Peers and students, my opinions..

[Lori Jones]

>> Aquilanne 6/6/97 2:19 PM
>> Ideally, category A does not compete, nor is compared to, category 
>> B....

> Clarissa said:
> This is ideally the best way to do things.  However, the few....
>  I have entered have been generic... and everything was judged 
>  together... I don't even see how they manage to determine 
>  the 'best' item among such diversity. 

I agree that judging by categories truly is the ideal method.  
However, I'd also have to agree that most of the competitions 
I've seen don't work that way. I really prefer to display only.  
That way, strange cross-category comparisons don't get made 
and I still get helpful critiques, plus the experience of putting 
something out for the world to see.    

I thought of an interesting comparison when it comes to A&S 
competitions that are generically judged.  Say theres an  A&S 
competition with many excellent entries in the textiles category 
and only one or two fairly good entries which are functional 
metalwork.  However, the judges are primarily metalworkers, so a 
metalwork entry wins (I've seen it happen often...).  This often 
results in cries of "foul" from many of the textile entrants and even 
A&S people who weren't judges. 

Is this any more or less fair than the individual who is never 
recognized for service simply because the only service-oriented 
people in his area are those involved in a different area (say, the 
autocrat/feastocrat type vs. the office-holding type)?  How about the 
individual who has worked diligently and become an excellent sword 
and shield fighter in preparation for tourney season, only to lose to 
individuals they'd have beaten sword & shield because most of the 
tourneys happen to be "no-shields" lists, or  swiss 5's this year?  
Not to mention the simple luck of the draw even in lists of their 
preferred style.  I can't count the number of times I've lost to 
fighter "A" in later rounds of a tournament, only to find that "A" 
was subsequently defeated by the guy I beat earlier in the day.  How 
about the guy who gets his AoA after a year's worth of minimal local 
activity, compared to the guy whose been active five or more years, 
but hasn't been recognized at all.  

None of these instances *seem* very fair.  My point being: 
the game we play isn't "fair".  Simple luck is a major factor in 
winning/recognition at almost everything we do.  Not everyone has 
the ability to do A&S in multiple mediums with exceptional skill.  
Not everyone has the aptitude to learn multiple weapons styles.  Not 
everyone has the drive to do long time service like holding an office 
(vs. the short-term intense service of autocratting).  I think, much 
as we'd like for everything to be fair, that it will take a long time 
to effect any changes toward that end (if they ever happen at all).

I know it sounds trite, but I think we'd be better off to play for 
the fun of participation and the benefit of experiences, etc.  It 
sure is a lot less frustrating that way.  :-)

(another $.02 I'll never see...... by the way, who *is* in charge of 
paying us, anyway.  They're falling down on the job....)

-  Bs. Kat MacLochlainn
   Barony of Wiesenfeuer