ANST - Documentation (wordy)

[Jerry Norris]

At 07:23 PM 2/16/99 -0600, Aquilane wrote:

>Good Baron Michael wrote:
>>Good grief, Charlie Brown! I am overwhelmed by both the number and
>vehemence of
>>the opinions voiced since I posted my comments. 

/* much was snipped here concerning the standardization of documentation
and the argument on quantification of documentation.  While this is
something that I would argue at another time, further in the article
Aquilane mentions what is considered a standardized template, and I'd like
to make my arguments one at a time.*/

>Besides, where do you draw the line? If an artist provides no
>documentation, do you disqualify their entry? What about the entrant who
>had met 70% of minimal required documentation? Do you disqualify them, or
>go on and judge their entry with no thought to the inequities that might
>arise? 

Yes.

That's the simple answer.  This from someone who considers himself to be
absolutely horrible concerning documentation.

His Excellency suggests that documentation allows the judge to examine the
piece while allowing the entrant to display evidence as to the nature and
historic perspective of the piece.  If we follow the fairly simple
guidelines below, then the documentation should answer most of the
questions that the judge might have concerning the piece.  If the
documentation doesn't do this, then it is the entrant's fault, not the judge.

I'm a bard and a musician.  I have entered competitions where documentation
was required.  I have lost those competitions in at least some small part
due to my lack of documentation.  At the time I didn't know much about
documentation (the last few days have opened my eyes ;^)), and what I
presented as documentation was, considering the situation, almost useless.  

I lost, but I learned.  Did I feel cheated?  No.  Would I (or the people I
played with) have won had we better documentation?  Maybe.  But in the end
I learned a few things and that was, to my mind, worth the price of admission

I have also run a bardic competition where the entrants were required to
perform two pieces from different forms (story/singing,
singing/instrumental, poem/story, etc.).  If those who had entered the
competition had not performed as requested they would have been disqualified.

>
>As another thought, it's a bit harder, as a judge, to give concise feedback
>without a standardized template. We're trying to meet a lot of needs here
>and, frankly, when I'm judging *I* don't always remember all the points
>that need to be covered. Standardization of documentation requirements and
>scores helps make sure all bases are covered. 
>

Which she follows with ...

>Right now I believe the general expectation for standard documentation is
>one page with all the "what it is, how it was done then, how I did it,
>where I deviated from period, and why" info, one page to list the
>references, plus a photocopy or two (preferably in color) of similar period
>exemplars. 

That, to me, sounds like a nice and concise description of standard
documentation.  Simple fool that I am, I even believe (now) that I can
follow it.


Gerald of Leesville - Barony of Stargate - Kingdom of Ansteorra	
jerryn at sprintmail.com -  Jerry Norris - Houston, Texas USA
writer, reader, thinker, father, lover. 


============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.