[Ansteorra] re: What can we talk about (was Level 3...)

[James Crouchet]

> If people weren't going to talk about these things, that would be one
> thing, but realistically people ARE going to talk about them
> (especially now that they've been told not to).  Wouldn't it be better
> to discuss things out in the open, where information can be vetted and
> corrected?  That way, people can see that it's really not an issue,
> except to the people involved.

No, I don't think so. I think the bottom line here is simple:

If a person wants to gossip and rumour monger, they should go for it. Have
fun. Freedom of speech and all that, just avoiding anything that would
violate the liable laws. Of course, people may not respect them very much
but that is their problem if they choose this course.

If a person really wants to know what is going on, he should ask the people
involved; their names are not secret. If those people say it is none of that
person's business, he should take a hint and keep his nose in his own
affairs.

The SCA has no obligation to be your news source or tattle when someone
is naughty. If the incident is criminal, you (the general "you") can get
information from public sources like the police. If not, then maybe no one
needs those not involved to individually evaluate the situation and render
their personal judgements.

Doré