[Artemisia] Comments regarding latest BoD announcment

[Spencer Maschek]

that is what this proposal is; a stop sign for those who may not be a 
benefit to the SCA. Once a person is cleared of wrong doing then obviously 
the "Stop" sign would be removed. It is merely a precaution to protect the 
whole. The wording is vague if you don't get the whole post, it isn't so 
vague if you do.
Vlad


>From: Sondra Gibson <sgibson at edulog.com>
>Reply-To: Kingdom of Artemisia mailing list 
><artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org>
>To: 'Kingdom of Artemisia mailing list' <artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org>
>Subject: RE: [Artemisia] Comments regarding latest BoD announcment
>Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:08:03 -0700
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from mail.coyotetechnical.com ([207.235.5.207]) by 
>bay0-mc6-f5.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 29 
>Mar 2006 07:10:30 -0800
>Received: (qmail 20214 invoked by uid 0); 29 Mar 2006 09:10:29 -0600
>Received: from localhost (HELO wiley.coyotetechnical.com) (127.0.0.1)  by 
>localhost with SMTP; 29 Mar 2006 09:10:29 -0600
>Received: (qmail 17995 invoked by uid 0); 29 Mar 2006 09:08:11 -0600
>Received: from mail.edulog.com (208.32.7.18)by wiley.coyotetechnical.com 
>with SMTP; 29 Mar 2006 09:08:11 -0600
>Received: from rearadmiral.logistics.int 
>(rearadmiral.logistics.int[172.16.34.3]) by mail.edulog.com (Postfix) with 
>ESMTP id 0208714F79for <artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org>;Wed, 29 Mar 2006 
>08:08:04 -0700 (MST)
>Received: by rearadmiral.logistics.int with Internet Mail Service 
>(5.5.2657.72)id <1MWS88QW>; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:08:04 -0700
>X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jEgOfHMzH2C2B2S6CFhMmvccKCi5W5x8pc=
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
>X-Logistics-MailScanner-Information: Please contact LogiSYS/Edulog HelpDesk
>X-Logistics-MailScanner: Found to be clean
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on 
>wiley.coyotetechnical.com
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no 
>version=2.63
>X-Spam-Level: X-BeenThere: artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2
>Precedence: list
>List-Id: Kingdom of Artemisia mailing list 
><artemisia.lists.gallowglass.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: 
><http://lists.gallowglass.org/mailman/listinfo/artemisia>,<mailto:artemisia-request at lists.gallowglass.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://lists.gallowglass.org/pipermail/artemisia>
>List-Post: <mailto:artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:artemisia-request at lists.gallowglass.org?subject=help>
>List-Subscribe: 
><http://lists.gallowglass.org/mailman/listinfo/artemisia>,<mailto:artemisia-request at lists.gallowglass.org?subject=subscribe>
>Errors-To: artemisia-bounces+smaschek=hotmail.com at lists.gallowglass.org
>Return-Path: artemisia-bounces+smaschek=hotmail.com at lists.gallowglass.org
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Mar 2006 15:10:30.0525 (UTC) 
>FILETIME=[EB2E12D0:01C65342]
>
>You are comparing apples and oranges.  You are not damaging anyone's life 
>by
>presuming them guilty, when you put up a stop sign.  But I have known 
>people
>who have had their lives turned upside down by being presumed guilty of
>something, that in the end they were cleared of.  So yes, I have a problem
>with the vague wording of this proposal and with banishing someone without
>pretty strong evidence of wrongdoing.  Just my own personal opinion.
>
>Gefjon
>
>
> > Behalf Of Spencer Maschek
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 8:48 PM
> > To: artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
> > Subject: RE: [Artemisia] Comments regarding latest BoD announcment
> >
> >
> > So you wait till several someones get killed at an unsafe
> > intersection
> > before you deem it necessary to put either a STOP sign or
> > light at that
> > point to make it safe?
> >
> > VL
> >
> >
> > >From: Sondra Gibson <sgibson at edulog.com>
> > >Reply-To: Kingdom of Artemisia mailing list
> > ><artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org>
> > >To: 'Kingdom of Artemisia mailing list'
> > >Subject: RE: [Artemisia] Comments regarding latest BoD announcment
> > >Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 16:31:33 -0700
> > >
> > >I have to agree with Sir Conrad, Sir Dan and Morgan.  If a situation
> > >arrises
> > >where a *real* threat exists, as in the example Mst. Thea
> > gave, my answer
> > >would be to call the mundane authorities.  Otherwise, I see
> > no reason to
> > >give the BoD more powers than it already has.  I have strong
> > reservations
> > >about imposing sanctions on anyone *accused* but not
> > *convicted* of a
> > >crime.
> > >What happed to the presumption of inocent till *proven*
> > guilty?  And IMO
> > >the
> > >whole thing is way too vague.  I see more paranoia in
> > feeling the need to
> > >have something like this than in not wanting still more rules and
> > >regulations.
> > >
> > >Mst. Gefjon Hrafnardottir
> > >
> >
>_______________________________________________
>Artemisia mailing list
>Artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
>http://lists.gallowglass.org/mailman/listinfo/artemisia