[ANSTHRLD] Who to Protect? A 1.0 and ABPS version
Jay Rudin
rudin at peoplepc.com
Tue Nov 16 06:07:03 PST 2010
Robert, when somebody calls a blow with grace and dignity, it should be noticed. Well said!
And there's nothing wrong with *any* question. That's where answers come from.
Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
>I am the one who started this "debate" and now I am almost regretting that I
>did...almost. It is interesting to see everyone perspective on this topic and to
>see the rulings and prior history. I still think that my original intent was
>misunderstood. I was not looking to eliminate any device, nor was I looking for
>a way to allow someone to assume the device of anyone else. My original intent I
>see is not possible. The stringent rules we have in place for submissions are
>there for a reason, and with a better perspective, I understand for a good
>reason. The more I read the responses the more I saw that if there was a change
>to what is now the standard then the way is opened for deviation from the
>attempted purity of SCA heraldry. The phrase that sealed it was "the right and
>dignity of arms." I now see that earned right should be protected under our
>current ruling no matter what the case unless the owner of that device releases
>it.
>
>Having listened to you all I submit that I was wrong. Though it might have been
>a question that lead to a healthy debate, the question itself was not a good
>one. Therefore, I withdraw the question with the understanding that I agree with
>the current standards and therefore am against my own question.
>
>Robert of Coleford
>Herald, Shire of Gate's Edge
________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com
More information about the Heralds
mailing list