i varje grupp ytterst {r ansvarig f|r alla k{mpa-aktiviteter, med tanke p} att de inneb{r vissa s{rskilda risker och kr{ver auktorisering. Att b}gskyttekaptenen skulle vara underst{lld marsken tycker jag {r ren hj{rnbl|dning, eftersom aktiviteterna {r helt separata. *Strids- b}gskyttet* {r en k{mpa-aktivitet som b|r h|ra under marsk{mbetet. B}gskyttekaptenen har ingen anledning att l{gga sig i det, annat {n som r}dgivare. Han b|r {gna sig }t historiskt b}gskytte, som {r n}got helt annat. William From nordmark-request Sat Feb 26 19:56:54 1994 Received: from sunic.sunet.se (sunic.sunet.se [192.36.125.2]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA19588 for ; Sat, 26 Feb 1994 19:56:53 +0100 Received: from hjds90.hj.se by sunic.sunet.se (8.6.4/2.03) id TAA21359; Sat, 26 Feb 1994 19:56:47 +0100 Received: by hjds90.hj.se (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.38) id ; Sat, 26 Feb 94 19:56 MET Received: from TRISSE/M_QUEUE by trisse.hj.se (Mercury 1.11); Sat, 26 Feb 94 19:58:19 GMT+100 Received: from M_QUEUE by TRISSE (Mercury 1.11); Sat, 26 Feb 94 19:58:02 GMT+100 From: "Padraig / Anders" Organization: H”gskolan i J”nk”ping To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se Date: Sat, 26 Feb 1994 19:57:54 MET+1 Subject: Re: mera kokokommmentarer Priority: normal X-mailer: PMail v3.0 (R1) Message-ID: <4746FD5E01@trisse.hj.se> Status: RO Padraig h„lsar varenda liten kotte! Kommentarer till Williams kommentarer om mina kommentarer... :) > William >> Padraig >>Varf|r skall bara fursteparet ha r{tt att f|resl} {ndringar i >>lagen??? > > Redan detta att Tinget har r{tt att best{mma om lagen, inneb{r > ett kraftigt avsteg fr}n SCAs traditioner, d{r fursteparet p} m}nga > st{llen stiftar lagar helt env{ldigt, p} andra st{llen stiftar > env{ldigt efter att ha pratat med ett "r}d" (curia). Best{mmelsen > {r till f|r att bevara n}got lite av den verkliga makt som de flesta > furstepar i SCA har. Hrmm, problemet ligger i att jag inte tycker att de skall ha den makten. Alla kronor, oavsett om det „r baroner, kungar eller vad det nu m† vara, borde ur ren inflytandesynpunkt vara likv„rdiga alla andra i f”reningen. De skall h„rska i v†r medeltida v„rld, utdela ordnar, f”rgylla dr”mmen, etc. Deras auktoritet skall h„rstamma fr†n gott rollspel kombinerat med hj„lp ifr†n alla andra vad g„ller upptr„dande gentemot dem. Bara f”r att ta ett exempel: v†r k„re ex- baron Ragnvald har s†vitt jag vet aldrig n†gonsin haft s† mycket mer „n n†gon annan att s„ga till om, och inte heller f”rs”kt skaffa sig den f”rm†nen. Likv„l tror jag att ingen k„nner att han varit en mindre "v„rdig" eller "auktorit„r" baron. Han passade som handen i handsken utan n†gon egentlig makt. P† v†ra evenemang, i rollen som baron, kunde han ta beslut som han behagade. Man m†ste nog h†lla is„r de h„r tv† sakerna tror jag. Det h„r „r en lek vi ger oss in i, och d† accepterar vi att vi har personer som leker just kr”nta h„rskare. N„r vi mellan evenemangen f”rs”ker f† f”reningen att fungera s† leker vi inte. Vi jobbar f”r att alla skall kunna ha roligt. Som jag ser det s† har furstetiteln f”ga med det h„r att g”ra egentligen. Det „r en helt annan aspekt av f”reningen. > Vem som helst kan f|resl} {ndringar i lagen! Till fursteparet > allts}. Sedan {r det de som best{mmer om f|rslaget ska l{ggas inf|r > Tinget. I praktiken betyder det att fursteparet har vetor{tt, fast > p} ett snyggare s{tt. F”rvisso, men det „r fortfarande upp till fursteparet om de vill s„tta sitt namn p† f”rslaget. Jag kan inte sl„ppa tanken p† att n†gon l„mnar ett bra f”rslag som fursteparet av n†gon anledning inte tycker om, och d„rf”r inte f”r det vidare. Det k„nns s† on”digt och bortkastat. Sl”seri med resurser helt enkelt. >> Vad inneb{r furstefrid??? Det m}ste nog f|rtydligas, ety i alla >> fall jag fann mig helt off-side. > > Okej, det kan vi g|ra. Det {r ett omr}de runt dignit{rer, inom vilket > man inte f}r komma utan till}telse. Detta f|r att h{rskarna inte ska > bli helt |verlupna av folk vid evenemangen. Intressant, men blir det inte lite konstigt??? Skall man alltid fr†ga om lov innan man „ntrar omr†det eller hur „r det t„nkt att fungera ? Det k„nns som om det skulle bli lite konstigt vid ett event om man inte riktigt vet om man kan framtr„da. Men, det l”ser sig s„kert... >> Paragraf 5, stycke 4: Varf|r m}ste man h}lla ny krontornering om >> n}gon av tronf|ljarna bortfaller. Man {gde ju r{tten att sj{lv >> f|rs|ka vinna kronan, och d} var det ju OK att regera ensam. > > D{rf|r att det st}r i Corpora att furstend|men ska styras av > ett furstepar. Vid bortfall under regeringstiden {r det knappast > meningsfullt att }tg{rda detta p} studs, eftersom regeringstiderna > {nd} {r r{tt korta. H{nder det f|re regeringstiden finns dock tid > att reparera skadan. M†ste man allts† ha en partner „ven om man _sj„lv_ s”ker vinna kronan? Vad „r i s†dana fall skillnaden mot att f”rs”ka vinna den tillsammans med en partner av motsatta k”net? Žr det att b†da sl†ss, eller? Jag f”rst†r inte riktigt... Jag tolkade det som att en ensam person kunde ta tronen i besitning helt ensam. Borde det formuleras om, eller har jag makaroner i huvudet :) >> Borde inte f{ltsk{ren ha r{tt att st{lla krav f|r sitt {mbetes >> skull vid exempelvis k{mpalekar (krav p} vatten, f|rsta f|rband >> etc.). > > Menar du att f{ltsk{ren kunde kr{va att n}gon annan ska fixa fram > vatten och f|rband? Vem, i s} fall? Jag tycker att man m|jligen kan > l{gga in en uppmaning i autokrathandboken, att autokraten ska hj{lpa > f{ltsk{ren med t ex att skaffa vatten. F|rbandsl}dan tycker jag att > det {r f{ltsk{rens sak att ta med. Nja, som det „r nu s† †ligger det de respektive h„rf”rarna i ett krig att fixa marskar, och ibland „ven vattenb„rare etc. men alla dessa best„mmelser ligger p† marsken, s† vitt jag vet. Det vore bra om man var _tvungen_ att ha en ansvarig f„ltsk„r p† plats, f”r enligt SCA's lagar beh”vs inte det. Jag skulle personligen _aldrig_ dr”mma om att vara sl†ssokrat om det inte fanns en ansvarig f„ltsk„r och tillr„ckligt med utbildat folk p† plats. Som ansvarig f„ltsk„r s† b”r man d† kunna st„lla krav p† att det skall finnas vatten i r„tt m„ngder p† r„tt st„llen. Det „r givetvis i slut„ndan upp till k„parna om de vill ha n†gra k„mpalekar, f”r d† g”r man b„st i att lyda :) Det blir s„kert inga bekymmer, i Nordmark har vi v„l mer folk „n n†gon annanstans som st„ller upp. Dessutom vore det bra om en f„ltsk„r f†r den officiella r„tten att ta bort allt f”r tr”tta och utm„rglade k„mpar, ist„llet f”r att som nu beh”va g† via marsken, som vid _alla_ evenemang „nd† s„ger "Jaha, nu lyder ni f„ltsk„rarna, annars f†r ni med oss att g”ra". Det skulle inte beh”vas om f„ltsk„rarna fick den befogenheten redan fr†n b”rjan. Jag f”resl†r en formulering i stil med "Har r„tten att utf„rda till„ggsregler och best„melser vid k„mpalekar, samt r„tten att borttaga deltagare fr†n k„mpalekar n„r s† „r n”dv„ndigt f”r dennes eller andras h„lsa.". > Att b}gskyttekaptenen skulle vara underst{lld marsken tycker jag {r > ren hj{rnbl|dning, eftersom aktiviteterna {r helt separata. *Strids- > b}gskyttet* {r en k{mpa-aktivitet som b|r h|ra under marsk{mbetet. > B}gskyttekaptenen har ingen anledning att l{gga sig i det, annat {n > som r}dgivare. Han b|r {gna sig }t historiskt b}gskytte, som {r > n}got helt annat. Ahh, precis vad jag menade. Jag ber ”dmjukast om urs„kt om jag skrev b†gskyttekaptenen. Vad jag menade var givetvis den person som agerar som marsk f”r stridsb†gskyttar. Tja, det var v„l allt. Med h„nsyn till de andra kommentarer som har inkommit p† lagen s† tror jag att det blir fin-fint. Lagf”rslagsgruppen har min djupaste respekt f”r sitt arbete. > William Padraig / Anders "It was a night, oh what a night, L.A. burnin' bright, oh what a night" - Shock to the system Billy Idol From nordmark-request Sat Feb 26 21:19:41 1994 Received: from meryl.csd.uu.se (meryl.csd.uu.se [130.238.11.31]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id VAA20974 for ; Sat, 26 Feb 1994 21:19:40 +0100 Received: by meryl.csd.uu.se id AA15467 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4 for nordmark@ludd.luth.se); Sat, 26 Feb 1994 21:19:30 +0100 Date: Sat, 26 Feb 1994 21:19:30 +0100 Message-Id: <199402262019.AA15467@meryl.csd.uu.se> To: D91-NOA@trisse.hj.se Cc: nordmark@ludd.luth.se In-Reply-To: "Padraig / Anders"'s message of Sat, 26 Feb 1994 19:57:54 MET+1 <4746FD5E01@trisse.hj.se> Subject: mera kokokommmentarer From: Sender: vader@csd.uu.se X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Status: RO William hackar p}! Padde skrev: >M_ste man allts_ ha en partner _ven om man _sj_lv_ s_ker vinna >kronan? Vad _r i s_dana fall skillnaden mot att f_rs_ka vinna den >tillsammans med en partner av motsatta k_net? _r det att b_da sl_ss, >eller? Jag f_rst_r inte riktigt... Jag tolkade det som att en ensam >person kunde ta tronen i besitning helt ensam. Borde det formuleras >om, eller har jag makaroner i huvudet :) Det finns tv} s{tt att vara med i en krontornering: antingen som nu, dvs att man sl}ss f|r sin egen tillt{nkta medregent -- eller som f|rk{mpe f|r ett annat par av regenter. I inget fall kan n}gon vinna kronan enbart f|r sig sj{lv. "F|r egen del, tillsammans med en medkandidat av motsatt k|n", {r allts} en beskrivning av nuvarande regler. Dina kommentarer om f{ltsk{rens uppgifter {r intressanta. F}r jag be dig att komma till tinget och redog|ra f|r exakt vilka befogen- heter du anser att f{ltsk{ren ska ha? Det kan vara ett bra till{gg till den paragrafen. William From nordmark-request Sat Feb 26 21:36:39 1994 Received: from sunic.sunet.se (sunic.sunet.se [192.36.125.2]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA21189 for ; Sat, 26 Feb 1994 21:36:38 +0100 Received: from hjds90.hj.se by sunic.sunet.se (8.6.4/2.03) id VAA02620; Sat, 26 Feb 1994 21:36:40 +0100 Received: by hjds90.hj.se (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.38) id ; Sat, 26 Feb 94 21:36 MET Received: from TRISSE/M_QUEUE by trisse.hj.se (Mercury 1.11); Sat, 26 Feb 94 21:38:12 GMT+100 Received: from M_QUEUE by TRISSE (Mercury 1.11); Sat, 26 Feb 94 21:37:49 GMT+100 From: "Padraig / Anders" Organization: H”gskolan i J”nk”ping To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se Date: Sat, 26 Feb 1994 21:37:44 MET+1 Subject: Re: mera kokokommmentarer Priority: normal X-mailer: PMail v3.0 (R1) Message-ID: <48F0C036F9@trisse.hj.se> Status: RO > William hackar p}! Vem g”r inte det... William skrev: > Det finns tv} s{tt att vara med i en krontornering: antingen som nu, > dvs att man sl}ss f|r sin egen tillt{nkta medregent -- eller som > f|rk{mpe f|r ett annat par av regenter. I inget fall kan n}gon > vinna kronan enbart f|r sig sj{lv. "F|r egen del, tillsammans med > en medkandidat av motsatt k|n", {r allts} en beskrivning av nuvarande > regler. Aha! En rej„l feltolkning av mig. Nu har jag inte lagf”rslaget framf”r mig, men n„r du citerar det s† l†ter det logiskt. Skall det verkligen vara ett kommatecken mellan del och tillsammans ??? Det m†ste vara det som jag misstolkade som om det vore tv† alternativ n„r det egentligen var ett. Bara en tanke... > Dina kommentarer om f{ltsk{rens uppgifter {r intressanta. F}r jag > be dig att komma till tinget och redog|ra f|r exakt vilka befogen- > heter du anser att f{ltsk{ren ska ha? Det kan vara ett bra till{gg > till den paragrafen. Oops! Jag „r dessv„rre redan upptagen den helgen, ety jag skall iv„g och spela levande rollspel (skr„ck, 1920-talsmilj” :). Dock skall jag fundera ”ver det och skicka med n†gon form av dokumentation med v†r k„re drots Jean-Pierre de Sac. Det hela b”r ju i vilket fall som helst diskuteras. Nordmarks f„ltsk„r och marsk har s„kerligen †sikter de ocks†... > William Ha det! Padraig / Anders "It was a night, oh what a night, L.A. burnin' bright, oh what a night" - Shock to the system Billy Idol From nordmark-request Mon Feb 28 14:11:02 1994 Received: from decnet.sunet.se (decnet.sunet.se [192.36.125.5]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id OAA16348 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 1994 14:11:01 +0100 From: bronia@na.sunet.se Received: from NA.DECnet MAIL11D_V3 by decnet.sunet.se (5.57/2.01) id AA22638; Mon, 28 Feb 94 14:10:47 +0100 Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 14:10:46 +0100 Message-Id: <9402281310.AA22638@decnet.sunet.se> To: "Nordmark@ludd.luth.se"@kth.sunet.se Subject: Lagf}rslaget Status: RO Hejsan allihopa! Bronia p] prath}gen. Jag t|nkte bara g}ra ett mycket litet inl|gg i debatten om lagf}rslaget. Jag tycker att Padde har r|tt i fr]ga om fursteparets makt, dvs att deras faktiska makt ska minimeras s] mycketsom m}jligt. Detta bl.a f}r att kronorna ska g}ras s] lite ]tr]v|rda som m}jligt. D|rigenom kanske vi slipper en del av det allvar, tjafs och skitsnack som har varit s] dominerande vid de tv] krontorneringar som hittills h]llits i Drachen- wald. Som jag ser det s] ska fursteparet bara vara galjonsfigurer i v]r medeltida teaterlek. Sj|lvklart ska de ha r|tt att besluta om sm]saker vid evenemang (som Ragnvald gjorde), men i st}rre fr]gor om t.ex lagen och annat som p]verkar alla medlemmar i Nordmark b}r de inte ha st}rre inflytande |n vanliga medlemmar. Kort och koncist! Vi ses p] tinget! H|lsningar fr]n Bronia From nordmark-request Mon Feb 28 14:40:41 1994 Received: from hplb.hpl.hp.com (hplb.hpl.hp.com [15.255.59.2]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id OAA16775 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 1994 14:40:35 +0100 Received: from hpustoix.sweden.hp.com by hplb.hpl.hp.com; Mon, 28 Feb 1994 13:38:37 GMT Received: by hpustoix.sweden.hp.com (1.36.108.7/15.5+IOS 3.22) id AA12560; Mon, 28 Feb 1994 14:39:00 +0100 From: Morgan Broman Message-Id: <9402281339.AA12560@hpustoix.sweden.hp.com> Subject: Re: Lagf}rslaget To: bronia@na.sunet.se Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 14:38:59 MET Cc: nordmark@mother.ludd.luth.se (Nordmark mailing list (SCA)) In-Reply-To: <9402281310.AA22638@decnet.sunet.se>; from "bronia@na.sunet.se" at Feb 28, 94 2:10 pm Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25] Status: RO > Bronia p] prath}gen. > > Jag t|nkte bara g}ra ett mycket litet inl|gg i debatten om lagf}rslaget. > Jag tycker att Padde har r|tt i fr]ga om fursteparets makt, dvs att > deras faktiska makt ska minimeras s] mycketsom m}jligt. Detta bl.a f}r > att kronorna ska g}ras s] lite ]tr]v|rda som m}jligt. D|rigenom kanske > vi slipper en del av det allvar, tjafs och skitsnack som har varit s] > dominerande vid de tv] krontorneringar som hittills h]llits i Drachen- > wald. Ibland blir man raett besviken paa folk...suck. Vad aer det foer vits att haalla paa med att foersoeka aaterskapa en tidsperiod om vi helt struntar i hur det fungerade. Eller aer vi bara en uppsaettning konstiga maenniskor i konstiga klaeder, som vilket teatersaellskap som helst...?? Naer skall folk laera sig att skilja paa lek och verklighet. Den feodala strukturen aer en lek. Ingen "krona" i den Kaenda Vaerlden ger dig naagra som helst foerdelar i det mundana livet. Det ger dig en posi- tion inom leken !!! Anledningen till att det blir tjafs beror oftast paa att de som aer ansvariga inte vaagar ta sitt ansvar och fatta beslut. Det har inte med systemet utan med personerna att goera. Hade inte Vanna tagit tag i sakerna paa siste Krontornerinen saa vet jag inte hur det hade slutat. > Som jag ser det s] ska fursteparet bara vara galjonsfigurer i v]r > medeltida teaterlek. Sj|lvklart ska de ha r|tt att besluta om sm]saker > vid evenemang (som Ragnvald gjorde), men i st}rre fr]gor om t.ex lagen > och annat som p]verkar alla medlemmar i Nordmark b}r de inte ha st}rre > inflytande |n vanliga medlemmar. Ja och nej. Jag anser att det skall finnas en balans mellan den furstliga makten och den folkliga. Det foerslag som Laggruppen kommit ut med aer en intressant och bra loesning. Taenk paa att Fursteparen kommer att bytas ut regelbundet, saa gaar det inte med ett par faar man vael foer- soeka med naesta. Om flera furstepar i rad tycker att foerslaget aer ej oenskvaert saa kanske det kan vara sant...;) ! Om fursteparen goers till enbart galjonsfigurer saa har vi skapat en tom och vaerdeloes institution....saa varfoer bry oss ? At the Ting !!! Morgan// Helt mundant...;) -- HP : Morgan Broman mabr@sweden.hp.com SCA : Morgan deGrey, Master of the Freehold Ravens Crag APD-I: Shade Amtgard : Morlacad ShadowHawk a.k.a Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is life, but a sequence of fragments of time put together in a random fashion, to create eternity... [R] Shade ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nothing stated here is an official statement by the Hewlett-Packard Corp. From nordmark-request Mon Feb 28 16:41:25 1994 Received: from world.celsiustech.se (world.celsiustech.se [139.58.1.3]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA18404 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 1994 16:41:24 +0100 Received: from localhost (leeu@localhost) by world.celsiustech.se (8.6.4/8.6.4) id QAA29219 for nordmark@ludd.luth.se; Mon, 28 Feb 1994 16:41:19 +0100 From: Leif Euren Message-Id: <199402281541.QAA29219@world.celsiustech.se> Subject: Tinget... Kommer det n}gon dit? To: nordmark@ludd.luth.se (Nordmark Mailing List (Prath|gen)) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 16:41:18 MET DST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL11] Status: RO Autokraterna f|r Nordmarks 3:e Ting b|rjar undra om det |verhuvudtaget kommer n}gra dit. Hitills har inte en enda riktig anm{lan flutit in. Visserligen fick vi en frist till senast 2 dagar f|re Tinget, men varf|r m}ste vi j{mt g|ra autokraternas liv s} sv}rt. G|r inte som vanligt: anm{l dig redan nu! Till: Autokrat: Laurentius Staffan Andersson 018-46 16 72 Flogstav{gen 53 C 752 63 UPPSALA sa@skinner.fysik.uu.se Matansvarig: Vanna Kristina Rudbjer 018-46 26 27 ****************************************** ** ** ** OCH SPRID DETTA TILL ANDRA, OCKS]! ** ** ** ****************************************** -- p} uppdrag av autokraterna Peder Klingrode | Leif Euren Stockholm, Sweden Holmrike, Nordmark, Drachenwald | leeu@celsiustech.se From nordmark-request Tue Mar 1 00:28:45 1994 Received: from bronze.lcs.mit.edu (BRONZE.LCS.MIT.EDU [18.30.0.254]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id AAA24849 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 1994 00:28:26 +0100 Received: by bronze.lcs.mit.edu id AA05642; Mon, 28 Feb 94 18:22:48 EST Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 18:22:48 EST From: greg@bronze.lcs.mit.edu (Greg Rose) Message-Id: <9402282322.AA05642@bronze.lcs.mit.edu> To: NORTH@bransle.ucs.mun.ca, antir@kwantlen.bc.ca, calontir@unl.edu, carolingia@bloom-beacon.mit.edu, e5@uriacc.uri.edu, jaymin@maths.tcd.ie, lgrant@lanczos.maths.tcd.ie, nordmark@ludd.luth.se, northshield@stolaf.edu, sca-reform@mit.edu, sca-west@ecst.csuchico.edu, scahrlds@pucc.princeton.edu Subject: Maybe the Horse Will Sing Status: RO MAYBE THE HORSE WILL SING: A REMONSTRANCE TO THE MESSAGE OF THEIR MAJESTIES OF THE MIDREALM BY BARON HOSSEIN ALI QOMI, LION OF ANSTEORRA There is sometimes great truth in stories... Once upon a time a group of malefactors who had been convicted of capital crimes was brought before the King of France for sentencing. Among them was a troubadour. As sentence was about to be pronounced, the troubadour begged the King for a reprieve, saying that if the King should grant him but a year before passing sentence, in that year he would teach the King's horse to sing. The King was much intrigued by this and agreed that, if the troubadour would teach the royal horse to sing within the span of a year, he would grant him full pardon. As the reprieved troubadour awaited his escort to the royal stables, another prisoner asked him how he could promise to do such a thing, which no man could do? The troubadour smiled and replied, "A year is a very long time. In a year, the horse may die. Or the King may die. Or I may die. Or the horse may sing..." With all respect to the Midrealm Crown, I fear that the meat of their message is this: we hope to teach the corporate horse to sing. I pray that their reasoning is not so cynical as that of the troubadour, but, like the condemned prisoner, I must ask: how do you promise to do such a thing, which no man yet has shown the slightest evidence he can do? The missive of Their Majesties of the Midrealm is long, but honor requires response to its most salient points. I beg your indulgence. Their Majesties of the Middle Kingdom write: >Many of the Gentles of Our Realm have questioned why We could not >sign either the Estrella Compact nor The Proclamation generated from >the many meetings at Estrella X. We could not in good faith sign the >Estrella Compact because there is no guarantee that these Kingdoms, >if they become truly separate entities from the SCA, will continue to >play a consistent game with the Laurel Kingdoms, and therefore, We >will not join this pact that could compromise Ourselves and Our >Heirs.... > >At a glance the document seems to be beautifully worded and focuses >on unification of the Kingdoms of the Known World, but it effectively >binds the Crown of the Middle Kingdom to recognize and encourage any >Kingdoms which might in the future secede from the SCA - >essentially "taking their ball and going home". We do not support >such drastic measures and did not wish to bind ourselves or lend >tacit approval of any such future action. If they wish to be >recognized by the Laurel Kingdoms of the SCA then they need to play >the same game with the same rules. I did not realize that the Middle Crown had so confused our game with medieval ecclesiology. By their telling, our game is a sacrament which can only be conveyed by hands which have received ordination from the BoD. All others are heretics. All others are anathema. Shades of Boniface VIII? The claim to homogeneity which Their Majesties make was untrue even before January 22. To be sure, we share commonalities, but is the game played in the East the same as the game played in the Outlands? Are the rules of the Midrealm the same as the rules of the West? I think not. What exists is a veneer of common culture and a great deal of kingdom variation in which two things are most important: a respect for the differences between kingdoms and a commitment to play the game we love together, despite those differences. The Middle Crown has rejected this. They plainly say: bow to the Board, or we will not play with you. They tell the Known World that the Middle Crown knows better than any other Crown the needs of the populace of the Known World. If other kingdoms come to believe that the Board's lack of accountability and responsiveness to the populace is so grave a danger that it threatens our Society, then they will do what they must. This is not a matter of petulant children "taking their ball home." Do Their Majesties of the Middle truly believe that the rest of us are so childish? If the matter comes to secession, it will be because mature adults have found tyranny intolerable, and because they have found that the corporation has struck at the heart of the Society. The Middle Crown believes that the corporation and the Society are one. No, more than this, that the corporation alone determines who is a member of our Society. The greatest contribution of the united Crowns at Estrella was to make clear, once and for all, that the corporation and the Society are not the same thing. They believe that the corporation exists to serve the Society, not the Society to serve the corporation. In the Estrella Compact they committed themselves to always preserving our Society, regardless of what may happen with the corporation. They did so because they love the game we play and the people who play it. The Compact was a gesture of love and respect for the Known World. It breaks my heart that the Crown of the Middle Kingdom could not bring itself to make that gesture. Many of us remember the acrimony when the MSR split from the East Realm. Yet, the Crown of the East recognizes Acre by treaty, and its ranks and titles, and encourages it subjects to play with Acre and Acre with them. So also is Markland recognized. Are we to think the Crown of the East more generous and openhearted than the Middle, most especially when the current cause cuts so deeply to the core of our Society? Perhaps the King and Queen of the Middle have forgotten themselves. Their Majesties of the Middle continue: >We also had issue with and therefore could not sign the second >document that was drafted by a majority of the crowns and was >presented to the members if the Board of Directors present at >Estrella.... >Although We are committed to encouraging greater participation from >the Kingdoms and their people on the Corporate Level, and increased >communication and representation between the Board and the Kingdoms >they govern, We felt that The Proclamation generated at Estrella's >Council of the Kings was inappropriate and could not affix our >signatures to it for the following reasons: > >1. The overall tone of the proclamation was very "Royal" - or to be >more precise - dictatorial and inflammatory. It left no room for the >Board to make a graceful withdrawal. (We would like to note that it >also left the undersigned Crowns in the same position.) It was >definitely not in keeping with the ideals that are the very >foundation of Our society - those being courtesy and chivalry. The >"meetings" seemed more like a steam-rolling session than a channel >for discourse. HRM Boru of Meridies pointed out that the tactics >used by the Council of the Crowns exhibited the same behavior as that >chosen by the Board that many of the populous perceived as >inappropriate. Ultimately, we did not approve of the issuing of >ultimatums when communication and cooperation could have been >attempted. I find it odd that the Crown of the Midrealm equates "royal" with "dictatorial and inflammatory." I fear that Their Majesties leave important information from their missive. In the weeks before Estrella the Crowns made every effort to persuade the Board to make a graceful withdrawal. I know this directly from every Crown who signed the Ultimatum. I was physically present when HRM Inman begged Duke Randall that the Board should make the gesture of admitting that they had acted in haste, rescinding the January 22 policies, and soliciting the help of the advisory membership to meet the financial crisis which the Board claimed was the basis of their decisions. Others, not Royals, similarly beseeched the Board to back down, or even to provide enough information to make their decisions palatable. All were met with a stone wall. The Crowns did not come to the Ultimatum in place of appeals to the Board, but rather because those appeals were met with stony silence. Attempts by the Royals, indeed attempts by much of the Known World, to communicate with the Board were met with a singular lack of cooperation by the Board. If the Crown of the Midrealm did not hear this in the Royal Council at Estrella, it is because they deafened their ears to it. How is it unchivalrous or discourteous to demand redress from those who have turned aside softer words? Are Midrealm knights unchivalrous when they swear to defend the weak even by force of arms? Are Midrealm peers discourteous when they demand their rights? By the Middle Crown's reading of courtesy, they owe an apology to Michael of Boarshaven. I cannot believe that they mean to say this. Or does the Middle Crown believe that chivalry and courtesy demand that we meekly ask "how high?" when our corporate bosses tell us to jump? I was present at the Royal Council at Estrella. There was calm, reasoned discussion among the Crowns and solemn deliberation of their options. There was no steam-rolling of anyone. I beg the Crowns to release publicly the transcript of their deliberations to show this slander for what it is. The Midrealm and Meridien Crowns have far more credibility to lose from full disclosure than any other Crowns there present. Their Majesties continue: >2. The Proclamation opens with the statement "Whereas the Board of >Directors of the SCA, Inc. enacted on January twenty-second, Nineteen >ninety four changes to the governing documents of the corporation and >society with out appropriate consultation with the advisory members >of the corporation as stated in Corpora IIIb1..." This is not >true. The Board deemed the situation to be exceptional and requiring >immediate emergency action - certainly not the "normal >circumstances" that are affected by this law. Law IIIb1: "Under >normal circumstances the Board will publicize proposed changes to the >Society's Governing Documents in sufficient time to allow comment >from the membership before making a final determination." We could >not sign such an erroneous charge. The fact that the Board says it is so does not make it so. We have good evidence that the Board knew about the "professionalization" changes it was imposing on the corporation, and their cost, for at least a year and a half before the January meeting. Viscount Edward Zifran of Gendy and Duke Visivald have both reported that Board members discussed the pay-to- play proposal privately with them long before the Board took action. There was no emergency, and I cannot fathom why the Middle Crown has chosen to ignore this evidence. >3. WE have to admit that we found it very ironic that the Crowns who >signed The Proclamation basically accused the board of not following >Corpora and are now demanding the Board to not only ignore Corpora >IIIb1, but to do a major re-write of the By-laws within one month >with out time to appropriately poll the membership etc. (Adding >Ombudsmen is generally NOT an emergency sort of decision and should >be researched thoroughly.) The other Crowns came to Estrella with great piles of letters and petitions from their subjects demanding that they be represented and that be Board be made accountable. Perhaps, having made up their minds beforehand, the Midrealm Crown did not feel it necessary to do what the other Crowns had done: ask their subjects. They have said nothing about what their subjects told them before the meeting. Still, even if they had consulted, it is absurd to hold the rest of the Known World hostage to the preferences of the Midrealm. This is a dog that won't hunt. Their Majesties write: >5. The Proclamation requires that each Kingdom pledge that it will >support financially through the raising of funds the added expense >of increasing the numbers of the Board of Directors. We could not >guarantee such funding - for to do so would violate Our kingdom law >3-802 which states: "Monies exceeding the amount of One Hundred >Dollars ($100) shall not be disbursed from Middle Kingdom funds with >out the assent of a Quorum of the Curia Regis." The only thing that >the Crowns could promise was that they would personally cover the >difference out of their own pockets. Note: this could not be binding >on future Reigns. Only the Kingdom could guarantee continued coverage >of those costs - but only after appropriate consultation and quorum >assent. We would like to note that many of the other Kingdoms have >similar laws that were ignored. The Ultimatum says nothing of the sort. It committed the Crowns of the kingdoms _not yet represented_ to raise the funds _each for its own representative_. The Midrealm is currently represented by Tim Moran. It entailed no Midrealm expense whatsoever. This dog, too, will not hunt. >6. The Proclamation did not address the major issues that most upset >the members of Our Kingdom - one being how the "pay to play" >decision would affect student groups and newly formed shires in our >Kingdom. Nor did it address any decentralization of SCA functions to >the level where there are ready volunteers. Perhaps Their Majesties did not attend the same meeting as the other Crowns (I could have sworn they were there). The united Crowns agreed that the fundamental problem, of which the January 22 policies were only symptoms, was lack of accountability and representation. As the explanatory statement of the signatory Crowns makes clear, they believed that corporate reform was necessary to make addressing the substantive issues of January 22 possible. This was discussed at length in the meeting. Furthermore, there was a lengthy discussion by several Crowns in the meeting of precisely the need for decentralization and the firm belief that resolution of the accountability and representation issues had come to before decentralization was possible. Was the Middle Crown not listening? >7. It is possible to infer from the wording of The Proclamation, its >tone, and the tenor of the meeting that some of the promoters could >have been motivated by self-interest rather than any desire to work >to solve the SCA's problems. This Document leant itself only too well >to unspoken, but recognized, personal agendas on the parts of many >(not all) of the Crowns involved. Behind such pretty words the filthy innuendo lurks. Name names, I pray, if you have the ballocks for it. You call some of your Cousins liars and manipulators -- how else can one read the snide words about "personal agendas" -- which ones? Or do you mean for the slur to touch them all by implication, your parenthetical demurral notwithstanding? The physical stature of Midrealm kings has grown since the first, but in moral stature you are dwarfed by those who have come before you. You say that to demand redress from the Board is unchivalrous and discourteous. I say that to write what you have written here is to show that you do not know the meaning of the words! Their Majesties write: >9. We are satisfied that the current Board of Directors acted in good >faith for the betterment of the Society. The consensus of Middle >Kingdom gentles is that the decisions were not as offensive as the >presentation thereof, and the majors areas of concern centered about >the ramifications of the implementations strategies. Note: members of >the Board have admitted that they could have better handled the >communication and they have taken due notice for future reference. We >would like to point out that they purposely left the implementation >open so that the options could be explored and suggested by the >populous at large. Unfortunately, this was not communicated clearly, >but We believe the decisions were made out of honest concern for the >Society. I am mistaken. Their Majesties of the Middle do not believe that the corporate horse will sing. They believe that it sings already and they are mesmerized by its dulcet tones. I offer The Majesties the example of history, from the _Anglo-Saxon Chronicle_, _anno_ 1011: All those disasters befell us through bad policy, in that they were never offered tribute in time nor fought against; but when they had done most to our injury, peace and truce were made with them; and for all this truce and tribute they journeyed none the less in bands everywhere, and harried our wretched people, and plundered and killed them. The king of whom the Chronicle speaks was called "Unraed." It is a pity that the Middle Crown takes on the role of Ethelred and shuns the role of Alfred. Their Majesties write: >11. One of Our most major objections to The Proclamation is the >appointment of a director for his home Kingdom by the Crown of that >Kingdom. This director would easily be a political tool or pawn to >the current Crown. What would stop each Crown from installing their >cohorts to further their own personal crusade? Would the Director >change with every reign? Or worse, would the Crown Tournaments be >blood-baths for the Reigns that would determine the appointment of >new directors? It not only politicizes the Board, but the Crown as >well. The Board would not be accountable to the Crown but would be >controlled by it. In the words of a wise former Kingdom Seneschal, >this document really empowers the Crowns "... to replace the entire >Board with puppets they can manipulate into doing exactly what they >want." When the Ombudsman for a Kingdom becomes a political tool, the >general membership is disenfranchised from open input, no matter how >much the current Crowns may claim to listen. Another danger of having >each Crown chose its own ombudsman lies in the settling of >Inter-kingdom disputes. Any decision requiring unanimous action can >itself become a political bargaining chip - "I'll vote yes on moving >Pennsic if you vote 'No' on this Banishment appeal, etc." This is not >representation - it poor politics. The united Crowns made clear, in their discussion at Estrella and in their statements since, that unilateral Royal appointment was a one-time expedient to obtain quick action. They stated that they were committed to full and appropriate consultation of the populace and selection of Board members in accordance with the laws, traditions, and customs of each realm. The Crown of the Middle hangs trustingly on the Board's every word, but they treat their Royal Cousins as craven manipulators, liars, and knaves. Their "most major objection" is beneath contempt. Their Majesties write: >As a result of Our Meeting-of-the-minds between the Middle Kingdom >Royalty, the Meridian Royalty, and two Directors [A.J. Riviezzo and L. >Jane Richards] mentioned above, We have developed the following >proposals for the Board to consider when implementing the changes that >they determined at the ill-fated B.O.D. meeting on 1/22/94. > >Recognizing that the need for pay-to-play was generated as much by a >need for legal protection as by a need for funds We propose the >following: Apparently Their Majesties' trusted advisor, Mr. Riviezzo, has been speaking out of both sides of his mouth. The Midrealm Crown he tells that pay-to-play was adopted as much for legal protection as for financial exigency. The populace of Caer Galen he tells that pay-to-play was solely a result of financial exigency. He cannot tell a lie? He cannot tell the truth? Or, perhaps, he cannot tell the difference? >Require Pay-to-play at any event which requires a site fee or >participation fee for admittance. This releases the local or student >meetings from conforming to this requirement. Demos would likewise >be exempt, as would fighting practices and guild meetings. Why? The Board has presented no reasoned argument or evidence for such a requirement. When asked for details of the financial crisis which they claim brought the policy about, they say that they cannot tell us. When asked about legal ramifications, they say that non-members are all potential slanderers. The Board's own letter says both, and both are non-answers. Why should we give the Board what it wants if it will not explain why? >Offer Memberships-for-the-day for a small fee ($5 ?) complete with >waivers to sign - which are sent directly to the corporation. The >money would help to defray the costs of the increased administration >for these gentles, and the waivers could be kept on file for the >required year and a day in the event that any lawsuit might erupt >involving someone who was a one-day member. In this way, all >participants at an event are in-effect members, which meets the aim >of the proposal of the Board and the legal advisors. This membership >for a day would work much the same way as a hand stamp at a bar. >Participants that do not wish to sign up for permanent yearly >memberships for whatever reasons could continue to pay the surcharge >and become temporary members for those events which they chose to >participate in. This could happen as often as 365 times a year - or >as rarely as once or twice.... Again, why? The onus to explain the original change is still on the Board. They have stonewalled every effort to obtain answers. Why are we discussing implementation when more than 80% of the advisory membership think the policy is a bad idea? Perhaps Their Majesties of the Middle have confused compromise with surrender. >To address Our Kingdom's concerns with accountability and board >representation, the following proposal was brought before the two >board members. The Board should be restructured into a two-tiered >entity consisting of an Executive Board and an Advisory Board. The >Executive Board would be made up of the current Board members and >would focus on the modern aspects of running a Corporation >(By-Laws). The Advisory Board would concern themselves with he >Medieval aspect of Our organization (Corpora) and would be composed >of representatives from each of the 13 Kingdoms who could address any >situation in which the actions of the Board might not reflect the >views or culture of the Kingdom. A (3/4?) majority of Kingdom >representatives could have the power to overturn a board action. >This system would allow for checks and balances. For example, if an >Ombudsman is not representing a Kingdom position the Kingdom >Representative could speak up to refute the misrepresentation. And, >if a Kingdom representative is being unduly influenced by personal >Kingdom politics, the Ombudsman would address this. The largest >advantage of this proposal is that it works within the current >system. It does not require sweeping change and it achieves the good >aspects of many plans We have heard. It de-politicizes the role of >both the Board and the Crown. The united Crowns proposed a representative Board with a member from each kingdom. A simple, elegant solution to the problems of accountability and representation. The Crown of the Middle proposes an elaborate, two-tiered system in which kingdom representatives might get the right to veto some Board actions. It expands the number of people at Board meetings from a maximum of seven to twenty (and what was that nonsense they said about maximum efficient size -- consistency is not a high priority when expediency is calling the tune). What does this proposal buy us? More expense, another layer of bureaucracy. And, then, the Middle Crown cuts the guts from its own proposal: >We realize that this plan would involve higher expenses to support >the panel of 13 advisors - however, if the Kingdoms felt they could >support the increased Board size as stated on The Proclamation, >perhaps this would be no worse burden. If a Kingdom agrees with >this proposal, the Advisory Board Representative could participate >in as many or as few actual meetings as the Crown and Curia felt >appropriate - with the proper approval from the Curia for any >reimbursements, depending upon the Kingdom's budget and willingness >to financially support or augment this position. I'm certain the Board would prefer that none of the proposed "advisors" show up. Just how high a price is the Middle Crown prepared to pay to keep the current Board in power? >We discussed some tangible perks for associate as well as sustaining >members: > > An option to join the health Insurance coverage as provided to > the SCA, Inc. employees now. > Access to a Society Charge Card which would donate a percentage > of its proceeds to the Society whenever it is used. > Access to a SCA travel agent who could help to secure > discount rooms and help with major travel plans. Just as a matter of curiosity, are we the SCA or the AARP? What on earth does this have to do with our stated purpose as an organization? Or is this merely more confusion stirred into an already bubbling pot? Their Majesties continue with a long and rambling, often elliptical, report of their meeting with Riviezzo and Richards. They concluded this report with the admonition that no individual Board member could speak for the Board and that all that was said in the meeting was speculation. I treat the report of their private dalliance with individual Board members as the meaningless private conversation it was. If the Board has concrete proposals, let it tell the Known World openly. Their Majesties conclude: >This endeth Our Official Opinion on the matter of The Estrella >Compact, The Proclamation and the Implementation Strategies discussed >at Estrella X. We remain dedicated to service to the Society, the >Middle Kingdom and the People that reside Therein. Signed this 24th >day of February, Anno Societatus XXVIII. > >Jafar, REX Catherine, Regina The united Crowns openly offered the hand of friendship to the Crown of the Middle at Estrella. They turned it aside. The united Crowns invited the Crown of the Middle to join them in demanding accountability and representation on the Board. They refused, preferring to listen in secret to what some Board members are prepared to tell them but not the rest of us and to revile Their Royal Cousins as liars and manipulators with "private agendas." Before this, I have never been so ashamed for a King and Queen in my life. Hossein Ali Qomi Baron, Lion of Ansteorra From nordmark-request Tue Mar 1 07:03:18 1994 Received: from nic.stolaf.edu (root@nic.stolaf.edu [130.71.128.8]) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with ESMTP id HAA29921 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 1994 07:03:12 +0100 Received: from inga1.acc.stolaf.edu (waltner@inga1.acc.stolaf.edu [130.71.208.24]) by nic.stolaf.edu (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA27606; Mon, 28 Feb 1994 23:59:05 -0600 From: Wallace J Waltner Received: by inga1.acc.stolaf.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11610; Mon, 28 Feb 94 23:59:02 CST Message-Id: <9403010559.AA11610@inga1.acc.stolaf.edu> Subject: Re: Maybe the Horse Will Sing To: greg@bronze.lcs.mit.edu (Greg Rose) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 23:59:02 -0600 (CST) Cc: NORTH@bransle.ucs.mun.ca, antir@kwantlen.bc.ca, calontir@unl.edu, carolingia@bloom-beacon.mit.edu, e5@uriacc.uri.edu, jaymin@maths.tcd.ie, lgrant@lanczos.maths.tcd.ie, nordmark@ludd.luth.se, northshield@stolaf.edu, sca-reform@mit.edu, sca-west@ecst.csuchico.edu, scahrlds@pucc.princeton.edu In-Reply-To: <9402282322.AA05642@bronze.lcs.mit.edu> from "Greg Rose" at Feb 28, 94 06:22:48 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 17648 Status: RO Unto the collective electronic populace of the Known World does Wilhelm Dichtermann, archivist of the Northshield mailing list, send greetings. I am quickly getting to the point where words cannot describe the violent wash of emotions I am feeling about this whole Board Crisis. Even so, I must set those emotions aside and attempt to respond to His Excellency Hossein's treatise on the Midrealm Crown. His Excellency writes: >With all respect to the Midrealm Crown, I fear that the meat of their >message is this: we hope to teach the corporate horse to sing. I pray >that their reasoning is not so cynical as that of the troubadour, but, >like the condemned prisoner, I must ask: how do you promise to do such a >thing, which no man yet has shown the slightest evidence he can do? Firstly, your words show no respect to the Midrealm Crown. You take every opportunity to belittle them, in fact. You claim to hold honor and chivalry above all, and yet you verbally attack my King and Queen because they hope a peaceable solution to this whole mess is still possible? >The missive of Their Majesties of the Midrealm is long, but honor requires >response to its most salient points. I beg your indulgence. [Text of Jafar and Catherine's statement deleted] >I did not realize that the Middle Crown had so confused our game with >medieval ecclesiology. By their telling, our game is a sacrament >which can only be conveyed by hands which have received ordination >from the BoD. All others are heretics. All others are anathema. >Shades of Boniface VIII? You are twisting the words of Their Majesties to compliment your viewpoint, Hossein. If Ansteorra were to secede from the SCA, you would, according to the Estrella Compact, recognize us, but would you play with us? Probably not. Eventually, our "game" would become so different that we couldn't play together. This is what we so much want to avoid. By the way, who is Boniface VIII, and why do you use him in analogy? >The claim to homogeneity which Their Majesties make was untrue even >before January 22. To be sure, we share commonalities, but is the >game played in the East the same as the game played in the Outlands? >Are the rules of the Midrealm the same as the rules of the West? >I think not. What exists is a veneer of common culture and a great >deal of kingdom variation in which two things are most important: >a respect for the differences between kingdoms and a commitment to >play the game we love together, despite those differences. You amplify our differences while belittling our similarities. Yes, we have differences, but we have many more commonalities than you are willing to admit. We need those similarities in order for inter-kingdom play to occur. Because we all share a common bond in SCA, when there are differences, we can say "You play it your way, and we'll play it our way. When we get together, we'll figure out a compromise." Without that common bond, those compromises will dwindle away into nothingness. >The Middle Crown has rejected this. They plainly say: bow to the >Board, or we will not play with you. They tell the Known World that >the Middle Crown knows better than any other Crown the needs of >the populace of the Known World. If other kingdoms come to believe >that the Board's lack of accountability and responsiveness >to the populace is so grave a danger that it threatens our Society, >then they will do what they must. This is not a matter of petulant >children "taking their ball home." Do Their Majesties of the Middle >truly believe that the rest of us are so childish? If the matter >comes to secession, it will be because mature adults have found >tyranny intolerable, and because they have found that the corporation >has struck at the heart of the Society. Now you put words in Their Majesties' mouths. All Their Majesties want, the way I interpret their words, is that there are other options to consider before we turn into a collective lynch mob. Your words are coming dangerously close to a cliche I detest more than any other; "If you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem." >The Middle Crown believes that the corporation and the Society are >one. No, more than this, that the corporation alone determines who >is a member of our Society. >The greatest contribution of the united Crowns at Estrella was to make >clear, once and for all, that the corporation and the Society are not the >same thing. They believe that the corporation exists to serve the >Society, not the Society to serve the corporation. In the Estrella >Compact they committed themselves to always preserving our Society, >regardless of what may happen with the corporation. They did so >because they love the game we play and the people who play it. The >Compact was a gesture of love and respect for the Known World. It >breaks my heart that the Crown of the Middle Kingdom could not bring >itself to make that gesture. Neither the Corporation nor the Society exist to serve the other: both are interdependent. Without one, the other crumbles. I agree that the Corporation needs fixing, but you don't fix a broken finger by cutting it off at the shoulder. Sooner or later, you're gonna wish you had your arm back. >Many of us remember the acrimony when the MSR split from the East >Realm. Yet, the Crown of the East recognizes Acre by treaty, and its >ranks and titles, and encourages it subjects to play with Acre and >Acre with them. So also is Markland recognized. Are we to think >the Crown of the East more generous and openhearted than the Middle, >most especially when the current cause cuts so deeply to the core >of our Society? Perhaps the King and Queen of the Middle have >forgotten themselves. I'm sorry, but I neither understand this nor see what relevance it has to the argument. All it appears to do is provide more opportunity for crown-bashing. >Their Majesties of the Middle continue: [Again, text of Jafar and Catherine's statement deleted] >I find it odd that the Crown of the Midrealm equates "royal" with >"dictatorial and inflammatory." >I fear that Their Majesties leave important information from their >missive. In the weeks before Estrella the Crowns made every >effort to persuade the Board to make a graceful withdrawal. I >know this directly from every Crown who signed the Ultimatum. I >was physically present when HRM Inman begged Duke Randall that the >Board should make the gesture of admitting that they had acted in >haste, rescinding the January 22 policies, and soliciting the help >of the advisory membership to meet the financial crisis which the >Board claimed was the basis of their decisions. Others, not Royals, >similarly beseeched the Board to back down, or even to provide >enough information to make their decisions palatable. All were met >with a stone wall. The Crowns did not come to the Ultimatum in place >of appeals to the Board, but rather because those appeals were met >with stony silence. Attempts by the Royals, indeed attempts by much >of the Known World, to communicate with the Board were met with a >singular lack of cooperation by the Board. If the Crown of the >Midrealm did not hear this in the Royal Council at Estrella, it is >because they deafened their ears to it. >How is it unchivalrous or discourteous to demand redress from those who >have turned aside softer words? Are Midrealm knights unchivalrous when >they swear to defend the weak even by force of arms? Are Midrealm peers >discourteous when they demand their rights? By the Middle Crown's >reading of courtesy, they owe an apology to Michael of Boarshaven. I >cannot believe that they mean to say this. Or does the Middle Crown >believe that chivalry and courtesy demand that we meekly ask "how high?" >when our corporate bosses tell us to jump? >I was present at the Royal Council at Estrella. There was calm, >reasoned discussion among the Crowns and solemn deliberation of their >options. There was no steam-rolling of anyone. I beg the Crowns to >release publicly the transcript of their deliberations to show this >slander for what it is. The Midrealm and Meridien Crowns have far more >credibility to lose from full disclosure than any other Crowns there >present. I hope they do. And of course said transcript will come with your slanted commentary, I trust. [More of Jafar and Catherine's statement deleted] >The fact that the Board says it is so does not make it so. We have good >evidence that the Board knew about the "professionalization" changes it >was imposing on the corporation, and their cost, for at least a year and >a half before the January meeting. Viscount Edward Zifran of Gendy and >Duke Visivald have both reported that Board members discussed the pay-to- >play proposal privately with them long before the Board took action. >There was no emergency, and I cannot fathom why the Middle Crown has >chosen to ignore this evidence. Unfortunately, in this case, the fact that the Board says it is so does make it so. That's what they're there for. That's how this whole mess started; the Board spent themselves into a corner, creating an emergency, and now call upon us to bail them out. The Board did not break Corpora, but they did use it to their advantage. Making legally shaky accusations doesn't help anything. [Point #3 deleted] >The other Crowns came to Estrella with great piles of letters and >petitions from their subjects demanding that they be represented and that >be Board be made accountable. Perhaps, having made up their minds >beforehand, the Midrealm Crown did not feel it necessary to do what the >>other Crowns had done: ask their subjects. They have said nothing about >what their subjects told them before the meeting. Still, even if they >had consulted, it is absurd to hold the rest of the Known World hostage >to the preferences of the Midrealm. This is a dog that won't hunt. It's absurd to think that the Midrealm *could* hold the rest of the Known World hostage. And yes, we did speak out. But you know as well as I that the Midrealm is one of the largest kingdoms in the Known World. You try canvassing a Kingdom that streches from Winnepeg, Manitoba, Canada to Lexington, Kentucky and from Rapid City, South Dakota to Youngstown, Ohio and see how fast it takes you. And even if you can do it fairly quickly, can you be confident that the opinions you have are a fair sampling? Simply put, Their Majesties are waiting for a consensus. Which brings me to another point. You skipped Point #4 in Jafar and Catherine's statement. Let me refesh your memory: >4. Middle Kingdom Law 2 -101 requires that any change to Kingdom law >must first be addressed before the Curia Regis for their counsel. The >changes that The Proclamation addresses would involve changes to our >Kingdom law with out the benefit of the counsel of the Curia Regis >(who was not in attendance at Estrella), and by signing it We would >be in violation. Kingdom Law 2-101 reads as follows: " The Crown >shall have power to change these laws only *after* obtaining sage >counsel from the Curia Regis as herein defined, provided that said >changes do not in any way conflict with any part of the laws of the >Modern Governmental institution having authority over these areas." Herein is one of the primary reasons why Jafar and Cathereine could not sign: Kingdom Law prohibited it. And Kingdom Law is the code that we, its citizens, choose to live by. [Point #5 deleted] >The Ultimatum says nothing of the sort. It committed the Crowns of the >kingdoms _not yet represented_ to raise the funds _each for its own >representative_. The Midrealm is currently represented by Tim Moran. >It entailed no Midrealm expense whatsoever. This dog, too, will not >hunt. It would still involve extra expense for the Midrealm if the Board is expanded, whether or not we are currently represented on the Board. And again Their Majesties are bound by law, and They are honorable in following it. [Point #6] >Perhaps Their Majesties did not attend the same meeting as the other >Crowns (I could have sworn they were there). The united Crowns agreed >that the fundamental problem, of which the January 22 policies were only >symptoms, was lack of accountability and representation. As the >explanatory statement of the signatory Crowns makes clear, they believed >that corporate reform was necessary to make addressing the substantive >issues of January 22 possible. This was discussed at length in the >meeting. Furthermore, there was a lengthy discussion by several Crowns >in the meeting of precisely the need for decentralization and the firm >belief that resolution of the accountability and representation issues >had come to before decentralization was possible. Was the Middle Crown >not listening? You're the one who doesn't seem to be listening. You're on your holy Crusade to Rid The World Of The Evil Corporation while groups like mine (Nordleigh) are hung out to dry. Or are we going to be the sacrificial lamb? [Point #7] >Behind such pretty words the filthy innuendo lurks. Name names, I pray, >if you have the ballocks for it. You call some of your Cousins liars and >manipulators -- how else can one read the snide words about "personal >agendas" -- which ones? Or do you mean for the slur to touch them all by >implication, your parenthetical demurral notwithstanding? The physical >stature of Midrealm kings has grown since the first, but in moral stature >you are dwarfed by those who have come before you. You say that to >demand redress from the Board is unchivalrous and discourteous. I say >that to write what you have written here is to show that you do not know >the meaning of the words! Remember, m'lords and ladies, these are words of respect. Tell me with a straight face, Your Excellency, that you have absolutely nothing to gain politically from spearheading the reform movement. I haven't heard a good joke in years. Then tell me with a straight face that no King and Queen who signed the Estrella Documents had absolutely nothing to gain politically from championing the reform movement. There always has been, and always will be, personal agendas within the Society. In fact, this entire conflict is one of personal agendas. At least Jafar and Catherine have the guts to stand up for what they believe is right despite its political ramifications. [Point #9] >I am mistaken. Their Majesties of the Middle do not believe that the >corporate horse will sing. They believe that it sings already and they >are mesmerized by its dulcet tones. I offer The Majesties the example of >history, from the _Anglo-Saxon Chronicle_, _anno_ 1011: > All those disasters befell us through bad policy, in that they were > never offered tribute in time nor fought against; but when they had > done most to our injury, peace and truce were made with them; and > for all this truce and tribute they journeyed none the less in bands > everywhere, and harried our wretched people, and plundered and killed > them. >The king of whom the Chronicle speaks was called "Unraed." It is a pity >that the Middle Crown takes on the role of Ethelred and shuns the role of >Alfred. Do you really believe that the Board really had malicious intent in its pay-to-play proposal? I believe the Board really thought it was doing the right thing. I vehemently disagree with the Board, but it's ludicrous to think that they puposely wanted to hurt the Society. Remeber what I said about the Corporation and Society being interdependent? [Point #11] >The united Crowns made clear, in their discussion at Estrella and in >their statements since, that unilateral Royal appointment was a one-time >expedient to obtain quick action. They stated that they were committed >to full and appropriate consultation of the populace and selection of >Board members in accordance with the laws, traditions, and customs of >each realm. The Crown of the Middle hangs trustingly on the Board's >every word, but they treat their Royal Cousins as craven manipulators, >liars, and knaves. Their "most major objection" is beneath contempt. It obviously wasn't made clear, as there is a difference of opinion. Bring forth the transcript, if you wish to refute this. [Long refutation of points discussed at meeting between Midrealm Crown and Ombudsmen deleted] We all agree that the Board's power needs to be redistributed. That's a long term goal. Before that, we need to get this dispute settled. Jafar and Catherine wish to do this calmly and reasonably, and refrain from using drastic action except as a last resort. Why do you twist that into opposition? >The united Crowns openly offered the hand of friendship to the Crown of >the Middle at Estrella. They turned it aside. The united Crowns invited >the Crown of the Middle to join them in demanding accountability and >representation on the Board. They refused, preferring to listen in >secret to what some Board members are prepared to tell them but not the >rest of us and to revile Their Royal Cousins as liars and manipulators >with "private agendas. >Before this, I have never been so ashamed for a King and Queen in my >life. It saddens me to discover that differences of opinion cannot be tolerated amongst the royals. You call yourself honorable, yet your zealousness blinds you to rabid name-calling and liberalesque finger-pointing and fragmentation. Your shame is misplaced, sir. Wilhelm Dichtermann MoS, Baronial Colleges of Nordleigh Crown Principality of Northshield Middle Kingdom