Ok, here we go.... Here's an idea: Three peerages is a good balance. No one can "gang up" on another or cause a stalemate. Now, have at it! ( I.E. Discussion IS a good thing.) M. Jalali of Salamis ________________________________ From: Stefan li Rous <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Saturday, December 6, 2014 6:27 PM Subject: Re: [CALONTIR] Proposed Peerage for Masters of Defense 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] http://www.linkedin.com/in/marksharris **** 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. -- 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.