cc:Mail Link to SMTP Undeliverable Message

Admin-GTESUPH1 admin-gtesuph1_at_gtesuphub1 at
Fri Jul 18 19:32:50 PDT 1997

Message is undeliverable.
Reason: Unable to access cc:Mail Post office.
	Please retry later.
Original text follows:

-------------- next part --------------
Received: from by (ccMail Link to SMTP R6.00.02)
	; Fri, 18 Jul 97 19:42:38 -0600
Return-Path: <root at>
Received: from [] by
  (SMTPD32-3.03) id AF3656B00EE; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 19:49:58 -0500
Received: (from majordom at localhost)
	by (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA00827
	for ansteorra-outgoing; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 19:14:04 -0500
Received: from ( [])
	by (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA00824
	for <ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG>; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 19:14:03 -0500
Received: from burkemcc ( []) by (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA01945 for <ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG>; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 19:14:01 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: < at>
X-Sender: burkemc at
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32)
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 19:12:17 -0500
To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG
From: Burke McCrory <burkemc at>
Subject: Re: cooking w/alcohol  (was: BoD ruling)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG
Resent-From: <agulick at>
Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 97 19:50:02 EST
Resent-To:  agulick at ccnet

At 05:10 PM 7/18/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Lori Jones 7/17/97 9:06 PM
>>When I say there are groups who broke the rule, I was sticking to 
>>my subject and meant regarding the purchase of alcohol in minute 
>>quantities for use in cooking. I know, if you want to get technical, 
>>you could say that selling feasts which include dishes prepared 
>>with alcohol is re-selling the alcohol.  However, as most dishes 
>>*cooked* with alcohol have little or no alcohol content after 
>>cooking, it would eliminate the problem of liability.  I mean, no 
>>one is likely to leave a feast legally intoxicated from eating, say, 
>>beef marinated in wine. 
>I doubt the Texas state laws would see alcohol used in cooking as 
>'reselling' alcohol.  However, if the state laws DO include this, I doubt 
>that my personally buying the alcohol used as an ingredient in cooking a 
>menu item at a feast instead of the SCA would skirt the laws of 
>'reselling' since folks would still be buying the feast. I think I will 
>find out how the Texas laws really apply here. 
>I do not know the history behind the reason Ansteorra choose a policy of 
>"no purchase of alcohol with sca funds for ANY reason, including 
>cooking". I would like to though.  Many, many period recipes require wine 
>as an ingredient.  These are good recipes, Pears in Wine Sauce for 
>instance. Since my choices for period recipes to serve at feasts will be 
>limited I would like to know the reason why.

Your choice of reciepes is not linited by the Ansteorran policy.  You
simple will no be able to purchase the alcohol with SCA funds.  As HE
Artorius said before most people by the alcohol with their own money and
donate it to the feast.  If that won't work try passing the hat.  As to the
reasons I think that it came about from the problems of over purchasing
quantity and drinking what was not used in cooking the feast.  

In Service to the Dream

Sir Burke Kyriell MacDonald
Kingdom of Ansteorra

mka. Burke McCrory
burkemc at

More information about the Ansteorra mailing list