[Artemisia] Re: A Bit of a Rant.

[Redhawk]

Niccolo
*Under-cut*.  Nice verbage..good way to discribe it.. I must agree.
Redhawk

Bruce Padget <bapadget at yahoo.com> wrote:
Troubling you with a private email...tho not on the
forbidden topic.

If anyone has been obnoxious, I would like to know who
they are (within limits), for various reasons:

If it's a DWS, I have the duty to whack them as
needed.

If it's someone of the Loch Salann School of Defense,
I have the duty to chastise.

If it's someone of the Black Wing Company, the new
Captain-General is serious about wanting to enforce
standards of genteel conduct. (Hopefully he won't be
undercut as Azir was.)

So, if there's anything that needs action in what
you've received, please let me know.

Niccolo
bapadget at yahoo.com

--- Julia Jackman-Brink
wrote:
> John Gibson wrote:
> 
> > Sorry for the short answer, I think it was
> misinterpreted, so...
> 
> I also think you went a bit off track with
> MINE...I'm not knocking the 
> White Scarves, They are all great noble people with
> specific skills. 
> What I am trying to get across, especially to those
> who are new and may 
> not be aware, is there is a difference between DWS
> and Peerage. Someday 
> the SCA as we know it might choose to recognize a
> peerage in Rapier, 
> maybe they won't, but until then, the DWS doesn't
> carry a Patent of 
> Arms...and for the record, you all can quit sending
> me private mail, I'm 
> not going to debate this issue any further.
> 
> > Now, I understand the placement of the DWS meeting
> at Convocation was thrown
> > under "Peer Meetings" as a convenience done in
> trying to quickly send an
> > e-mail schedule out, but if you read the message
> as sent it listed Peer
> > Groups and you can easily include Landed Baronages
> in that and say they
> > mistyped a tab (which was my assumption).
> 
> I think what could have saved this whole
> conversation was a listing by 
> TIME of the meetings with no groupings. That is,
> "Here is the timeline 
> for what we want to acheive for this day". Works for
> major corporations 
> and there is rarely any controversy or
> misunderstandings.
> 
> And for the record, only SITTING Landed Baronages
> are above the Peers in 
> the Order of Precedence. They are often included
> when the Crown wants 
> input into the coversations at hand. When that
> happens is it 
> specifically noted. The Former Landed and Court
> Baronages are 
> technically placed below the Peerage and are rarely
> included. Most of 
> those tend to be doubled into the Peerage anyway.
> 
> > Fact is a Peer Group has nothing
> > to do with a Patent of Arms, but is by definition
> a group of equals. A
> > "Peer Circle" in the SCA refers to a meeting of
> OL, OP, OC, as would a
> > "Peerage Meeting".
> 
> You are correct in the definition, but the SCA has a
> different 
> recognition of the definition of "Peer". Both
> culturally as well as 
> socially. If you are talking in the SCA context, one
> needs to recongize 
> the difference and use it appropriately. Hence the
> confusion by many.
> 
> Juliana
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Artemisia mailing list
> Artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
>
http://lists.gallowglass.org/mailman/listinfo/artemisia
> 
_______________________________________________
Artemisia mailing list
Artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
http://lists.gallowglass.org/mailman/listinfo/artemisia

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com