SC - Removes and Feastocrat

[harper@idt.net]

david friedman wrote:
> 
> Perhaps you could expand on the etymological argument. Are you using
> "feastocrat" to mean someone who believes that the feast ought to
> rule, in parallel with a "democrat"--someone who believes that the
> people ("Demos") ought to rule? Or are you using it to mean a feast
> that does rule in a political system ruled by feasts, in parallel
> with an "aristocrat"--one of the rulers in a system where the best
> ("Aristos") rule (at least, that's the theory).
> 
> I can see something to be said for the idea that feasts ought to
> rule, but I don't think that is what most people mean by "feastocrat."
> 
> Try reversing the direction of the argument. If a feastocrat is
> someone who rules a feast then an autocrat is someone who rules
> himself. But that isn't what "autocrat" means, either in the SCA or
> elsewhere.

Cute, your Grace! 

I'm working on the premise that it is a play on SCA usage of the word
"autocrat", meaning sole/direct ruler, in this case, of the event.
Possibly a portmanteau of feast autocrat. We'll probably never know at
this point.

I'm rather pleased to note that I was around when the terms "feastcrat"
and "feastocrat" entered the lexicon of SCAdians in the East Kingdom
(previously we had cooks and head cooks, or simply a name in response to
the question of "Who's cooking?"), and that I am now around to see the
practice die. It was dealt a blow by royal decree (Lucan and Elspeth,
IIRC) stating that the only approved "O' Crat" was autocrat, and
communication between cooks on this list has almost entirely eliminated
it in my kingdom, my lifetime.

Now if we can just do something about vampires at Pennsic...

Adamantius 
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com