<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
<BR>What about this, what about that, what if, this and this, that and that...we're beating a dead horse. Everybody has their opinion and I doubt if anybody is going to change their minds.<BR> <BR>Take a poll and whatever comes out if it, live with it. If you don't want to fight with this, but rather fight with that, then just do it.<BR> <BR>My opinion; for adults, kill foil but keep epee.<BR>For kids, keep both.<BR> <BR>That being said, I'm out of here.<br><br>Toshiro, who doesn't like beating horses, dead or alive.<BR> <BR><div><div id="SkyDrivePlaceholder"></div><hr id="stopSpelling">Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:46:58 -0400<br>From: brianoftheloch@gmail.com<br>To: ansteorra-rapier@lists.ansteorra.org<br>Subject: Re: [Ansteorra-rapier] Proposed revision to rapier rules<br><br> Actually, there are reasonable means for establishing competency. It's called a marshal's authorization. I am not lightly bandying about terms. It was a serious and honest statement that if a marshal cannot inspect something that is perfectly legal according to our rules, they are, by definition, lacking in their training and qualifications and would, therefore, not be competent.<div>
As to your pilot analogy, it is not analogous. There are two separate licenses for helicopters and airplanes. It would be unfair to call a pilot licensed to fly an airplane incompetent for not being able to a helicopter if they do not hold that license. It would also be unfair to call a rapier marshal incompetent for not knowing how to marshal cut and thrust, because those are two separate and distinct authorizations. As Don Pieter pointed out, that distinction does not currently exist between rapier combat (F&E) and HR marshal authorizations, only with C&T.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Brian</div><div>Brian's<br><div><br></div><div><br><div class="ecxgmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Jacq Ball <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jacqball@gmail.com">jacqball@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;" class="ecxgmail_quote">I don't think a marshal should inspect epees unless they've actually<br>
seen one that should be rejected. I don't have an example bad epee to<br>
show new marshals. As for foils, I've never encountered one in the<br>
SCA, good or otherwise.<br>
<br>
It's a bit unfair to bandy about words like incompetent when no<br>
reasonable means of establishing competency has been offered new<br>
marshals, especially when the point of knowledge is increasingly an<br>
edge case. One would not call a pilot who does not know how to fly a<br>
helicopter incompetent, even though helicopters are totally legal.<br>
<div class="ecxHOEnZb"><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
Ansteorra-rapier mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ansteorra-rapier@lists.ansteorra.org">Ansteorra-rapier@lists.ansteorra.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-rapier-ansteorra.org" target="_blank">http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-rapier-ansteorra.org</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________
Ansteorra-rapier mailing list
Ansteorra-rapier@lists.ansteorra.org
http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-rapier-ansteorra.org</div> </div></body>
</html>