rapier trends

[cmwalden at bga.com]

This digest certainly makes it easier to go over several points at once!

>------------------------------
>From: "Pug" <pug at arlut.utexas.edu>
>There is something that is called authorization that one must go
>through a very minor test and get the right people to sign the right
>piece of paper to get authorized.  

Who determines who is qualified to authorize whom?  Is it based on a peer 
group that support each other, or is it based on similar qualifications to 
local Arts and Sciences Officer?

>From: horton at dhostwo.convex.com (Patricia Horton)
>...must be AUTHORIZED to fight or marshall. This means you must have that
>little card that says you are authorized to fight/marshall in the Kingdom
>of Ansteorra, period.
What would you say that that piece of paper means?  Is it simply a point of 
record, or do you think it is a fair evaluation of someone's competance to 
be on the field in either capacity?  (fighter/marshal)

>Wish I had a copy of my Corpora and kingdom law here at work, I would quote
>the pieces pertaining to this. I will dig tonight.
Unless the letter of the law expresses your own feelings about this process, 
I don't need to hear the precise wording.  Can look that up myself.

>Any combatent, light
>or heavy, can also have their authorization revoked for various reasons. 
Haven't heard of anyone's authorization being pulled.  Of course I may not 
be in the right rumor mill.  If you have such stories, I would be interested 
to learn more about them.

>From: <STDDLY at TINY_TIM.SHSU.EDU>
>As far as I know any marshall(in their respective field of knowledge) 
>may pull the card of any fighter(in that field) who exhibits unsafe
>behavior while fighting or marshalling. This decision must be 
>reported to their superior marshall and may be appealed by 
>talking to the marshal in question's superior (not just any white X).
I would be interested to hear more about how the White X circle interacts 
with the Marshall on such issues.  Do you think it runs well in mutual 
support, or is it like a modern beaurocracatic (stupid git!  Can't spell to 
save your life, can you?) office that upholds what they think best in spite 
of their peers.

>From: James Crouchet <crouchet at infinity.ccsi.com>
> - Authorizing marshals will often authorize those they know and fight...
> - I have been told most knights get signed off without difficulty...
> - I have seen Dons get signed off and I have seen them have to do the...
> - I notice we don't require authorizations for fighter practice.  if we...
All good examples of different interpretations of the written law.  I agree 
that we are inconsistent.  I don not yet know if that is a bad thing.

>you recently came back to fighting after a long absence. Have you noticed 
>much change?
My honor has remained intact on the field.  I have noticed that much of the 
politeness has left the game-- in more official circumstances.  For example 
I noticed that no one seems terribly concerned whether or not I was 
satisfied with the way that the fight was conducted.  Although, I suppose if 
we have implemented a system that has a set of strong standards that must be 
adhered to, with little room for individual interpretation, then that would 
be unecessary.  As long as the Authorities don't have a problem with what 
has occured, there must be no problem.

>Now the rules certianly have changed. They have grown from a few pages to
>a book of about 60 pages. 
What are your favorite rules?  Are there any that you think are especially 
convoluted.  I must admit that I did not do what might be considered 
appropriate research before discussing this topic, so I may not have the 
wording correct, but my favorite rule was always that "Each fighter is bound 
by his *honor* to call the blows that he has received."

>In any case, if one is checking to see if a Don/Knight knows the CURRENT 
>stuff you should be concentrating on the new stuff. 
Can you think of any of the "new stuff" that you feel are not widely known, 
or understood?  Would knowledge be based on application or primarily on 
syntax or ability to quote accurately?

>How often do you see someone required to fight 
>with a dagger, a cloak and a case of rapiers before they pass 
>authorization? 
That's how I first authorized.  I had to pass through several Dons and other 
respected figures in the rapier community before I got my first little card.

>I guess it does keep the paperwork police happy though.
Does it?  Who is happy about it?  Does the current authorization process 
make anyone feel safer, or better qualified?  

I hope that no one feels that I am suggesting that the authorization process 
should be abolished.  (And if you do, I hope you read down to here before 
you replied or I may be forced to snigger.)  I am just intrigued at the 
changes that have occurred over time in our rapier game.  I am trying to get 
a clear picture of how others feel about what we do.  I will look forward to 
hearing more from all of you on this.

I remain Yours, etc
Antonio
or cmwalden at bga.com