[ANSTHRLD] Who to Protect? A 1.0 and ABPS version

Clint Gallon cgallon at gmail.com
Tue Nov 16 05:58:57 PST 2010


No worries ... keep asking questions and coming up with ideas. Any questions
and all input is welcome.


-- Cathal

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Darnell Daniels <dmage121 at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Heralds mailing list
> Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/heralds-ansteorra.org
>



-- 
What man is a man who does not make the world better. - Balian of Ibelin



More information about the Heralds mailing list