[Ansteorra] lillies

Lisa McGee elainyanna2001 at yahoo.com
Tue Jun 24 16:20:49 PDT 2008


I think you have a point. Add some general guidelines overall, look into and
adopt a few of the practices of other organizations that have to provide
water to people doing sports and I think we would be on reasonably sound
footing.

Baron Christian Doré

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Rose & Chad <love at roseandchad.net> wrote:

> No, no, no. Expecting someone to be a walking compendium of food law
> knowledge for an entire Kingdom or Region would be too much. Except for me.
> Because I'm a genius. (People who know me are falling down laughing.) Just
> kidding.
>
>  Why would you need a Kingdom level officer to keep track of it. Kingdom
> level officers don't keep track of site rules or contracts or money.
> Baronial autocrats and Senechals and Reeves do. They simply send thier
> reports to Kingdom for oversight.
>
>  So if you have an event at Camp E-Ko-Wah in Comanche County, your Baronial
> waterbearing/food safety person would simply call and make sure of local
> regs, and proceed accordingly. In the event that the regs are turn out too
> expensive or time-consuming, make the waterbearing 'unofficial' or ask a
> Guild to host it, and remember not to choose that spot in the future.
>
>  The report would be
>
>  Yearly-
>  I checked in local authorities, this is what they said.
>  Each event-
>  Spoke to Lord X, Lady Y, and Baron Z about thier food events.
>
>  All the Kingdom level officer would have to do is make sure a report is
> received and file it away, in case of future lawsuits, lol.
>
>  Most Baronies only have about two events per year, and we all have
> favorite locations. I've been to at least four events at Camp E-Ko-Wah this
> year, and I'm going to at least one more. That's in Comanche County, so a
> call to the Comanche County Health Dept. would be in order. I bet locations
> with easier regs would become much more used, just like locations with less
> restrictions, and more cabins.
>
>  I've seen things at feast that are pretty gross and we've heard plenty
> about contact waterbearing areas. Why are we so afraid of complying with
> food regulations? As has been previously noted, they all stem from the same
> federal food code. Some are more restrictive or expensive, but some are
> pretty loose.
>
>  My food handlers' class was an ten-dollar, hour long event where we
> watched a video about hand-washing and got a lecture about the importance of
> hair nets. We had a health inspector come in once after a food poisoning
> complaint, stay for an hour, go away happy when I *know* there were
> unsanitary things hanging out because the cook was an idiot. (Which is what
> happens when you don't eat the kind of food you cook and your main customers
> are carnies, who have limited options and iron stomachs.)
>
>  Someone once told me that the BoD exists to make what we do legal and
> happy. Not to limit what we do. If it doesn't exist to make our events, and
> everything we want to do in it, legally alright then what does my money pay
> for?
>
>  R the O
>
> Maria Buchanan <scarlettmb at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>   We don't have a Traffic Officer or a Site rules officer. If you're
> talking about an officer who would keep track of ALL the food codes for
> anywhere that the group may have an event, any county or city. Now
> that's not too hard for a local officer, but the locals would have uplines.
> Reginals, Kingdom and Society officers would basically have to keep track of
> all that too. It's just not a feasable option.
>
> Traffic coordinators are per event. Site rules change
> per site but they rarely change from one event held at
> that site to the next. Traffic is always the same as
> far as coordinating. However, the food codes for
> cities can change at a moment's notice, from one week
> to the next.
>
> It's a good thought, but not one that would be as
> easily done as you'd think.
>
> Maria
> --- Rose & Chad wrote:
>
> > We do it for everything else... From traffic to site
> > rules to area rules... Why isn't it feasible? Have
> > we tried it yet?
> >
> > Cheerfully,
> > R the O
> >
> > Maria Buchanan wrote:
> > You're still looking at an office that has to
> > change
> > based on country, state, city and county health and
> > food codes. It's not really feasable.
> >
> > Maria
> > --- Rose & Chad wrote:
> >
> > > Well, the Chiurgeon already has alot of duties...
> > I
> > > meant adding one person for this... Although that
> > > might also be complicated... And possibly the
> > > Waterbearing officer we already have could do
> > > it...Hmm...
> > >
> > > :)
> > >
> > > R the O
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ansteorra mailing list
> > Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> >
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra mailing list
> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra mailing list
> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>



More information about the Ansteorra mailing list