SR - How many stewards does it take...?
gilli at seacove.net
Sun Mar 21 17:24:38 PST 1999
Ofcourse no one can compele any one in the organization to do antthing.
However; once a group has volunteered to do a particular thing or was asked
and they accept, there sholud be no basic difference. There may be some
specific differance like they might use thermonuclear weapeons and all we
got are, well we all know what we use.
I see no reason that the multi-group concept should not to work as long as
what I've already mentioned happens, plus every one knows that there are
other groups invovled, and the person in charge doesn't have so many other
projects going on they don't have time to make a decision.
From: ldcharls at swbell.net <ldcharls at swbell.net>
To: southern at Ansteorra.ORG <southern at Ansteorra.ORG>
Date: Sunday, March 21, 1999 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: SR - How many stewards does it take...?
>Dory Grace wrote:
>> Lousy example. The military spends money faster than most people could
>> manage to burn it. Moreover, we also lost more soldiers in operation
>> Desert Storm to safety incidents than to enemy fire. Not exactly a model
> Actually, I heard that the accident rate was the same or less as that
>for other combat operations. The combat casualty rate, however, was so
>miraculously low that the accident rate looks bad. My unit was told to
>expect 20,000 casualties for the first 6 months. Anybody who said that
>we would have losses of less than 200 would have been either laughed at
>or put in a rubber room.
> I would argue that the military model of inter-unit cooperation
>doesn't work well in the SCA because, unlike the military, there's no
>way for one group to compel another to take specific action. I do
>believe that more than one group can have an event, but the Steward
>needs to be more willing to persuade and solicit help than to dictate.
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.
More information about the Southern