Print

Print


Well, I'm sure your first option would give the Society an excellent idea of just how much of the Chivalry is still active, if formally proposed in the wake of a possible rejection of the current proposal.

Enough SMOFing for me, though, my comments have gone in and cover everything I have to say about it in some detail.

Paul Adler

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Stefan li Rous <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Actually that’s not true.

I’m swinging around to Alban’s idea that we don’t need any more Peerages. I’m still on the fence on whether we should simply put all martial combat activities into the Knighthood or whether we should keep that as is and create another Peerage for all other combat activities. But we don’t need a plethora of different Peerages.

I’ve always been told we already had 4 Peerages, with the ex-Royatly making up the fourth.

Stefan

On Dec 5, 2014, at 8:43 PM, Vince Zahnle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

As several have noted, nobody's really changing any minds on this.  I've submitted my own opinionated comments by email, I encourage anyone wanting to argue pro or con do the same.  I doubt the Society Seneschal is going to see anything posted only on the Calontir list.

Yours in service,

Paul Adler 

--------
THLord Stefan li Rous    Barony of Bryn Gwlad    Kingdom of Ansteorra
   Mark S. Harris           Austin, Texas          [log in to unmask]
**** See Stefan's Florilegium files at:  http://www.florilegium.org ****







-- 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.



--
Vince Zahnle
COL, USA, Ret.
-- 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.