"Growth" vs. Awards Policy

[Marc D McKeeman]

>
>
>> > are you speaking of the inclusion of Oriental and New World
>> > personae in a group which has in its charter "Western Europe and
>> > lands affecting it [MAJOR paraphrase}?
>> 
>> I am in disagreement with the premise of the paraphrase, holding in
>> particular that the older, "gentler", concept of "cultural contact"
>> is both more conducive to inclusion and simpler to apply.  Even
>> using the sense of "lands affecting it" I would deem must of
>> necessity include the New World and the Orient so long as we
>> continue to define our "period" as 600ce through at least 1600ce.
>> *Particularly* as concerns Spain and the New World, Italy and the
>> other areas impacted by "the Silk Road", the Byzantines and their
>> use of Oriental silk, and the spice trade in general.


I have an alternate personae, that is new World, and has had oppision on
ocasion.
 Depending on how much, or how little I dress, depends on my time period.
  


Any oppinons on this type of personae, I would like to hear.

I am also known by my tribel name,   Lone Wolf, given to me by an elder
of the Cedar Clan.

H.L. Marcus
>> 
>Here, your grasp of detail is far greater than mine; I don't have a 
>problem with Oriental or New World personae in general, since there 
>was some cultural contact (particularly with the New World toward the 
>end of period).  A couple of things that get done but rarely, at 
>least in the parts I've been in, are African personae (people were 
>coasting along Africa looking for gold and there was contact with 
>Timbuktu via the salt caravan in the 15th C!) and Indian personae 
>(the ties there go *way* back--Alexander the Great is a particular 
>historical hero of mine).  But it's a can of worms, because many 
>people take the narrower approach, which is what I was putting forth 
>as devil's advocate in my first post.
>
>> > are you speaking of a shire where everyone decides to be vampires?
>> 
>> Eeek, no.  When your original population base for a given locality
>> is drawn primarily from gaming groups, I am well aware of the
>> problems that can occur.  It is the responsibility of those
>> assisting the formation or ensuring the continuance of a local group
>> to make the clear distinction between the SCA and live-action
>> roleplay gaming opportunities.
>> 
>Yes, Indeedy.  I don't feel compelled to offer an environment for 
>people to bring their gaming characters to life, and I'm always 
>disturbed at the confusion in some people's minds between gaming and 
>rolling up a fantasy character, and the SCA and creating an 
>historicaly based persona (however scanty that creation may be).  I 
>vividly recall a discussion I had with a young lady at a Pennsic 
>wherein I was saying that I was alarmed by the number of people who 
>believed that medieval people had supernatural powers and she said 
>(obscurely) that "people back then were much more in touch with their 
>magickal side"--by which, I gathered (in context with what we'd 
>already said) that she was one of those who really *does* believe 
>that the Middle Ages were a time of dragons and faerie and people 
>having heightened supernatural powers that have been obscured or 
>dulled by all this technology and progress.  I find this kind of 
>alarming as a belief system, but if that's what she personally 
>believes, that's great; but it does rather clash with trying to see 
>that this organization does have some kernel of historical basis at 
>it's heart, despite the fact that I myself wear contact lenses and 
>don't make my shoes by hand.
>
>> > are you speaking of a group where a cult of personality
>> > has gone seriously out of control and the locals may love 'em but
>> > what they're promoting is not compatible with the SCA or the
>> > kingdom so the Royals or a kingdom officer has to step on them? 
>> > (had that happen to me--as clouter, not cloutee)
>> 
>> This one, yes: I would speak of in terms of the cult of personality
>> working against the goals and ideals of the Society.
>> 
>So would I.  This is an example of abnormal growth, and it does 
>somewhat conflict, in my view, with your original statement as not 
>revised.  Hence, I'm glad for your revision.  :-)
>
>> >> However, Mr. Bosko (acrubray at wtrt.net ?) may have misunderstood
>> >> the award process.  The Crown can only act based upon the
>> >> information actually in Their possession. If all they have seen
>> >> are recommendations based upon the artistic achievements of an
>> >> individual, or the service achievements, or the combat prowess,
>> >> it is not Their fault that a local issue of which they have no
>> >> knowledge may cloud any award given.
>> > This is totally 100% true.  The Royalty cannot be omniscient and
>> > it is amazing how many people expect them to be so.  Also, I've
>> > known people, had some as friends, who behave one way in their
>> > local group and another outside of it.
>> 
>> Thank you for reinforcing this "from the other side of the process",
>> i.e. having been seated as Crown. (Not something I expect to
>> experience myself anytime soon...)
>> 
>No problem.  Seriously, readers, I was stunned by the scant numbers 
>of award recommendations I received; and this was not mitigated by 
>the people who wanted to approach me at the last minute as I was
>prepping for court with a verbal recommendation.  There is so much 
>that is great about a well-thought-out, well-written letter of 
>recommendation that says that not only is this a great person, but 
>that here's a thoughtful individual who thinks well of them.  I could
>go on at great length about how to write effective letters of 
>recommendation, but this message is really friggin' long already.
>
>But do write letters of recommendation; and if you must write about a 
>problem person, curtail your hyperbole and try to remain objective 
>about what the actual problem is.  "The whole earth is going to 
>overturn in fire and water!" is not nearly as effective as "this 
>person means well, but is unable to perform the basic requirements of 
>the office such as reporting, returning phone calls and attending 
>group meetings".  
>
>> Bless you, Your Excellency, for gracing us with your presence, your
>> thoughts on this matter, and especially your forbearance in drawing
>> out additional detail when you had questions as to my motive /
>> stance. If I have continued to be unnecessarily obscure now, or am
>> so in the future, slap me down as appropriate. (You do it so nicely
>> that it is indeed a gentle reprimand, which I will take to heart.
>> And commend to memory.)
>> 
>OH, you're quite welcome, and once again, this wasn't a slap or a 
>reprimand, I just really wanted to be clear in my own mind as to what 
>limits you were suggesting.  We're not as far apart as I'd feared.   
>:-)
>
>Countess Berengaria de Montfort de Carcassonne, OP
>Barony of Caerthe
>Kingdom of the Outlands
>