[Sca-cooks] Unmitigated bullpucky

[Terry Decker]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stefan li Rous" <StefanliRous at austin.rr.com>
To: "SCA-Cooks maillist SCA-Cooks" <SCA-Cooks at Ansteorra.org>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 12:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Unmitigated bullpucky


> <<< Stefan,
>
> Since that's mostly an unhelpful statement, I challenge you to gather up
> a few copies of publication requirements from the most rigorous academic
> journals and send copies to the SCA corporate publication manager and
> the board of directors. Let's support the volunteers who are trying to
> protect our organization, rather than publicly trash them.
>
> Sayyeda al-Kaslaania >>>
>
> Unfortunately, now that Pennsic is over, it looks like I will be spending 
> my time writing up an appeal to get the SCA BOD overrule the Society 
> Chronicler who has said that my monthly Florilegium article, you've 
> probably seen it since I post it here, can't be published in SCA 
> newsletters unless I drop all links in the article to the webpage where 
> the files in the article can be found.
>
> I don't think readers should be forced to use a search engine to find the 
> articles being mentioned to them. Very few folks, even on this list, can 
> remember how to spell my site name.
>
> I;d much rather be adding interesting, new material to the Florilegium 
> than arguing with SCA BoD members over SCA publication rules or academic 
> standards.
>
> The Society Chronicler's reasoning seems to be that the Florilegium is 
> considered a "commercial" site since I have ads on there to pay the cost 
> of maintaining the site. Some "commercial" site.  If it was a commercial 
> site, it would have been in bankruptcy long ago. When the site does bring 
> in enough money to cover the monthly hosting fees, the remaining money 
> probably pays me pennies per hour that I spend on the site. Until recently 
> it's been about ten hours a week, week in, week out for about 20 years.
>
> If the problem is indeed the ads on the site, I am exploring various 
> possibilities to decrease the cost of the site and eliminating the ads. 
> However since I'm now working contract and am paid by the hour and it's 
> less than I've made in 20 years spending more time at work is sounding 
> more appealing.  Or simply shutting down the site if it is no longer of 
> use to the Society.  If nothing else, I know of a number of people who 
> have joined the SCA after reading the material in the Florilegium.
>
> They (kingdom chronicler and Society chronicler) quoted to me the section 
> on commercial advertisement. I'm not sure if I got over to them that the 
> article was an article and not an ad, and that I wrote it. Apparently 
> including the link to the site counts as an ad? Even so, there is this 
> phrase in the advertisement section:
>
> ** Commercial advertisements must be for products and services vital to 
> the
> educational purposes of the Society, according to Postal regulations. **
>
> I think the Florilegium fits this requirement. If not, perhaps it is not 
> accomplishing what it was set up to do.
>
> Not once have either the Ansteorra Kingdom or Society Chronicler indicated 
> how publishing an monthly article detailing what new files have been added 
> to the Florilegium is or could be detrimental to SCA Inc..
>
> For now, since I can still publish the monthly article in electronic form 
> on the Kingdom and other lists, I'm hoping that there will be enough 
> publicity and reminders to create enough interest and visits to make 
> maintaining the Florilegium worth while. But it may only be a matter of 
> time before these officious policies start encroaching onto the electronic 
> lists.
>
> As for helping out SCA corporate publications, authors who are running 
> afoul of overzealous bureaucrats, are welcome to send their works to me 
> for likely publication in the Florilegium. I have everything from short 
> overview articles to long scholarly articles, Master's thesis and original 
> research and translations.
>
> I am not an academic and likely don't have access to these "publication 
> requirements from the most rigorous academic
> journals". I can see the importance to the Society of papers with 
> differing levels of academic rigorousness. While I like to get the latter 
> when I can for the Florilegium, I accept all levels as I see a use for all 
> levels.
>
> Perhaps both society paper publications and things like the Florilegium 
> are nearing the end of their usefulness.
>
> Stefan
>
> On 8/15/2012 10:24 PM, Mark S. Harris wrote:
>> SCA publication requirements and and the restrictions on the amount of 
>> copyrighted material that can be included in SCA journals are quickly 
>> also exceeding those of the most rigorous academic standards as well. So 
>> maybe this is just the way SCA writing is going. :-(
>>
>> Stefan
>
> --------
> THLord Stefan li Rous    Barony of Bryn Gwlad    Kingdom of Ansteorra
>   Mark S. Harris           Austin, Texas 
> StefanliRous at austin.rr.com
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/marksharris
> **** See Stefan's Florilegium files at:  http://www.florilegium.org ****
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sca-cooks mailing list
> Sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/sca-cooks-ansteorra.org
>