[Artemisia] Winning or Just Not Losing?

Thu Oct 1 15:09:57 CDT 2015

Adne,
I completely understand your concern as a chirurgeon. What do you think, as
fighters, we should do? If we continue to hit them with the force that
we've been hitting them with and they don't take it, it tells us that the
shot wasn't good, for whatever reason. Therefore, we assume it's either a
power issue or an accuracy issue.  It's the nature of the sport. I've even
been in a situation where I had hit someone in the same spot 5 times,
upping the power of the shot each time and they still didn't want to take
it. I asked the person what their opinion was of the shot and they just
shrugged. I like to hit people, I don't like to injure people. If you have
an idea or two, i'd love to hear them. I agree the idea of 'hit them
harder' isn't the most ideal way to handle it, but I don't see a whole lot
of other options.

Thank you
Vigdis

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 1:52 PM, danoman1000 . <danoman1000 at gmail.com> wrote:

> "...what would be fair?" - Vigdis
>
> Personally I like the model I've heard described by a friend in
> Northshield.  From what I'm told their crown gives out awards and does all
> the ceremonial and fun things our crowns do, but they leave all
> the legislative stuff (revisions to law, banishments, dispute resolution,
> etc.) to the "Stellar Committee"
>  a parliamentary body with representatives from each group.  Obviously I've
> only heard of it second hand, but it seems like a fair and period way to go
> about it.
>
> Sneferu
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mellane McCammon <mellane30 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > On some of the assertions made, it is correct that the only way to win
> > crown tournament is by fighting. The people that usually win those
> > tournaments, as well as other tournaments, have put in countless hours of
> > training and work to get good enough to be a crown contender. These
> people
> > often are involved in the other activities of the SCA as well. If it
> > doesn't make sense that a person who is good at combat is a good ruler,
> > then how would it make sense that someone good in an art would be a good
> > ruler? Would a pelican be a good ruler? There is no way to know until the
> > person has ruled. If we are strictly going by the idea of who would be a
> > good ruler, then we would have to turn more towards politics and
> > candidates. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your view, this
> > would turn a great many people away. Not only from our sport of fighting,
> > but from the SCA as a whole. If it is unfair (which is a word I despise)
> > then what would be fair? Regardless of the debate regarding 'how should
> > crowns be determined', I do not believe it is quibbling with regards to
> > cheating. Every sport, from Football to Olympic swimming deals with
> > cheating on one level or another. To say that we're quibbling about
> > cheating is rather insulting to all of us that play in our sport. It is
> > important to us, rather it's in a tournament or not. Please keep in mind,
> > not all who fight, win. It really is a level of training, persistance and
> > passion that will win at that level.
> >
> > When it comes to dishonesty in fighting, it needs to be addressed in all
> > areas. There should be honesty at practice, at war and at tournaments.
> > Unfortunately, there are a few that feel honesty isn't as important as
> > winning.
> > How to deal with that situation is complicated due to the entirety of the
> > sport relying on the perception of the person in the armor and the people
> > watching. Is there obvious cheating? Yes, of course. But where is that
> > line? It's a very difficult question. I wish I had the answers but I
> don't.
> > Maybe the answer lies in changing the mind set of new fighters. I know
> for
> > me, I do my best to make sure I am, above all else, honorable. I would
> > never want my friends, family and especially my consort, to feel that I
> am
> > being anything less. Perhaps that example, if made by many, will have a
> > trickle down effect. In reality, though, it has been my observation that
> > the cheaters are a very small percentage. They are just the most
> > spotlighted.
> >
> > I love the SCA and have decided that I will not let the negativity change
> > my love of the game. It is disheartening at times and has made me
> question
> > why I play. And I play for the love of all of it; the arts, the people,
> the
> > fighting, the pagentry. All of it.
> >
> > Thanks for reading,
> >
> > Vigdis
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:31 AM, danoman1000 . <danoman1000 at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > When people grumble about a tournament not being won cleanly, I think
> > that
> > > it is a symptom of a bigger issue.  The SCA has many varied activities
> > that
> > > each person can pick and chose from.   Heavy combat is one of the
> oldest
> > of
> > > these activities.  It's very visible, and it draws in a lot of our new
> > > membership.  But it is not the only activity we do.  Yet the fact
> remains
> > > that it is the only way to win the crown.  And the crown makes the
> rules
> > > for all of our activities.  I can't speak for anyone else, but that
> seems
> > > unfair to me.  It doesn't make sense to me that a person who is good at
> > > combat is necessarily a good ruler.  And it doesn't make sense to me to
> > > quibble about the fairness of combat, when it's already unfair that
> only
> > > the combatants have the opportunity to rule.
> > >
> > > Sneferu
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Duke Alan <dukealan at q.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Good Morning All,
> > > >
> > > > Seems like we need some lively discussion to wake up the Aerie.
> > > > Excellent!  Here we go, and the topic is appropriate considering this
> > > > weekend's festivities...
> > > >
> > > > The SCA claims to be honorable, and is loath to "call shots" for
> > others.
> > > > But what happens when someone refuses to "call shots" as good in a
> > > > tournament?  Please don't pretend this doesn't happen.  We've all
> seen
> > it
> > > > repeatedly.
> > > >
> > > > How do we deal with the person who couldn't win, but refused to lose?
> > So
> > > > far, we've not done much.  Sometimes they get a Crown out of the
> deal,
> > > > which of course dishonors those who did fight fairly and played the
> > game
> > > > with honor.  Those people far outweigh the Cheaters.
> > > >
> > > > Oh my, is that too harsh?  But PC aside, what do you call someone who
> > > > participates in a game, yet wants to win and not necessarily
> following
> > > the
> > > > rules to do so?
> > > >
> > > > I was extremely pleased to watch our last Crown Tourney.  It was
> clean,
> > > > and the final winner, in fact, was the winner.  Not the guy who
> refused
> > > to
> > > > lose.  I would greatly hope that we would draw a line in the sand and
> > > say,
> > > > that is the standard that we wil hold to.
> > > >
> > > > So, how is that done?
> > > >
> > > > Discuss away!
> > > >
> > > > Alan
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Artemisia mailing list
> > > > Artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
> > > > http://lists.gallowglass.org/mailman/listinfo/artemisia
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dan Lind
> > > praeco sum, ergo insanus sum
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Dan Lind
> praeco sum, ergo insanus sum
> _______________________________________________
> Artemisia mailing list
> Artemisia at lists.gallowglass.org
> http://lists.gallowglass.org/mailman/listinfo/artemisia
>