Oops.... I meant to. Sorry. Sokhatai Saikhan No one knows me by my sca name either On Dec 4, 2014 8:11 PM, "Patrick Anderson" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Maria, > > With all due respect, you may want to sign your posts. > > Who are you? (I mean that. I don't know your modern name. ) > > Gabriel > > -- > Patrick Anderson > > Sent from a phone. > Please forgive spelling mistakes. > > On Dec 4, 2014, at 8:07 PM, Maria Geeslin <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > So I never ever comment on these things... this one and only time I can't > help myself. If everyone is really entitled to their opinions on this list > lets see what happens. These are just random things I've been saying in my > head whilst reading this thread today and are not, in any way, meant to > offend anyone. > > I'm sorry but SCA armored combat is not on the same historical accuracy > plane as other medieval re-enactment groups. In fact, stick tag and kidney > belts are quite a joke to other groups. Not necessarily defending that > opinion.... just mentioning it. However I feel that other re-enactment > groups put in just as much passion, dedication, skill, and historical > accuracy. > > Earning a peerage for service is also not the same thing as armored > combat, yet we have a peerage for service. > > How long has archery been around in the SCA? And how long does it take to > the "earn the right" to have it's own peerage? I understand where Stefan is > coming from. These activities have been ignored for a very long time. > Sometimes you have to kick start change and let it snow ball... peerage for > cut and thrust... ok, next is a peerage for archery/missile weapons. > > Cut and thrust possesses just as much potential for technical skill, > legitimate historical accuracy, and work as heavy combat does. (not that it > really matters but, I've done both) > > There are a number of people on this thread that speak of ignoring other > groups... well it seems to me that people will be ignored which ever way > this proposal swings. > > As far as "earning the right".... just because something came along first > does not, in any way, mean it automatically has a "right". Nor does that > mean it has the right to judge whether others have that same right. > > Calontir is so reluctant to change. No offense but, I believe that one day > this will be it's undoing. You can't play like it's 1986 anymore > (recruitment numbers have kinda proved that). Change happens and sometimes > when you look at the bigger picture, it's for the better. Just because we > re-enact the past does not mean we can't take steps foward to better this > kingdom's future. > > Judging by the number of one sided posts, mostly made by those who have > either been in the SCA a long time or are/were peers themselves, people > sound threatened by this change. It looks like some seem to feel that their > worth in this kingdom will be diminished by adding a peerage. > > I don't see anything wrong with archery, equestrian, and cut and thrust > having peerage... you want to compartmentalize people? ok.. do it right. I > feel there's nothing wrong with everyone getting in on this pie. Or just > have one peerage that covers everything. Frankly there's already quite a > lot of disorganization and it's not about to clear itself up anytime soon. > > I, and others I know, find that this > SCA-bureaucratic-I-want-to-put-everyone-in-their-place and > this-is-the-way-its-always-been mentalities are black cancers spreading > throughout this kingdom and organization. It has driven away many great > people, who did and could have further contributed great things to this > organization. I find that to be more detrimental to this kingdom than 100 > peerages. > > This is a hobby folks, something everyone is supposed to have fun with.... > remember. > > > On Dec 4, 2014 5:26 PM, "Rex Deaver" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I am an archer, a Boga Fyrd, and a C&T fighter. I have been an armored > fighter in years past. Armored combat is at the very foundation of the SCA, > and is the First Peerage. Non-armored combat is not the same thing, not on > the same plane historically either in the SCA or in the real world. Among > non-armored martial arts, there is no valid reason for elevating rapier > above archery and equestrian. They should all be elevated equally, as they > earn that right. > > Mathurin > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Stefan li Rous <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > >> But elevating hitting people with wooden sticks above archery and >> equestrian is not a slap in the face of those folks? >> > -- Manage your subscription at http://listserv.unl.edu. listserv.unl.edu > lists do not accept incoming email from Yahoo.com, AOL.com or Dropbox.com > due to their DMARC policies. > -- Manage your subscription at http://listserv.unl.edu. listserv.unl.edu > lists do not accept incoming email from Yahoo.com, AOL.com or Dropbox.com > due to their DMARC policies. > > -- Manage your subscription at http://listserv.unl.edu. listserv.unl.edu > lists do not accept incoming email from Yahoo.com, AOL.com or Dropbox.com > due to their DMARC policies. -- Manage your subscription at http://listserv.unl.edu. listserv.unl.edu lists do not accept incoming email from Yahoo.com, AOL.com or Dropbox.com due to their DMARC policies.