[Ansteorra-archery] Arrow approval, appove this.

[Khailil The Sarclander]

    I just can't get motivated to make neutered arrows.  Arrows are already
slow and inacurate.  Next we will be duck taping nerf footballs to our
shafts.

     Here is the root of my complaint.  Someone at Gulf War got a bruised
eyeball from a two flecthed stubby crossbow bolt. (I was standing next to
the guy and witnessed the hit)
Instantly the archery rules are changed.  So all archery is punished, no
vote, no recourse, no voice.

      A fighter going up the ramp and over the wall at Gulf War, recieved a
double compound fracture.  She may never walk straight again!!!   Have ramps
been banned in the SCA?  I don't think so!  Why does one injury constitute a
major change in the rules and another does not.

     Every event that I have marshalled,  has resulted in a thumb getting
broken.  Has there been any major rule changes?

     What I am saying is there seems to be a major prejuduce against
archery.   The higher ups took one minor injury, (yes it was an eye, but no
perminate damage was incurred.) and they ran with it.

      Archers were given NOTHING!  No vote, no help.  It is very expensive
to make arrows. Now let us make them more expensive and less accurate.  We
have played right into hands of those who would like to see archery totally
eliminated.

      The result, less fun. less archers.  What do you tell a new fighter
who want to be an archer.  After you get your armor up, it should'nt be more
than $200 to $300 to play.  You might hit something.  Thats just my opinion,
I could be wrong.

>
>
> > And why is that, exactly??
> >
> > Gilli
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > > Agreeded,  It will be along time before my Bow sees the Light of day
> > again.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > >
> > >
> > > Let us keep in mind that the SCA is a organization that thrives of
> > > participation from members.  While I am sure that safety is of the
> utmost
> > > importance, let us not become like our government and become so
> obtrusive
> > > that no one wants to participate anymore, simply because the sheer fun
> is
> > > gone!
> > >
> > > The Ghost
> > >
> > > --- Kenneth c Elwood <kelwood at vvm.com>
> > > > >> I think that it is possible that we already have too many
> > authorizations.
> > > >>
> > > >> First, I think it is the job of the marshallate in inspection.  We
> > > already
> > > >> have a separate marshallate authorization for combat archery and
> those
> > > >> marshals should know how all the requirements and know how inspect
> the
> > > >> equipment to make sure it meets the requirements.We don't trust
that
> > bows
> > > >> and crossbows are combat legal just because they came from a
certain
> > > >> manufacturer, we still inspect them.
> > > >
> > > >I agree that the archery marshallate job to inspect ALL equipment
prior
> > to
> > > it
> > > >entering on the field.
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't think we need more levels of authorizations but I do think
we
> > > need
> > > >> to do a better job at authorizing combat archers.  We see people
all
> > the
> > > >> time who don't know they need a Gauntlet of their bow hand, don't
> know
> > > there
> > > >> is a minimum range, don't know they cant glean arrows, don't know
> > shafts
> > > >> have to be taped, etc.  This is an overall authorization problem.
> > > >>
> > > >> Sometimes we are too fast and loose with our authorizations and we
> need
> > > to
> > > >> do a better job.
> > > >>
> > > >> We need to do a better job of authorizing combat archers.  I
> personally
> > > >> would like to see at least a two part authorization process.
First,
> a
> > > >> written multiple choice test that shows knowledge of the rules,
armor
> > and
> > > >> equipment requirements, etc.  Second, a sort of practical test were
> > they
> > > >> have to show knowledge of the equipment and show that they can do a
> > basic
> > > >> safety inspection of their own equipment and perform safely.  I
> perhaps
> > > >> third an observation period.  What I mean is that if an unknown
> person
> > > shows
> > > >> up to me tomorrow and can spout all the rules and can show me he
> knows
> > > his
> > > >> equipment, I don't think that necessarily means he is ready to be
> > > authorized
> > > >> or that I should authorize him.  Ideally I would like to see the
guy
> > > around
> > > >> several times and understand that he "knows" the stuff rather than
> > having
> > > >> just perhaps memorized it the night before so he can satisfy a
> marshal.
> > > >>
> > > >I agree that that we are sometimes too fast in authorizing CA
> especially
> > > before
> > > >GW or for melee events.
> > > >
> > > >I disagree that a written test be required for authorization, that
> start
> > to
> > > >create more paper work than really needed, There are some people that
> may
> > > be
> > > >good at taken a written test and not be able to perform the
> requirements,
> > > or
> > > >that the individual cant pass or has problems with written test but
can
> > > perform
> > > >the requirements to be a CA. I also agree to a observation period,
> this
> > > would
> > > >show that an individual knows how to inspect his equipment and
> constantly
> > > >perform on the melee field in a safe manner.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >HL Roger
> > > >