[Artemisia] Winning or Just Not Losing?

Thu Oct 1 15:15:52 CDT 2015

That is generally correct about NorthShield.
The crown is involved but on a much smaller level. The Stallari runs much
of the day to day business.
It works well for them.

Syeira
(Immigrant from NorthShield)
On Oct 1, 2015 1:53 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
>