'Unofficial Feast' - was Re: [Sca-cooks] Wines at a Feast **The New Policy**

[Tom Vincent]

Is that meant, then, as a CYA or loophole? 

So that if a group actually does buy & serve wine at a feast, the feast 
therefore, by definition, is not an official SCA event? 

What would the actual or possible sanction be against a barony or shire, 
for example, that 'dared' to buy & serve wine at a feast if, since it 
would then no longer even be an official SCA event?

Would that mean that any awards handed out at the (now) unofficial 
non-event were null and void?

If the feast was part of a longer event (say, an all-day or weekend 
event) would just the feast be unofficial or would the entire event be 
voided?

The mind swims... :)

Duriel


Terry Decker wrote:
> I think it was changed to keep the SCA from being sued when the 
> inevitable happens.  The policy is you can't officially do it, so if 
> you get the SCA sued, then you were obviously acting on your own and 
> without official sanction.
>
> Bear
>
>> That would fall under 'furnishing'. Frankly I don't see a way around 
>> it. Diners could bring their own- provided the site is wet. But 
>> that's it.
>>
>> This policy is new- all of two weeks ago. I'm surprised that I didn't 
>> see screaming and yelling about it. I'm mildly curious as to why the 
>> policy was changed, but not enough to poke my nose into it.
>>
>> 'Lainie
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sca-cooks mailing list
> Sca-cooks at ansteorra.org
> http://www.ansteorra.org/mailman/listinfo/sca-cooks
>
>