"Dead Rabbits" at War
Cynthia Gee
this year?
It's the new system of forced volunteerism put in place at
Pennsic this year , for offences ranging from accidentally losing one's
medallion (5 hours community service), to parking in such a way as to
obstruct traffic, to goofing up your group's boundaries at land grab
(20 hours community service APIECE for an entire camp in one instance.)
Refuse the
community service and you get kicked off site. No warnings for first
offences, no pleading ignorance either. You don't even have to be
present at the time of the offence -- one poor sucker arrived on site
to find that he had to serve 20 hours of community service, along
with everyone else in his group, and everyone else in his entire
block, for an inadvertant error on the part of their land grab
agents, an error which was approved by the Coopers and by the Pennsic
landcrat at the time of land grab.
Check it out on the Pennsic message board,
""Community Service" Hours... - or forced labor at War...":
http://www.pennsic.net/cgi-bin/mb/mb.cgi?cmd=List&topic=wildcat
Am I "trolling" here? You bet your sweet bippy I am... although it didn't
affect me personally at war, it affected folks I've known for years, good
honorable longtime Scadians, and I am outraged. I want as many folks as
possible to learn of this, and I want see it ended.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jeanne Francesca Fitzgerald, OWS
Susan Carroll-Clark
> Am I "trolling" here? You bet your sweet bippy I am... although it didn't
> affect me personally at war, it affected folks I've known for years, good
> honorable longtime Scadians, and I am outraged. I want as many folks as
> possible to learn of this, and I want see it ended.
If we want to see it ended, we've got to do more than complain about it in
various public venues...
I would suggest that the best way to get it ended is to write next year's
autocrat, Master Melchior, at may...@pennsicwar.org. As you may know, just
because something is introduced and run a particular way at one Pennsic does
not mean that next year's staff will like it and adopt it. Master Melchior
has been involved at a senior level in running Pennsic for many years, and
likely has his own way of doing things. When writing, provide concrete
examples of what happened, and don't just complain--suggest ways of fixing
the problem.
Nicolaa
E.F. Morrill
>Hey all... did you notice the phrase "Dead Rabbits" around Pennsic
>this year?
>It's the new system of forced volunteerism put in place at
>Pennsic this year , for offences ranging from accidentally losing one's
>medallion (5 hours community service), to parking in such a way as to
>obstruct traffic, to goofing up your group's boundaries at land grab
>(20 hours community service APIECE for an entire camp in one instance.)
Not true. It was a 20 hours per group.
Many people were "let-off" with a warning.
People who parked incorrectly or too long were repeated given warnings.
So what would you suggest? You seem to only concentrate on a small part of
the DR"s, (Name change next year to Volunteer Co-Ordination).
You are factually wrong on many points here.
Nor have you said that it is being looked into to have improvements made.
May I suggest that you assist the effort next year and volunteer to be
part of the staff?
Some parts of this sytem worked well. It did save people the embarassment
of being sent home for "BLatent" disregard for the rules.
"Some" over eager staff members took it upon thmeselves to overstepp their
bounds. They are being duly punished for their actions.
The program is in the refinement process.
>Refuse the
>community service and you get kicked off site. No warnings for first
>offences, no pleading ignorance either. You don't even have to be
>present at the time of the offence -- one poor sucker arrived on site
>to find that he had to serve 20 hours of community service, along
>with everyone else in his group, and everyone else in his entire
>block, for an inadvertant error on the part of their land grab >agents,
an error which was approved by the Coopers and by the Pennsic
>landcrat at the time of land grab.
>Check it out on the Pennsic message board,
The Cooper's had nothing to do with Land Grab or enforcing or handing out
any CS.
I would debate whether or not it was "inadvertant" on the part of groups
in E23.
Many warnings were given. Most of the rules have been in effect for at
least 4 years. Many cases were mitigated on: one's attitude when caught;
if the person had been to PW before and the "severity" of the infraction.
>""Community Service" Hours... - or forced labor at War...":
>http://www.pennsic.net/cgi-bin/mb/mb.cgi?cmd=List&topic=wildcat
>Am I "trolling" here? You bet your sweet bippy I am... although it didn't
>affect me personally at war, it affected folks I've known for years, good
>honorable longtime Scadians, and I am outraged. I want as many folks as
>possible to learn of this, and I want see it ended.
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jeanne Francesca Fitzgerald, OWS
CS has been used for years as a way to mitigate infractions of the rules.
As stated on at least one list that I now you are on, it is being looked
into to see what worked and what didnt' and will be improved next year.
You have made it sound here, that this situation has gone unnoticed.
It has not.
YOurs,
EDWARD Z
Mayor PW33
--
E.F. Morrill Icon God of the Theatre World
aka The Viscount Edward Zifran of Gendy, KSCA, OL, OP, ETC.
Have Sword - Will Travel http://www.whitebelt.com
201-681-7865 Cell. - 718-651-7299 LAND
E.F. Morrill
>Greetings--
>Nicolaa
I would heartily agree with this. Many aspects of the VOlunteer
CO-ordination team worked and some aspects did not work. Efforts are
being taken to reslove some of these issues. Master Melkor will be
refining these over the next year.
Arval
> It's the new system of forced volunteerism put in place at
> Pennsic this year , for offences ranging from accidentally losing one's
> medallion (5 hours community service), to parking in such a way as to
> obstruct traffic, to goofing up your group's boundaries at land grab
> (20 hours community service APIECE for an entire camp in one instance.)
Ignoring the factual errors and bias in your post, let me cut to the
basic question: How do you think that violations of the rules should
be addressed? Would you prefer monetary fines? Or do you think that
the rules shouldn't be enforced at all?
===========================================================================
Arval ar...@mittle.users.panix.com
Cynthia Gee
reason to lie. As for bias, certainly I'm biased. The idea of public, forced
labor demeans the ideals of service and honor that areour traditions and are
integral to the working of our Society. I am biased against any and all who
would harm our Dream.
What was wrong with the way things were done prior to this year? What
brought about the change? And why, for crying out loud, order people to do
community service for such picayune things as lost site medallions?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jeanne
"Arval" <ar...@mittle.users.panix.com> wrote in message
news:cgsvgv$6ki$1...@reader1.panix.com...
P D RUSS
Forced Labor???
The entire 10000+ Pennsic populous didn't rise up and protest this????????????
Why not?
I guess history really does repeat it's self.
I've never been a fan of punishing one person for someone's actions. I have no
respect for those that do this kind of thing.
I can see punishing the person that parks his car wrong, that is a volunetary
act.
If the group's landcrat screws up I can see him being punished but not everyone
in camp, especailly the people that haven't even shown up on site yet. That is
utterly ridiculous! I would be in favor of making move their camp to the
correct place and space.
Accidentally losing one's medallion ?? It's an *ACCIDENT*, they didn't do it
on perpose. Get real.
Tamara
Cynthia Gee
horses' mouths, in several cases. I am diametrically opposed to any sort of
*public* forced labor , and opposed to forced labor in principle for any
but the most serious of offences, as theft or brawling, or sneaking unpaid
folks in. Then perhaps it has merit as an alternative to kicking people
offsite altogether, but only if it is handled circumspectly.
I apologise for giving the impression that nothing is being done, but here
you have the opportunity to tell us all just how this will be handled in the
future, and get insights and suggestions from a wide sector of our Society,
rather than spring another "surprise" on us next war.
As for my being on next year's staff, tell me more...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Dona Jeanne
"E.F. Morrill" <ge...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cgsurv$6gn$1...@reader1.panix.com...
Todd Rich
> You are kidding, right?
> Forced Labor???
> The entire 10000+ Pennsic populous didn't rise up and protest this????????????
> Why not?
> I guess history really does repeat it's self.
> I've never been a fan of punishing one person for someone's actions. I have no
> respect for those that do this kind of thing.
> I can see punishing the person that parks his car wrong, that is a volunetary
> act.
> If the group's landcrat screws up I can see him being punished but not everyone
> in camp, especailly the people that haven't even shown up on site yet. That is
> utterly ridiculous! I would be in favor of making move their camp to the
> correct place and space.
As Edward posted, it was 20 hours per group. It was up to the group to
decide on how it was divided up.
> Accidentally losing one's medallion ?? It's an *ACCIDENT*, they didn't do it
> on perpose. Get real.
No, and if they were willing to get an wristband there was no community
service. If they wanted a new medallion, that was what the CS was for.
> Tamara
Torin
Cynthia Virtue
It sounds like it is an idea which could have been useful, but was so
poorly implemented (no warning or signoff by the attendees, no
notification of who could fine people, no printed chart of "fines" to
prevent fine inflation) that the basic concept will be irretrievably
tarnished for years.
cv
E.F. Morrill
>Sir Edward, I have stated the facts as I recieved them, straight from the
>horses' mouths, in several cases. I am diametrically opposed to any sort of
>*public* forced labor , and opposed to forced labor in principle for any
>but the most serious of offences, as theft or brawling, or sneaking unpaid
>folks in. Then perhaps it has merit as an alternative to kicking people
>offsite altogether, but only if it is handled circumspectly.
>I apologise for giving the impression that nothing is being done, but here
>you have the opportunity to tell us all just how this will be handled in the
>future, and get insights and suggestions from a wide sector of our Society,
>rather than spring another "surprise" on us next war.
>As for my being on next year's staff, tell me more...
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Dona Jeanne
The I will assume that you have been misinformed about the actual intent
and goings on at PW33. I would have thought you might research more before
bringing this matter to a much wider forum and have offered some
constructive criticism that might help me advise next years Mayor.
Community Service(CS) for transgressions of the rules has been used for
years by various Autocrats/Mayors and "Seneschal's COurts". It was not
really a "suprise". This year it seemed to come to a head. I freely admit
that there were overeager staff members who overstepped their areas of
authority. Believe me they are being dealt with.
The main purpose of Dead Rabbits, whose name is being change to Volunteer
Co-Ordination Office (VCO), was to provide a clearing house for those
wishing to volunteer for something to do at PW33. The secondary purpose
was to act as a clearing house for those whose actions had warrented
having to do CS. The areas seems to have become blurred. It was an
experiment that is being refined and Master Melkor Stoneteeth, next
years's Mayor will be refining the duties and responsibilities of the
office for next year.
Many of the Rules are site specific to Pennsic War and maybe a wider group
may bring insight but I would postulate that if one has never been to PW,
then it might be difficult to assess the situation.
The examples you used above, are ones that there is no CS. People who
engage in those activities, "WILL" be sent home" and/or possibly face
modern charges.
Many things mitigated any CS handed out. Honest mistakes were often met
with, "hmmmm. well, don't do it again". Oftne times the attitude was,
"Yeah I broke the rules, waddaya gonna do about it?", which merited a
higher degree of CS. Rumors are flying that we forced people to heavy
labor. That too is not a fact. Never was anyone forced to service that
they could not perform. If people were not able bodied they were not
forced to move hay bales for the battle field. Assignments were given
according to ones' skills.
Thusly I would ask you, what would you suggest be done with those who
break our rules?
What about people who chronically refuse to move their cars even after
they have been asked nicely and then ticketed twice? Cars that block the
road and make access to port-a-johns impossible? Or even worse yet, makes
ambulance runs impossible too?
What about peple who steal or move street signs? It does seem that that
action might be not very important, that is until a Chirurgeon or
Public Safety Patrol needs to radio in a heart attack.
What do you do with the person who forgot or lost their medallion and my
staff must use an hour of their time to make sure that the person is who
they say they are, get them to Troll, get/find their medallion
What about people who knowingly circumvent the Land Alocation system?
What about the parents who allow their 7 year old to wander about? The
child becomes lost and Public safety spends two hours trying to find the
child's parents only to be met with "Oh, there you are, Kid?" instead of
a distraght parent who has also been looking for the child?
All these examples cause staff to have to take "their" time out of their
Pennsic and deal with the actions of others who either disregard the rules
or freely admit they did not read the rules or don't even care about the
rules.
Is it fair to people who have in essense given up "their" vacation to make
sure that 11000 can have a nice and safe Pennsic, to let these people "go"
without some sort of re-inforcement that the rules must be followed?
Please. Be part of the solution. Pot-shots at me won't solve the problem.
I do welcome all suggestions on this or any other matter as concerns
Pennsic War.
Yours,
EDWARD Z
Michael Grossberg
"Cynthia Virtue" <cvi...@thibault.org> wrote in message
news:v6GdnZWff_M...@speakeasy.net...
Also, there is the problem of, to borrow a phrase, "tin plated dictators
with delusions of
godhood". It's been said that a few of the people trying to implement the
dead rabbits policy got a
little carried away, and made assessments that were beyond their authority.
It's also been
said that these persons are being disciplined.
The thing is, power corrupts. There will always be someone who takes a
little bit of authority
and tries to run it into tyranny. Had any of these gentles approached me
with their attitude and
enforced servitude, my first response would have been to tell them where to
put it(in no uncertain
terms), and to demand the immediate presence of the autocrat. A polite
request to correct some
minor infraction in one's camp area may be accepted with grace, and acted
upon. A pronouncement
that you have, in effect, committed an offence and must be punished is not
likely to sit well.
If this occurs at Pennsic again, remember that the autocrat is ultimately
the one responsible for what
happens at the event. There are only two entities who can legally expel
someone from Pennsic;
the Coopers, and the autocrat. Anyone else is, at best, acting under the
authority of the two mentioned. In cases like that, always question
authority; demand to see the one in charge, and hear
it from his/her own mouth.
This is, of course, my opinion. Please feel free to shoot back.
Gardr Gunnarsson
Barony of Settmour Swamp
Tim McDaniel
Would someone please explain the derivation of the term? The only
association coming to my mind is with the obsolete human chorionic
gonadotropin rabbit ovary test, but that only suggests that labor will
happen some months in the future.
Danielis Lindum Colonia
--
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tm...@panix.com
David Serhienko
> In article <cgt73l$8rm$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
> E.F. Morrill <ge...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>>The main purpose of Dead Rabbits
>
>
> Would someone please explain the derivation of the term? The only
> association coming to my mind is with the obsolete human chorionic
> gonadotropin rabbit ovary test, but that only suggests that labor will
> happen some months in the future.
Mid-1800s Street Gang in New York. No idea how the name comes to apply,
except that the Dad Rabbits were one of the two main gangs in the recent
film 'Gangs of New York'.
http://www.fact-index.com/d/de/dead_rabbits.html has a short history of
the Dead Rabbits.
Deykin
E.F. Morrill
>Tim McDaniel wrote:
>Deykin
It was a play onthe fact that I, as Mayor, was going to be "BOss Gendy" at
PW33. The name has failed miserably I admit and will be changed to the
Volunteer Co-Ordination Office for future Pennsics. It was/is designed to
be the clearing house of people who wish to volunteer at Pennsic for
something but maybe do not know "what" they should volunteer for. The VOOC
will keep a list of requests from Departments as to special staffing needs
they may have. For Example, Say the Battel field co-ordinator sees that
he/she may need extra help on the day of the "GReatBIG BATTLE of The
Bridge and Town", they may tell the VOOC they need 10 extra bodies to help
move hay bales at 2pm. Other departments would give simular requests.
People then could go to the VOOC and say "Hey! WHat can I do?" and be
given a list of options and times.
EDWARD Z
Mayor PW33
Bronwynmgn
>brought about the change?
And as has been pointed out to you on other message boards prior to your post
here, since people kept breaking the same rules, that had been in place for
years, over and over again, clearly the way these issues were being dealt with
before were not having a satisfactory effect on changing people's behavior.
Therefore something new needed to be tried.
If you are biased against any and all who harm the dream, then you should be
biased against people who feel they can ignore Society rules (wearing an
attempt at garb during the event) and Pennsic rules "because it's Pennsic", or
"because I'm not a member of the SCA" or any of a thousand other reasons people
offer to explain why they don't or shouldn't have to follow the rules at
Pennsic.
You've also had the other side of the stories you keep posting explained to you
on other boards, and you keep ignoring them and posting the same inflammatory
post everywhere. That is certainly trolling, and does nothing except to get
other people angry about something they weren't involved in and don't know the
whole story about.
Brangwayna
Bronwynmgn
>everyone
>in camp, especailly the people that haven't even shown up on site yet. That
>is
>utterly ridiculous! I would be in favor of making move their camp to the
>correct place and space.
My husband was on land staff. The land agent for each group on the block was
the person who received 20 hours of service (because all the groups in the
block were involved in the "mistake"). In some cases, the group they were
camped with *got permission* to share the service hours to help out their land
agent. The land staff DID NOT assign community service hours to people who had
not yet arrived on site, but the members of their group may have told them of
the penalty and asked them to help pay it. In one case, the reason the group
was not asked to shift their borders was because they had already erected
multiple structures on the land they weren't supposed to have, and the land
staff gave the land agent community service rather than ask them to tear down
the structures, move them, and rebuild them.
This is the fifth place I have had to post this same rebuttal, and 4 of them
have been the result of the same person complaining about it - and in most
cases, starting the so-called "discussion" of the Dead Rabbits in the first
place.
Brangwayna
Insane Ranter
"Bronwynmgn" <bronw...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20040829180738...@mb-m04.aol.com...
The problem with this solution is that people might start to the idea in
there head that... well if we take more land that we're assigned then we'll
just have to do hours XYZ for it... what say you we wanna grab the extra
land for X hours each? yea? ok then!"
Silly as it may sound it may/will happen.
Arval
> It was a play onthe fact that I, as Mayor, was going to be "BOss Gendy" at
> PW33. The name has failed miserably I admit and will be changed to the
> Volunteer Co-Ordination Office for future Pennsics.
If you're going to change the name, it might be nice to try to find a
reasonably medieval name that fits the bill. If you think there's any
chance that could happen, I'll help.
===========================================================================
Arval ar...@mittle.users.panix.com
Arval
>> It sounds like it is an idea which could have been useful, but was so
>> poorly implemented (no warning or signoff by the attendees, no
>> notification of who could fine people, no printed chart of "fines" to
>> prevent fine inflation) that the basic concept will be irretrievably
>> tarnished for years.
Judging from what's been posted here, since I've not seen it
first-hand, it sounds like typical SCA-rumor-mill stuff: third-hand
anecdotal evidence much of which is grossly exaggerated and taken out
of context. That the system has problems isn't surprising, but I
caution everyone to avoid taking any of these reports at face value
until you've talked to people who are directly involved -- the people
who broke the rules and had to pay the cost, not their friends or
their neighbors or any other third party. And before you draw any
conclusions, ask these people how _they_ think the specific rule ought
to have been enforced, if not by community service.
My main concern with the general idea is that if community serice
becomes a punishment, then fewer people will see it as a duty that
everyone shares. I don't know the exact details of the present
system, so I can't comment in detail. But in general, I think it
would be more useful to assign community service to a camp rather than
to individuals (which is apparently done in at least some cases) -- if
one schmuck is breaking the rules, then making his friends share the
penalty will make it a LOT less likely that the problem will recur. I
think it might also be useful to have each camp _start_ the War owing
a community service tax proportion to the camp size, which is then
increased by rules violations. (And when I say "each camp", I
definitely include royal encampments. They might start with twice the
per capita tax of a normal tax, to make up for their special
treatement.) This would make service in general seem less like a
punishment and more like a common duty.
===========================================================================
Arval ar...@mittle.users.panix.com
Jacquetta
only one question that hasn't been answered already. Why were people who
accidentally dropped their medallions and went to claim them according to the
site rules, forced to do community service to claim them? Or is that just a
rumor?
Lady Jacquetta de Mehun
Lynn Shaftic-Averill
Rest Not!/Life is sweeping by/go and dare before you die,/ something mighty and
sublime/leave behind to conquer time. -- Goethe
Greg Lindahl
> owing a community service tax proportion to the camp size, which is
> then increased by rules violations.
I think this would be a terrible idea -- I want to work alongside
people who are positively motivated to be there.
-- Gregory
(who volunteered a lot at Troll for Pennsic 33.)
Chass Brown
the Dead Rabbit, although they did say they were being punished neglected to
say how. This post thread alone would scare people off from Pennsic next
year.........
--
Chass of Rundel of Ansteorra aka
Charinthalis Del Sans of the portable Chariot
Honorable Recruiter of the House of the Red Shark (Have you seen my Belaying
Pin??)
Muddeler of Mead, Ailment of Ale, Whiner of wine.
"Arval" <ar...@mittle.users.panix.com> wrote in message
news:cgtn2v$dq1$3...@reader1.panix.com...
Drew Nicholson
> Cynthia Gee <gold...@earthlink.com> wrote:
>
> > It's the new system of forced volunteerism put in place at
> > Pennsic this year , for offences ranging from accidentally losing one's
> > medallion (5 hours community service), to parking in such a way as to
> > obstruct traffic, to goofing up your group's boundaries at land grab
> > (20 hours community service APIECE for an entire camp in one instance.)
>
> Ignoring the factual errors and bias in your post, let me cut to the
> basic question: How do you think that violations of the rules should
> be addressed? Would you prefer monetary fines? Or do you think that
> the rules shouldn't be enforced at all?
>
Personally, I'd like to see some sort of "next day court" type of thing,
with a short overview of the issue, a chance for the accused to defend
themselves, and, in the end, a selection of punishments for at least the
low-level infractions -- Community service, a fine, or "period
punishment" -- a few hours in the stocks, for example, or walking through
the food court with a sign that says "I left my car parked on the road
overnight" or something like that.
The implementation, however, reeks of complexity, and I don't know how to
fix that.
purple
Drew Nicholson
>
> My main concern with the general idea is that if community serice
> becomes a punishment, then fewer people will see it as a duty that
> everyone shares. I don't know the exact details of the present
> system, so I can't comment in detail. But in general, I think it
> would be more useful to assign community service to a camp rather than
> to individuals (which is apparently done in at least some cases) -- if
> one schmuck is breaking the rules, then making his friends share the
> penalty will make it a LOT less likely that the problem will recur. I
> think it might also be useful to have each camp _start_ the War owing
> a community service tax proportion to the camp size, which is then
> increased by rules violations. (And when I say "each camp", I
> definitely include royal encampments. They might start with twice the
> per capita tax of a normal tax, to make up for their special
> treatement.) This would make service in general seem less like a
> punishment and more like a common duty.
>
I _like_ that idea.
P D RUSS
>> one schmuck is breaking the rules, then making his friends share the penalty
will make it a LOT less likely that the problem will recur.>>>>>
Gee, let's just replace with the word "Schmuck" with a racist slur and then see
well the idea goes over.
But the same idea is behind that kind of thought.
Tamara
Tim McDaniel
Drew Nicholson <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote:
>"period punishment" -- a few hours in the stocks, for example
Unintended Side-Effect: massive road blockage in the Tuchux camp.
Danielis Lincolinum
Dennis M. O'Connor
having difficulty getting enough people to volunteer.
IMHO this is a consequences of the estrangement of
the general populace from the politically-active
power-seekers that fill the top positions, which in
itself is a consequence of an award system that
rewards political connections more than hard work.
See, for some reason the hard work of those
who don't have political connections is never
"excellent" enough, as determined in the secret
deliberations of the Circles, to merit the big awards.
No surprise, then that eventually these people
stop working so hard, or stop working at all.
So then you have to FORCE people to "volunteer".
Or pay them ($3.45/hr, IIRC) like Estrella does.
--
Dennis M. O'Connor dm...@primenet.com
David Friedman
"Drew Nicholson" <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote:
I don't.
There is a large difference between a duty that is self-perceived and
self imposed and one that is compelled. Part of what's nice about the
SCA is our ability to get people to do things because they want to do
them, or feel an obligation to do them.
My fundamental objection to the system being discussed is that I don't
like the idea of service as a punishment, or compulsory labor.
--
David/Cariadoc
www.daviddfriedman.com
Robert Uhl
>
> > I think it might also be useful to have each camp _start_ the War
> > owing a community service tax proportion to the camp size, which is
> > then increased by rules violations. (And when I say "each camp", I
> > definitely include royal encampments. They might start with twice
> > the per capita tax of a normal tax, to make up for their special
> > treatement.) This would make service in general seem less like a
> > punishment and more like a common duty.
>
> I _like_ that idea.
Better not call them 'volunteers,' then--volunteering is voluntary.
Perhaps 'conscripts,' or 'slaves' would be more apropos.
My younger brothers were forced, as a condition of graduation, to
'volunteer' by their high school. I imagine that the idea was to show
them the rewards of serving others. Naturally, the lesson they learnt
was something else entirely.
A wonderful quote is attributed to Congressman Ron Paul, in regards to
the draft:
Congress has the authority to raise an army, but it does not have the
constitutional authority to enslave a certain group to bear the brunt
of the fighting. A society that cherishes liberty will easily find
volunteer defenders if it is attacked. A free society that cannot
find those willing to defend itself without coercion cannot survive,
and probably does not deserve to.
It applies equally well to the SCA: a society which cannot find those
willing to serve it without coercion cannot survive, and probably does
not deserve to.
I'm all in favour of service, and I try to help out at any event I
attend. Doesn't mean I wish to force anyone else to pitch in, and it
certainly doesn't mean I wish to be forced to pitch in.
And yes, I'm aware that nobody is proposing force in the sense of
sticking a weapon to someone's head; and I'm quite aware that SCA events
are something one joins in by choice; but I _do_ consider it wrong to
force someone to choose between not playing and pitching in. They also
serve, who only provide background colour, or something:-)
--
Robert Uhl <ru...@4dv.net>
I once successfully declined a departmental retreat, saying that on that
day I planned instead to advance. --Alan J. Rosenthal
Dennis M. O'Connor
> I think it might also be useful to have each camp
> _start_ the War owing a community service tax
Yeah, let's FORCE people to "volunteer" !
That's the old SCA spirit, Arval !
It used to be that enough people would volunteer
on their own, without bribes or coercion.
No more, it seems.
I've got my own (already posted) theory on
why they don't do that anymore, but credible
alternative explanations would be amusing to read.
Anyone ??
Dennis M. O'Connor
> It applies equally well to the SCA: a society which cannot find those
> willing to serve it without coercion cannot survive, and probably does
> not deserve to.
I agree with Robert 100%. There should be no draft
in a society that calls itself free: not in the US of A,
and not in the SCA.
Besides, I've already volunteered, _really_ volunteered,
many hundreds of hours to the SCA, so why should _I_ be
_forced_ to "volunteer" even 1 ?
David Serhienko
That thought occurred to me immediately... "Ah look, a way to buy land
with the one resource I have plenty of: time".
Deykin
David Friedman
"Dennis M. O'Connor" <dm...@primenet.com> wrote:
> I read this as a sign that Pennisc, like Estrella, is
> having difficulty getting enough people to volunteer.
>
> IMHO this is a consequences of the estrangement of
> the general populace from the politically-active
> power-seekers that fill the top positions, which in
> itself is a consequence of an award system that
> rewards political connections more than hard work.
An alternative explanation is that it is the result of too much
centralizaton.
Consider the same issue in the context of the Society as a whole. Almost
everything we do is done by volunteer labor--demos, classes, cooking
feasts, research, ... . Yet somehow, the SCA Inc. finds that it has to
do its part of the job--a tiny part of the total, measured by hours of
labor--with paid labor.
I think the explanation is that the Corporation has concentrated quite a
lot of work in a small area. Volunteer labor is, in practice, "paid"
with status, gratitude, and similar non-pecuniary values. There is
enough of such coin in a shire to "pay" a seneschal, even enough in a
kingdom to "pay" a kingdom seneschal. But there isn't enough in the area
where the corporation is headquartered to pay for all the labor needed
to run the central office and the Corporation. That's one argument in
favor of decentralization--of moving more of the work down to where the
volunteer labor can be found.
I suspect the same is true of Pennsic. If some job, such as security, is
done by each barony for itself, the people who do it can be rewarded
with the gratitude of their friends (and being fed dinner without having
to help cook it). The more such jobs are concentrated, the harder it
becomes to do things that way. We don't seem to have any problem finding
the labor necessary to lay out encampments--decide what tent goes where,
once the boundaries of the encampment have been set.
Which raises the obvious question of whether there are ways of changing
how Pennsic is run that would shift more of the work further down the
pyramid--from Pennsic staff to local groups. Since I have played no
significant role in running Pennsic for a very long time, I don't know
the answer, but my guess is that there probably are. Certainly it is a
question worth thinking about.
--
David/Cariadoc
www.daviddfriedman.com
Zebee Johnstone
David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.com> wrote:
>
> There is a large difference between a duty that is self-perceived and
> self imposed and one that is compelled. Part of what's nice about the
> SCA is our ability to get people to do things because they want to do
> them, or feel an obligation to do them.
I agree that volunteers are way better.
and that there is a problem with people choosing to violate rules,
knowing there's no useful penalty.
If trying to fix both those things at once is no go, what can be done
about either of them?
I suppose the start is to find out *why* people are not volunteering,
and *why* the break the rules they are breaking.
I suspect that both boil down to an insufficient sense of community and
an oversufficient sense of self.
Not easily fixable one week a year!
I presume someone's tried making volunteer hours a war point?
Silfren
Ted Eisenstein
> I suspect the same is true of Pennsic. If some job, such as security, is
> done by each barony for itself, the people who do it can be rewarded
> with the gratitude of their friends (and being fed dinner without having
> to help cook it). The more such jobs are concentrated, the harder it
> becomes to do things that way. We don't seem to have any problem finding
> the labor necessary to lay out encampments--decide what tent goes where,
> once the boundaries of the encampment have been set.
How would you handle multiple-group functions, then? Each group could
handle its own security, but who handles cross-group issues, public
areas and roadways,and the like? And areas that absolutely need to be
staffed 24 hours a day, like Chirurgeons' Point or Troll?
I'd suspect you'd still need at least a co-ordinator for each area, if
only to maintain the lists of who does what when, and that could well
lead to centralization.
Alban
DeeWolff
In article <41327252$0$10700$2c56...@news.cablerocket.com>, "Chass Brown"
<ch...@allegiance.tv> wrote:
<< This post thread alone would scare people off from Pennsic next
year.........
>><BR><BR>
Err, nope.
Spent my most favorite time at war this year. Didn't break any
rules.Volunteered lots/ Had fun.
Andrea
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not
an act, but a habit. -- Aristotle
Chass Brown
referring to the newbs.. We were planning on going to pennsic next year now
we are rediscussing it.
--
Chass of Rundel of Ansteorra aka
Charinthalis Del Sans of the portable Chariot
Honorable Recruiter of the House of the Red Shark (Have you seen my Belaying
Pin??)
Muddeler of Mead, Ailment of Ale, Whiner of wine.
"DeeWolff" <deew...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20040829233000...@mb-m04.aol.com...
E.F. Morrill
FIrst let me say that, we had plenty of voluteers for positions at Pennsic
War 33. Even moving hay bales for the Battle Scenerios. Though we
could/can always use more, we were blessed with many people, including my
"full-time" staff of over 160 people who freely gave their time and
efforts to bring Pennsic War to over 11000 people.
Second, The Community Service (CS) was in no way used to gain more
volunteers. This was a way to allow people who had broken our rules a
chance to "atone" for their errors and still stay and enjoy Pennsic.
At no time did I or my staff ay or think "HMMM.. We need 10 extra people
today, let's go looking for wrongdoers".... In fact completion of ones CS
was on the honor system. NOt once did I write a persons name down and then
go check to see if they had completeed their CS. I am sure there may be
some that did not complete their CS and feel they beat the system.
However, I do know that many people actually not only co=mpleted their CS
but then turned around andvolunteered additional time.
I have admitted in this and other forums parts of this Dead Rabbit Office
did not work and I am workign with nexts years' Mayor and Volunteer
Co-Ordinator to improve the overall system. But we are still stuck with
the question of what do we do with people who blatently violate our rules?
Pennsic is a two year planning cycle now. It is a concerted effort of a
lot of people. The person who is the Mayor for PW35 (2006) is already
working on budget and staffing. I would encourage all who would like to
see the inner workings of Pennsic to contact next year's Mayor (PW34,
2005) and offer their services). Or possibly look into the Mayor Training
Program (MTP) a series of seminars, booklets and classes that demystifies
the Pennsic war and show the time commitment and other qualifications of
Division Head, Deprtment Head and the Mayor's position.
I would like to thank all thos who attended and all those who volunteered,
even if for two hours. Your help was indeed a big part of the overall
successof PW33.
YOurs,
EDWARD Z
Mayor, Pennsic War 33
E.F. Morrill
>I was not referring to people who have been to pennsic being scared off I am
>referring to the newbs.. We were planning on going to pennsic next year now
>we are rediscussing it.
There is no reason not to go to Pennsic. THere are no Press Gangs walking
about "Forcing" innocents off the street into doing work. THere may be
those who violate our rules who may be offered a chance at Community
Service as opposed to being sent home for major Viloations.
We had plenty of "newbies" that had a wonderfull time at Pennsic this
year.
EDWARD Z
>--
>Chass of Rundel of Ansteorra aka
>Charinthalis Del Sans of the portable Chariot
>Honorable Recruiter of the House of the Red Shark (Have you seen my Belaying
>Pin??)
>Muddeler of Mead, Ailment of Ale, Whiner of wine.
>"DeeWolff" <deew...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
>news:20040829233000...@mb-m04.aol.com...
>>
>> In article <41327252$0$10700$2c56...@news.cablerocket.com>, "Chass Brown"
>> <ch...@allegiance.tv> wrote:
>>
>> << This post thread alone would scare people off from Pennsic next
>> year.........
>> >><BR><BR>
>>
>> Err, nope.
>>
>> Spent my most favorite time at war this year. Didn't break any
>> rules.Volunteered lots/ Had fun.
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrea
>> We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not
>> an act, but a habit. -- Aristotle
David Serhienko
difficulty in finding ways to volunteer effectively.
Usually this is a case of those in charge being too busy to assign
optimally helpful tasks to people who randomly wander by asking what
they can do to be helpful (my usual method).
Sure, there is always a need for another pair of hands setting up
chairs. It gets done that much faster, but there is often something
more urgent to be done.
I think the idea of a centralized volunteer clearing house is an
excellent one. It gives those who, like me, want to help, but don't
know who to ask (as happens at many many large events of all orgs), an
opportunity to help where help is needed. Too often, I end up lending a
heand wherever I ahppen to be. While that is helpful in the general
case, it isn't optimal.
So, whatever else can be said about the Dead Rabbits program, it is
still a good idea, IMO.
Deykin
John Groseclose
<al...@socket.net> wrote:
> How would you handle multiple-group functions, then? Each group could
> handle its own security, but who handles cross-group issues, public
> areas and roadways,and the like? And areas that absolutely need to be
> staffed 24 hours a day, like Chirurgeons' Point or Troll?
While I would agree that the tollbooth/registration point must be
staffed, I disagree that Chirurgeons' Point "...absolutely need(s) to
be staffed 24 hours a day..."
From the Chirurgeons' Handbook
(http://www.sca.org/officers/chirurgeon/ChiHandbook.HTM):
"VI.A.2. It is not required that the Chirurgeonate be present at any
SCA event. A Chirurgeon who is present is not required to provide first
aid unless required otherwise by law.
VI.A.3. If the Chirurgeonate is not functioning at an event, any
injuries should be handled in the manner they would normally be handled
regardless of their happening at an SCA event. It behooves any autocrat
to know how to reach emergency medical services quickly in the event of
an injury or illness."
From Corpora (http://www.sca.org/docs/govdocs.pdf):
"H. The Chirurgeon
The Chirurgeon administers the organization that is responsible for
voluntary first aid at Society events, including assisting participants
in tournament combat, notifying attendees of health and safety
concerns, and such other related activities as kingdom law and custom
may entail."
As with some other functions fulfilled by volunteers at SCA events, the
Chirurgeonate is STRICTLY A VOLUNTARY SERVICE on the part of those
people who provide it.
I submit that there are other functions that could also be "done
without," but that those services and functions make for a better
(safer) event. They're also quite a bit of fun, between crises - as a
lot of people who've done the "night shift" with me can attest.
--
spam delenda est
Cynthia Gee
have had to post this same rebuttal, and 4 of them have been the result of
the same person complaining about it - and in most cases, starting the
so-called "discussion" of the Dead Rabbits in the first place."
Yes, and I am that person. I started this discussion on this group and in
three other places after reading postings on
http://www.pennsic.net , because I believed that this was an important issue
worthy of everyone's attention, and I started the discussions prior to
hearing your rebuttal. That is why we discuss things-- to bring up a topic,
and hear all sides of the story, and decide for ourselves the merits of the
various ideas presented.
Now, I 'm sorry if what I said cames across as a rant. I have nothing
against you personally, Bronwynmgn, (although I find that I disagree with
you at nearly every turn) or against Sir Edward either-- and except for this
"dead Rabbits" mess, he and the Pennsic staff have always done a great job.
Too, it's entirely possible that I am wrong or have been mislead -- heaven
knows I've been wrong before, and been lied to, too - but I did get most of
my info first hand, from the persons involved. If what I'm saying is
incorrect, as you state, then why is the person to whom it happened saying
otherwise? I see no reason why the folks from E23 block should choose to
lie, what could it get them, now that Pennsic is over? (and this is not a
rhetorical question, I'd really like your input on this.) Moreover, should
I find that I am wrong regarding the facts as I have presented them here
and elsewhere, I will be willing and eager to publicly apologise for my
error. But I won't apologise for starting the discussion, and making people
aware of the situation.
My main point, however, and the reason I'm making such a big deal of this,
is that many of the people involved in these Pennsic land mixups appear to
have been guilty of **honest mistakes**, not some kind of underhanded
gerrymandering (which SHOULD be penalized), and yet there were those who
felt that this too was deserving of punishment. Worst of all, that
punishment took the form of honest labor; which, by using service as a
punishment, demeans and attaches a stigma to the ideal of Service which is a
hallmark of our Society, and also demeans the hours of work contributed by
*willing* volunteers. This is the thing that concerns me most of all.
I first became aware of most of this (and grew outraged by it) less than a
week ago, after reading postings on
http://www.pennsic.net . Since then I have learned that steps are being
taken to prevent the same problems from happening next year. If there is
anything that I personally can do to help fix this or make next Pennsic a
better War, please let me know. As it is, the least we can all do is to
discuss the matter thoroughly on this and other forums. Who knows what
solutions we might come up with as a group by putting our heads together
and discussing this openly?
Respectfully, Jeanne Francesca Fitzgerald
ngwayna
>
Cynthia Gee
sure this will be cleared up soon.
"E.F. Morrill" <ge...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cgu8ot$j91$1...@reader1.panix.com...
Cynthia Gee
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jeanne
"Zebee Johnstone" <ze...@zip.com.au> wrote in message
news:slrncj56bv...@zeus.zipworld.com.au...
Greg Lindahl
David Serhienko <david.s...@ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
>I think the idea of a centralized volunteer clearing house is an
>excellent one. It gives those who, like me, want to help, but don't
>know who to ask (as happens at many many large events of all orgs), an
>opportunity to help where help is needed. Too often, I end up lending a
>heand wherever I ahppen to be. While that is helpful in the general
>case, it isn't optimal.
>
>So, whatever else can be said about the Dead Rabbits program, it is
>still a good idea, IMO.
Did you see anyone criticizing the idea of a centralized volunteer
clearinghouse? I didn't. It's important to realize when there are
separate things, where only some of them are being criticized.
-- Gregory
David Serhienko
No, I didn't. Thus my clipping of all the criticism of the rest of the
Dead Rabbit program.
I felt that, with acrimony of some sort beginning, it was worth stating
that the clearinghouse was a good idea.
I could stated my purpose more clearly.
Deykin
Steve Mesnick
>>The name has failed miserably I admit and will be changed to the
>>Volunteer Co-Ordination Office for future Pennsics.
ARVAL SAID:
> If you're going to change the name, it might be nice to try to find a
> reasonably medieval name that fits the bill. If you think there's any
> chance that could happen, I'll help.
I SAY:
ME TOO!!! I have been decrying the mundanification of SCA office
names and institutions for years, and it really came to a head this
year at Pennsic. Now, let me say that I *do* understand the motivation:
folks need to know that, say, the Disability Services Office exists
and would likely be mystified if we called it the Porter (the original
name for this service in the Eastrealm). I recognize that there is a
time for clear modern designations. But I suggest that there are also
times to be medieval and then s/he ought to be called the Porter.
As for Public Safety, formerly Security, there is no need to reinvent
the wheel out of Oriental insularity. Our brethren of the "Occidental
Rite" of the SCA (West, Caid, etc.) have long had an office they call
the Constabulary, complete with a registered badge (a blue mace, as I
recall).
I must note that one of the most crucial institutions,
First-Aid Services, gets along without a modern name: everyone
calls it the Chirurgeonate, a name with which few outside the
SCA are familiar. Surely if the medics can do this without confusion,
the Deputy Mayor for Cultural Affairs (ack! ptui!) can do as well.
In short, although there is a place for clarity, there is a place where
our modern institutions (like ourselves) need personas. I am *VERY
EAGER* to help in this regard.
Steffan ap Kennydd
Former Northeast District Coordinator for Pure and Applied
Semiotics
SCA, Inc.
%^)
Insane Ranter
> Ed wrote:
>
> > It was a play onthe fact that I, as Mayor, was going to be "BOss Gendy"
at
> > PW33. The name has failed miserably I admit and will be changed to the
> > Volunteer Co-Ordination Office for future Pennsics.
>
> reasonably medieval name that fits the bill. If you think there's any
> chance that could happen, I'll help.
>
The Inquisition
Insane Ranter
> "Cynthia Virtue" <cvi...@thibault.org> wrote in message
>
> >> It sounds like it is an idea which could have been useful, but was so
> >> poorly implemented (no warning or signoff by the attendees, no
> >> notification of who could fine people, no printed chart of "fines" to
> >> prevent fine inflation) that the basic concept will be irretrievably
> >> tarnished for years.
>
> Judging from what's been posted here, since I've not seen it
> first-hand, it sounds like typical SCA-rumor-mill stuff: third-hand
> anecdotal evidence much of which is grossly exaggerated and taken out
> of context. That the system has problems isn't surprising, but I
> caution everyone to avoid taking any of these reports at face value
> until you've talked to people who are directly involved -- the people
> who broke the rules and had to pay the cost, not their friends or
> their neighbors or any other third party. And before you draw any
> conclusions, ask these people how _they_ think the specific rule ought
> to have been enforced, if not by community service.
>
> My main concern with the general idea is that if community serice
> becomes a punishment, then fewer people will see it as a duty that
> everyone shares.
Why can't we just stick up stocks and flogg them?
Insane Ranter
"Robert Uhl" <ru...@4dv.net> wrote in message
news:m3pt59u...@localhost.localdomain...
> "Drew Nicholson" <anicho...@comcast.net> writes:
> >
> > > I think it might also be useful to have each camp _start_ the War
> > > owing a community service tax proportion to the camp size, which is
> > > then increased by rules violations. (And when I say "each camp", I
> > > definitely include royal encampments. They might start with twice
> > > the per capita tax of a normal tax, to make up for their special
> > > treatement.) This would make service in general seem less like a
> > > punishment and more like a common duty.
> >
> > I _like_ that idea.
>
> Better not call them 'volunteers,' then--volunteering is voluntary.
> Perhaps 'conscripts,' or 'slaves' would be more apropos.
>
> My younger brothers were forced, as a condition of graduation, to
> 'volunteer' by their high school. I imagine that the idea was to show
> them the rewards of serving others. Naturally, the lesson they learnt
> was something else entirely.
13th. Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment
for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist
within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Tangent....the High School thing is wrong violates this...
Does the breaking of the rules constitute a crime? Convicted also?
Insane Ranter
"Tim McDaniel" <tm...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cgu22f$ae9$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us...
> In article <kMydndUup7n...@comcast.com>,
> Drew Nicholson <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >"period punishment" -- a few hours in the stocks, for example
>
> Unintended Side-Effect: massive road blockage in the Tuchux camp.
This is a bad thing?
Insane Ranter
"David Serhienko" <david.s...@ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote in message
news:10j55ok...@corp.supernews.com...
Oddly enough it'd happen too with that number of people...
Derek Lyons
>"Robert Uhl" <ru...@4dv.net> wrote ...
>> It applies equally well to the SCA: a society which cannot find those
>> willing to serve it without coercion cannot survive, and probably does
>> not deserve to.
>
>I agree with Robert 100%. There should be no draft
>in a society that calls itself free: not in the US of A,
>and not in the SCA.
If the situation under discussion was a draft, you and he would have a
point. But it's not. Comparing a general draft to the situation
under discussion is absurd.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
Derek Lyons
>Yes, and I am that person. I started this discussion on this group and in
>three other places after reading postings on http://www.pennsic.net
M'lady. It is intuitively obvious that you *didn't* read the postings
on the referenced website. Had you done so, you'd have noted that
numerous things you've claimed here in the last twenty four hours
were debunked in messages dated days ago.
I heartily recommend that you read the entire thread from the
begining.
http://www.pennsic.net/cgi-bin/mb/mb.cgi?cmd=read&topic=wildcat&id=1093284872&offset=0
Susan Carroll-Clark
> IMHO this is a consequences of the estrangement of
> the general populace from the politically-active
> power-seekers that fill the top positions, which in
> itself is a consequence of an award system that
> rewards political connections more than hard work.
I think you are overgeneralizing from your own experiences again.
Pennsic, unlike Estrella, is not run by a single kingdom. Because of the
dynamics of the relationships between the various kingdoms (along with the
Horde and Horde Moritu, both of who have also always had people involved in
running Pennsic), it is much more difficult to do well well in a Pennsic
leadership position if you are purely a political power seeker--because you
can't assume that the political connections you have in your own kingdom are
going to do one whit of good when dealing with people from multiple
kingdoms.
As a result, the pure political players--those who aren't willing to put in
the work-- are usually weeded out at the lower levels because they're not
pulling their weight.
My own opinion about why it's sometimes difficult to find volunteers at
Pennsic is related to its size. When you're talking about an even with over
11,000 people attending, the small community feel, where everyone pitches in
because they can directly see the results, is largely absent. It's easy to
assume at Pennsic that "they"--the people on staff--are going to take care
of all of the behind-the-scenes stuff, much as they would if you went to a
hotel or resort.
Nicolaa
Dennis M. O'Connor
You must have missed it when Arval proposed a draft.
Robert and I were responding to Arval's proposal.
--
David Friedman
> > I suspect the same is true of Pennsic. If some job, such as security, is
> > done by each barony for itself, the people who do it can be rewarded
> > with the gratitude of their friends (and being fed dinner without having
> > to help cook it). The more such jobs are concentrated, the harder it
> > becomes to do things that way. We don't seem to have any problem finding
> > the labor necessary to lay out encampments--decide what tent goes where,
> > once the boundaries of the encampment have been set.
>
> How would you handle multiple-group functions, then? Each group could
> handle its own security, but who handles cross-group issues, public
> areas and roadways,and the like? And areas that absolutely need to be
> staffed 24 hours a day, like Chirurgeons' Point or Troll?
I'm not arguing that the centalized elements can be reduced to
zero--just that it might be possible to reduce them.
--
David/Cariadoc
www.daviddfriedman.com
Drew Nicholson
Not if this year is any indication. Groups that get high orders of merit
from the east apparently don't screw up that much...
Drew Nicholson
news:m3pt59u...@localhost.localdomain...
> "Drew Nicholson" <anicho...@comcast.net> writes:
> >
> > > I think it might also be useful to have each camp _start_ the War
> > > owing a community service tax proportion to the camp size, which is
> > > then increased by rules violations. (And when I say "each camp", I
> > > definitely include royal encampments. They might start with twice
> > > the per capita tax of a normal tax, to make up for their special
> > > treatement.) This would make service in general seem less like a
> > > punishment and more like a common duty.
> >
> > I _like_ that idea.
>
> Better not call them 'volunteers,' then--volunteering is voluntary.
> Perhaps 'conscripts,' or 'slaves' would be more apropos.
>
How about "attendees"?
I'd also be in favor of allowing groups to figure out different ways of
working off that "tax", fwiw.
We often hear about rights, both in the SCA and the US. At some point, we
need to be instilling our "god given" responsibilities as well.
Purple
Cynthia Virtue
> "Robert Uhl" <ru...@4dv.net> wrote in message
>>"Drew Nicholson" <anicho...@comcast.net> writes:
>>Better not call them 'volunteers,' then--volunteering is voluntary.
>>Perhaps 'conscripts,' or 'slaves' would be more apropos.
> How about "attendees"?
A friend opined that the correct term might be employees (paid by being
allowed to stay onsite) -- which gets into a whole 'nother bunch of trouble.
cv
Craig Levin
lady wife, we came to some conclusions. For what it is worth,
while we've been to Pennsic in the past, we weren't able to go
this year. Also, these are my summaries of our discussion; Devora
is definitely able to post hers.
First, we reasoned, it's not a requirement to go to Pennsic. If
the rules don't feel right to you, don't go.
Second, our perception of how it was done before was that
rule-breaking was responded to with one of two responses: a
warning, or getting booted, if repeated warnings were
disregarded, or if the infractor presented a bad attitude to the
Coopers or the autocrat. We feel that a middle ground needed to
exist. One has to consider that something as minor as taking one
of the street signs could lead to an unecessary delay for an
ambulance, but that hopefully the chance of that happening wasn't
that major-a balance between a lecture and an order to go.
Third, we figured that given Pennsic's usual size (somewhere
between ten and fifteen thousand souls), a constabulary and
courts of some sort would exist if it was, say, a college campus
or a town (in fact, in VA, a permanent population center of five
thousand people can become a city, with its own state circuit
court and other sorts of public departments). Order has to be
kept somehow. The main thing is to make sure that neither
community service nor being asked to go are used arbitrarily.
Pedro
--
http://pages.ripco.net/~clevin/index.html
cle...@ripco.com
Craig Levin Librarians Rule: Oook!
Cynthia Gee
"the numerous things you've claimed here in the last twenty four hours were
debunked in messages dated days ago."
To exactly which things are you referring?
Are you saying that the involuntary community service didn't happen?
Are you saying that people weren't penalized for lost site medallions, and
for land grab errors, some of which were inadvertant?
Are you accusing me of factual errors regarding the E23 incident, or the
incident involving 20 hours of service apiece per person in one camp for
everyone present at land grab? I may have been in error regarding some of
that, I am now told that the time was reduced to five hours of service
apiece per person, but I was relaying all the facts I had at the time.
Since then other people have come forward and told their sides of the story
(and I believe that that is one of the purposes of discussion) but that was
AFTER I made my posting here.
Your intuition notwithstanding, M'lord, I had read the pennsic.net thread,
from its beginning to where it stood at the time of my posting to this list.
**At that time**, I was not aware that any of the issues I was addressing
had been debunked, AND the only claims I have made on this list in the last
24 hours are those made in my original posting. Perhaps you should read my
postings again, and the postings on the referenced website. My other five
postings here contain no claims whatsoever and have only reiterated and
explained what I said in my initial posting.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jeanne
"Derek Lyons" <fair...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4136e189...@supernews.seanet.com...
Jitka Ivanovna Kianinov
planning to volunteer a certain number of hours moving hay bales or
whatever. Then they find out about this "tax". I know in my case, I'd kind
of feel like, "Well, fine. I'll do this "tax" thing, but I'm not doing
anything else." Just cuz I'm contrary like that... I don't like being forced
into doing something, especially if it's something I'd be doing voluntarily
ANYWAY. It seems like it doesn't recognize that there are people who DO
fulfill that responsibility, and punishes them by adding on forced labor.
Jitka
"Drew Nicholson" <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ScCdnZAFF-X...@comcast.com...
Cynthia Gee
of middle ground would you suggest? Let's take moving a street sign as an
example. This is an obviously deliberate act; there's no way anyone could
claim that they moved a street sign by accident or through carelessness, or
claim that they didn't know it was wrong. Too, a foolish prank like this,
while not likely to have been done maliciously, could have serious
consequences for someone if, as you said, an ambulance was called onto site.
I don't think this sort of thing is quite serious enough to warrant throwing
someone offsite (unless he has done this before), but politely asking the
culprit not to do this again seems rather inadequate. As I have previously
stated, I am personally opposed to the idea of using volunteer work as a
punishment, but obviously something does need to be done in cases like this.
I think we should put the question to the group of us here on rec.org.sca--
what do you all think should be done in a case like this?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jeanne
"Craig Levin" <cle...@ripco.com> wrote in message
news:cgvfpf$53s$1...@e250.ripco.com...
Arval
> ...if one schmuck is breaking the rules, then making his friends
> share the penalty will make it a LOT less likely that the problem
> will recur.
Tamara replied:
> Gee, let's just replace with the word "Schmuck" with a racist slur
> and then see well the idea goes over. But the same idea is behind
> that kind of thought.
You're going to have to explain that to me, Tamara, because I have no
idea what you mean. Racism is a form of sterotyping, whereby you
presume to judge someone's character or abilities by his ethnicity
rather than his actions. I referred to a hypothetical person who had
demonstrated his lack of character by breaking the rules. What do you
see in common between the two?
Or perhaps my use of the particular word "schmuck" is one with which
you aren't familiar? If you search Google for "schmuck Yiddish", the
first hit gives the definition: dork, jerk, a fatuous bore. In common
usage, at least in the northeast, it is often a bit stronger than
that, comparable to "asshole".
===========================================================================
Arval ar...@mittle.users.panix.com
Arval
> If some job, such as security, is done by each barony for itself,
> the people who do it can be rewarded with the gratitude of their
> friends (and being fed dinner without having to help cook it).
Security currently does things that are easily decentralized, like
keeping watch over everyone's campsite; but also things that aren't
easily decentralized, like maintaining order in common areas, reacting
to emergencies, etc. Shifting some of that burden to individual
campsites, I think, is a fine idea, as long as a reasonable mechanism
can be found to coordinate those efforts and deal with the inevitable
groups that shirk their duties.
===========================================================================
Arval ar...@mittle.users.panix.com
Chass Brown
a few were abusing power and over stepping their bounds at issuing dead
rabbits. He said they were being punished.
--
Chass of Rundel of Ansteorra aka
Charinthalis Del Sans of the portable Chariot
Honorable Recruiter of the House of the Red Shark (Have you seen my Belaying
Pin??)
Muddeler of Mead, Ailment of Ale, Whiner of wine.
"Derek Lyons" <fair...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4136e189...@supernews.seanet.com...
Tim McDaniel
Drew Nicholson <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote:
>"Tim McDaniel" <tm...@panix.com> wrote in message
>news:cgu22f$ae9$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us...
>> In article <kMydndUup7n...@comcast.com>,
>> Drew Nicholson <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >"period punishment" -- a few hours in the stocks, for example
>>
>> Unintended Side-Effect: massive road blockage in the Tuchux camp.
>
>Not if this year is any indication.
They used stocks as period punishment at Pennsic this year?
The things I miss.
Danielis Lindocollinum
--
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tm...@panix.com
Derek Lyons
>You must have missed it when Arval proposed a draft.
>Robert and I were responding to Arval's proposal.
No. I reconize the difference between a general draft, and charge
laid in hours rather than dollars for attending an event.
Derek Lyons
>M'lord, you wrote,
>"the numerous things you've claimed here in the last twenty four hours were
>debunked in messages dated days ago."
>
>To exactly which things are you referring?
Nearly everything you wrote.
>Are you accusing me of factual errors regarding the E23 incident, or the
>incident involving 20 hours of service apiece per person in one camp for
>everyone present at land grab?
Yes. The fact is that such claim was debunked several days before you
posted here.
>I may have been in error regarding some of that, I am now told that the time
>was reduced to five hours of service apiece per person, but I was relaying
>all the facts I had at the time.
M'lady, if you were relaying the information you had at the time, then
both your original claim and the revised claim above indicate clearly
that you were not in fact current on the information presented on that
thread. The correct information (20 hours *per camp*) was in a
message dated nearly four days before the post that heads this thread.
>Since then other people have come forward and told their sides of the story
>(and I believe that that is one of the purposes of discussion) but that was
>AFTER I made my posting here.
No M'lady. The post that heads this thread is dated 29th August.
Even a casual browsing of the Penssic.net thread notes that it began
on 23rd August, and that information you have failed to present was
posted to that thread by the 24th.
>Your intuition notwithstanding, M'lord, I had read the pennsic.net thread,
>from its beginning to where it stood at the time of my posting to this list.
No M'lady. The facts plainly show that you did no such thing.
(Alternatively, the facts show that you did read it, but ignored
information that did not match your beliefs.)
>**At that time**, I was not aware that any of the issues I was addressing
>had been debunked, AND the only claims I have made on this list in the last
>24 hours are those made in my original posting.
Indeed. And it's the difference between the information available
five days ago, and the information you posted a day ago that raised my
interest. Given that fact 'x' was available on the thread on the
24th, and that you posted incorrect information 'x' and 'z' on the
29th and 30th, it is quite clear that the only possible way for you to
make your claims on the 29th is to have not read the thread from it's
begining, or do have deliberately ignored inconvenient material. By
accident or malice, your posts from the 29th forward do not match what
is on the thread from the 25th forward.
Dennis M. O'Connor
>
>>You must have missed it when Arval proposed a draft.
>>Robert and I were responding to Arval's proposal.
>
> No. I reconize the difference between a general draft, and charge
> laid in hours rather than dollars for attending an event.
It's still a draft, just like the compulsory service seen in Europe
SCA events _used_ to work like this: everyone paid to rent the site.
[In theory, anyway: in reality, not paying your site fee used to be
so common in Atenveldt that one coronation, 400+ people attended
and way less than half of them paid the site fee, and the SCA lost money.]
People paid for a feast if they wanted to.
Anything else people wanted to do, they got a bunch of like-minded
people together and did it, using themselves and their friends as
volunteer labor, and often buying the necessary props.
But not anymore. In t he SCA now, some politically-connected dweeb
will say "Wouldn't it be cool if we did X", and X becomes part of the
event, and then people like Arval and Drew and apparently
yourself will force people, people with no interest in X and who
do not benefit from it, to help make X happen. That's just plain wrong.
An SCA event has only three critical needs: sufficient appropriate space,
bathrooms, and usually a way to collect money to pay for 1 and 2.
Everything else, people can and do voluntarily take care of themselves.
Which gets back to Robert's point: if a thing is truly worth doing,
enough people will _volunteer_ to make it happen. The only
reason for a draft is to force people to do things they do not
think are worth doing, things that the People in Charge, in
their arrogance, vanity and ambition, want to have done for them.
It's true in the USofA, and in the SCA, and everywhere.
--
Craig Levin
Cynthia Gee <gold...@earthlink.com> wrote:
>Pedro, I find myself in agreement with you on most of this, but, what sort
>of middle ground would you suggest? Let's take moving a street sign as an
>example. This is an obviously deliberate act; there's no way anyone could
>claim that they moved a street sign by accident or through carelessness, or
>claim that they didn't know it was wrong. Too, a foolish prank like this,
>while not likely to have been done maliciously, could have serious
>consequences for someone if, as you said, an ambulance was called onto site.
>I don't think this sort of thing is quite serious enough to warrant throwing
>someone offsite (unless he has done this before), but politely asking the
>culprit not to do this again seems rather inadequate. As I have previously
>stated, I am personally opposed to the idea of using volunteer work as a
>punishment, but obviously something does need to be done in cases like this.
>I think we should put the question to the group of us here on rec.org.sca--
>what do you all think should be done in a case like this?
Well, in VA, taking a street sign is a misdemeanor that can land
you in the hoosegow for several months, get you a thousand-dollar
fine, or both. In that light, a bit of community service seems
all right to me. I really can't see most SCAfolk tolerating a
Pennsic jail...
Cynthia Gee
thusly:
>>>>>>>>>>statement
"E.F. Morrill" <ge...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cgsurv$6gn$1...@reader1.panix.com...
"In rec.org.sca you write:
>Hey all... did you notice the phrase "Dead Rabbits" around Pennsic
>this year?
>It's the new system of forced volunteerism put in place at
>Pennsic this year , for offences ranging from accidentally losing one's
>medallion (5 hours community service), to parking in such a way as to
>obstruct traffic, to goofing up your group's boundaries at land grab
>(20 hours community service APIECE for an entire camp in one instance.)"
"Not true. It was a 20 hours per group. "
>>>>>>>>>>Another person claimed that each person in her group was given
community service hours. I found out recently, well AFTER I made my postings
to this and other lists, that the number of hours assigned was more like 5
per person, rather than 20 as I was first told.
"Many people were "let-off" with a warning."
>>>>>>>>>And many were not, I am told.
"People who parked incorrectly or too long were repeated given warnings."
>>>>>>>>>That is good. And in my opinion the old system of warning people a
couple of times, then towing their car, is still the best one. I had my car
towed about 8 years ago. It was an expense and an inconvenience, but
preferable to being publicly humiliated and made to feel like a criminal by
being made to do community service. And, I have never parked my car in the
wrong place since.
"So what would you suggest? You seem to only concentrate on a small part of
the DR"s, (Name change next year to Volunteer Co-Ordination)."
>>>>>>I have concentrated on the part of the DR's that was a problem. (BTW I
did find the Dead Rabbit name to be pretty humorous, even though it was
blatantly OOP) As for the rest of your volunteer coordination program, you
guys did a great job. What's not to like?
>>>>>>>As for how to make things better, I would suggest that we go back to
the way we did things for the last 32 years. Things seemed to have been
working. Of course, I wasn't on staff, and I don't know everything that you
guys had to deal with, but from the standpoint of the average Pennsic
attendee, your new policies just made things worse by focusing on punishing
inadvertent errors and the more picayune deliberate offenses (parking,etc.),
while leaving larger problems, such as theft, unchanged.
As for specific suggestions, I would say that accidental things, such as
losing one's site medallion, or HONEST land grab mistakes, should NEVER be
penalized. The person feels like a fool already, and further penalization
only creates hard feelings. Sure it's a nuisance for the folks who have to
get the guy a new medallion, or the folks who have to straighten out the
land error, but this type of hassle is part of running any large event, and
should be accepted as such.
>>>>>>>>Then there are such things as the inconsiderate so-and-so's who drum
at 4 AM or who smoke in the barn and in other indoor public areas. Now, I
don't smoke and I hate smelling the stuff, but here too, a moderate approach
works best. Traditionally in the SCA a person is always given the benefit of
the doubt, and deemed honorable until he proves himself to be otherwise. The
inconsiderate jerk who smokes where he shouldn't or drums when he shouldn't
even after politely being told not to proves himself to be --well-- an
inconsiderate jerk! Traditionally in the SCA such a person recieves social
censure for being an ass, and that is punishment enough. The rest of us
only demean ourselves if we continue to give notice to such an idiot.
>>>>>>>Going on to the next level, there will always be a certain amount of
deliberate mischief at an event the size of Pennsic- such thing as moving
signs, (this was addressed by Pedro in his post this morning) and DELIBERATE
land misuse, as has sometimes taken place. Here, community service might be
an option, but only if used sparingly, in worst case scenarios, and only if,
as has been done in past years, it is kept quiet and performed without
drawing attention to the fact that the person doing the service is anything
other than an ordinary volunteer.
>>>>>>>A chief danger, as I see it, is demeaning the ideal of Service in our
society, by turning it into a punishment. After all, who will want to
volunteer for anything if folks are going to look at you and wonder, "Gee
whiz, what did HE do?"
>>>>>>>As for MAJOR offenses, such as drawing steel in a threatening manner,
theft, assault, etc,KICK THEM OFFSITE. No second chances, nothing. We don't
need people like that at Pennsic.
"You are factually wrong on many points here."
>>>>>>>>I may well be, and I apologise for any errors. I made my posting in
good faith, with all of the information I had at the time. Since then you
and many other people have come forward and gave your personal accounts of
what went on, and now both sides of the DR story are emerging. That was part
of my purpose in starting the discussion.
"Nor have you said that it is being looked into to have improvements made."
>>>>>>>>>At the time of my first posting, I did not have that information.
But you did, and then you posted it for all to read. Thank you. I also
attempted to post your letter describing your side of things to the
pennsic.net board, and at least give the disgruntled folks there the
information you posted on the sca aethelmearc list. The board wouldn't let
me do that at first, some computer mumbo jumbo about not being able to post
things with html tags (what are those anyway?), but I did get your letter
and your contact info on there eventually and then you posted there as well.
"May I suggest that you assist the effort next year and volunteer to be
part of the staff?"
>>>>>>>>>>>>Certainly. I've said already that I might be interested. Please
send me more information at cindyje...@yahoo.com. , as the earthlink
mailbox is a pain to access.
"Some parts of this sytem worked well. It did save people the embarassment
of being sent home for "BLatent" disregard for the rules."
>>>>>>>>>>That's true, and a good thing. But it also seemed to embarrass
other people by punishing them for minor breaches of the rules.
""Some" over eager staff members took it upon thmeselves to overstepp their
bounds. They are being duly punished for hteir actions.
The program is in the refinement process."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Acknowledged, and again, a good thing.
">Refuse the
>community service and you get kicked off site. No warnings for first
>offences, no pleading ignorance either. You don't even have to be
>present at the time of the offence -- one poor sucker arrived on site
>to find that he had to serve 20 hours of community service, along
>with everyone else in his group, and everyone else in his entire
>block, for an inadvertant error on the part of their land grab
>agents, an error which was approved by the Coopers and by the Pennsic
>landcrat at the time of land grab.
>Check it out on the Pennsic message board,"
The Cooper's had nothing to do with Land Grab or enforcing or handing out
any CS."
>>>>>>>>>>>I found that out later too. But I would never have found it out
were it not discussed openly.
"I would debate whether or not it was "inadvertant" on the part of groups in
E23."
>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, some tell it one way and some tell it another, and I don't
know who's right. But they do claim that the whole thing was OK'ed at the
time by the Pennsic land agents, and that later their land grab folks got
into trouble for it. And other people made similar complaints.
"Many warnings were given. Most of the rules have been in effect for at
least 4 years. Many cases were mitigated on: one's attitude when caught;
if the person had been to PW before and the "severity" of the infraction."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>True, but sometimes warnings were not given, merely punishment,
and I still maintain that "punishment" should be reserved for the more
severe infractions, and repeated (say 4-5 times) violations of lesser rules,
as has been done in times past.
">""Community Service" Hours... - or forced labor at War...":
>http://www.pennsic.net/cgi-bin/mb/mb.cgi?cmd=List&topic=wildcat
>Am I "trolling" here? You bet your sweet bippy I am... although it didn't
>affect me personally at war, it affected folks I've known for years, good
>honorable longtime Scadians, and I am outraged. I want as many folks as
>possible to learn of this, and I want see it ended.
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jeanne Francesca Fitzgerald, OWS"
CS has been used for years as a way to mitigate infractions of the rules."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes, I know. And I have no problem with the very discreet way
in which it was used up until this year.
"As stated on at least one list that I now you are on, it is being looked
into to see what worked and what didnt' and will be improved next year.
You have made it sound here, that this situation has gone unnoticed.
It has not."
>>>>>>>>>I have said no such thing. What I did by my posting was to
introduce a topic for discussion, in order to draw public attention to a
situation that I felt was detrimental to Pennsic and dangerous to our well
being as a Society. The resulting discussion has proved to be quite
informative, has cleared up a few misconceptions for me at least, and has
provided a forum for those who are fixing the situation to attest to that
fact and to describe to all of us how you are going to make it better next
year, as well as allow the rest of the folks on the rec.org list to offer
their insights on how to make things better.
~~~~~~~~~Respectfully, Jeanne Francesca Fitzgerald
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"E.F. Morrill" <ge...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cgsurv$6gn$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> In rec.org.sca you write:
>
> >Hey all... did you notice the phrase "Dead Rabbits" around Pennsic
> >this year?
> >It's the new system of forced volunteerism put in place at
> >Pennsic this year , for offences ranging from accidentally losing one's
> >medallion (5 hours community service), to parking in such a way as to
> >obstruct traffic, to goofing up your group's boundaries at land grab
> >(20 hours community service APIECE for an entire camp in one instance.)
>
> Not true. It was a 20 hours per group.
>
> Many people were "let-off" with a warning.
>
> People who parked incorrectly or too long were repeated given warnings.
>
>
> So what would you suggest? You seem to only concentrate on a small part of
> the DR"s, (Name change next year to Volunteer Co-Ordination).
>
> You are factually wrong on many points here.
>
> Nor have you said that it is being looked into to have improvements made.
> May I suggest that you assist the effort next year and volunteer to be
> part of the staff?
>
> Some parts of this sytem worked well. It did save people the embarassment
> of being sent home for "BLatent" disregard for the rules.
>
>
> "Some" over eager staff members took it upon thmeselves to overstepp their
> bounds. They are being duly punished for their actions.
>
> The program is in the refinement process.
>
>
> >Refuse the
> >community service and you get kicked off site. No warnings for first
> >offences, no pleading ignorance either. You don't even have to be
> >present at the time of the offence -- one poor sucker arrived on site
> >to find that he had to serve 20 hours of community service, along
> >with everyone else in his group, and everyone else in his entire
> >block, for an inadvertant error on the part of their land grab >agents,
> an error which was approved by the Coopers and by the Pennsic
> >landcrat at the time of land grab.
> >Check it out on the Pennsic message board,
>
>
> The Cooper's had nothing to do with Land Grab or enforcing or handing out
> any CS.
>
> I would debate whether or not it was "inadvertant" on the part of groups
> in E23.
>
> Many warnings were given. Most of the rules have been in effect for at
> least 4 years. Many cases were mitigated on: one's attitude when caught;
> if the person had been to PW before and the "severity" of the infraction.
>
>
> >""Community Service" Hours... - or forced labor at War...":
>
> >http://www.pennsic.net/cgi-bin/mb/mb.cgi?cmd=List&topic=wildcat
>
> >Am I "trolling" here? You bet your sweet bippy I am... although it didn't
> >affect me personally at war, it affected folks I've known for years, good
> >honorable longtime Scadians, and I am outraged. I want as many folks as
> >possible to learn of this, and I want see it ended.
>
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jeanne Francesca Fitzgerald, OWS
>
> CS has been used for years as a way to mitigate infractions of the rules.
>
> As stated on at least one list that I now you are on, it is being looked
> into to see what worked and what didnt' and will be improved next year.
> You have made it sound here, that this situation has gone unnoticed.
> It has not.
>
>
> YOurs,
>
> EDWARD Z
> Mayor PW33
> --
> E.F. Morrill Icon God of the Theatre World
> aka The Viscount Edward Zifran of Gendy, KSCA, OL, OP, ETC.
> Have Sword - Will Travel http://www.whitebelt.com
> 201-681-7865 Cell. - 718-651-7299 LAND
law
> My own opinion about why it's sometimes difficult to find volunteers at
> Pennsic is related to its size. When you're talking about an even with over
> 11,000 people attending, the small community feel, where everyone pitches in
> because they can directly see the results, is largely absent. It's easy to
> assume at Pennsic that "they"--the people on staff--are going to take care
> of all of the behind-the-scenes stuff, much as they would if you went to a
> hotel or resort.
>
Actually, at any event, the assumption is "they" -- the people on staff
-- are going to take care of all the behind-the-scenes stuff. Probably
because that's exactly what the event staff is there for. And, Pennsic
is not going to be any different, no matter the size, because "that's
the way events are done."
And, if the event staff is too small to be able to handle all the work
of Pennsic, meaning the available staff are working the entire time and
not being able to enjoy their "vacation," obviously more staff is
required. But, expecting to effectively fill the ranks of volunteers
with "dead rabbits" is naive. One of the least effective of
"volunteers" are thosed forced to volunteer. Rather, the volunteers
must find some reason to want to be on Pennsic staff ... whether that
reason be because they are gluttons for thankless jobs or because some
new and glorious inter-kingdom award is granted to volunteers entices
volunteers or because they are offered some discount on future Pennsics
or ????
Lia
Cynthia Gee
regarding the E23 incident. And you are right, in rereading the postings on
that site yet again, after reading this letter, I now see where I missed the
posting that "debunked" the claim of 20 hours service per person. But I
missed that by accident, not through malice as you ever so politely
insinuate. You are right, I was wrong about that. If you care to discuss
anything else that you feel I was wrong about, we can do that, too. I am
willing to admit when I am wrong, and gracefully. Bring it, point by point.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jeanne
My Lord,
"Derek Lyons" <fair...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:41345a75...@supernews.seanet.com...
newsreader
"Ted Eisenstein" <al...@socket.net> wrote in message
news:10j57kt...@corp.supernews.com...
> areas and roadways,and the like? And areas that absolutely need to be
> staffed 24 hours a day, like Chirurgeons' Point or Troll?
Erm... While there are good reasons why Troll needs to be staffed 24/7,
Chirurgeon's point is entirley optional.
YIS,
Macsen
---
Outgoing mail has been scanned for virii/trojans by AVG.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.745 / Virus Database: 497 - Release Date: 8/27/2004
Arval
> As for how to make things better, I would suggest that we go back to
> the way we did things for the last 32 years. Things seemed to have been
> working. Of course, I wasn't on staff, ...
...or you would know that these policies were put in place precisely
because things _weren't_ working.
In a discussion like this one, especially when you know that you don't
have all the facts, it's best to start with the assumption that the
people running things are doing their best to do what they think it
best for the Society. They may be incompetant; or they may fail to do
what they hope; or their opinion of the best interests of the Society
may differ from yours; but there are VERY few people helping to run
our game who don't act in good faith, as they see it.
So it's a good idea to start by trying to understand why someone, in
good faith, would have done something that strikes you as foolish. If
someone puts in place a new policy to enforce rules that have been on
the books for decades, then it's pretty much a guarantee that things
must not have been working well under the old policy.
===========================================================================
Arval ar...@mittle.users.panix.com
Derek Lyons
>You seem to have problems with only ONE thing I said, a fact error
>regarding the E23 incident. And you are right, in rereading the postings on
>that site yet again, after reading this letter, I now see where I missed the
>posting that "debunked" the claim of 20 hours service per person.
My Lady, I chose the most convenient and easily found debunking of
your claim, being a mere twenty odd messages into the Pennsic.net
thread.
>But I missed that by accident, not through malice as you ever so politely
>insinuate.
M'lady. Missing one point is an accident. Missing multiple points
raises questions. When one makes a claim, and claims to be current on
the primary source of information, and is demonstrably not, the
questions are firmly answered. I insinuate nothing, but let the facts
speak for themselves.
>You are right, I was wrong about that. If you care to discuss
>anything else that you feel I was wrong about, we can do that, too. I am
>willing to admit when I am wrong, and gracefully. Bring it, point by point.
M'lady, a gracious and careful person would have re-read the primary
source of information the first time they were referred to it. When
one has to be reminded again that one's account is at odds with the
primary source and that information one claims to not be aware of has
plainly been available for days...
And as a third reminder, all the points you raise are debunked firmly,
both in the thread at Pennsic.net, and the thread here. Your
intentions are plain both by your words and deeds and I shall not
accomodate them.
Susan Carroll-Clark
> Actually, at any event, the assumption is "they" -- the people on staff
> -- are going to take care of all the behind-the-scenes stuff. Probably
> because that's exactly what the event staff is there for. And, Pennsic
> is not going to be any different, no matter the size, because "that's
> the way events are done."
Not really. At most events I go to, there is an unwritten rule that
attendees will pitch in where they can for things like court/feast
setup/takedown, sweeping the hall, collecting empties, etc. And most events
could not survive if the only marshal/chirurgeon/herald/feast
servers/dishwashers in the place were someone local.
Nicolaa
Zebee Johnstone
Susan Carroll-Clark <scla...@rogers.com> wrote:
>
> Not really. At most events I go to, there is an unwritten rule that
> attendees will pitch in where they can for things like court/feast
> setup/takedown, sweeping the hall, collecting empties, etc. And most events
> could not survive if the only marshal/chirurgeon/herald/feast
> servers/dishwashers in the place were someone local.
It's the unwritten bit I think.
IN other words, acculturation.
My understanding is that Pennsic has a lot of once-a-year people who
aren't really acculturated. I know that when Rowany Festival was held
in a known and relatively accessible place, we got a few blowins (and
when you have 600 or so people total. 10 is a lot) who came to this
"cool thing at Wilton" and knew bugger all about any unwritten rules.
How is the acculturation done? I think those who are really into the
SCA from the beginning get it quick enough, but there's a sliding scale
of participation, and I expect different places do things differently.
Some will just hope folk get it by example, others will be more direct.
I think it depends on size of event too. Small ones are much more
obviously "everyong pitches in", larger ones have more of a "catered"
feel about them, and might instead trip people's "paid entertainment"
buttons, meaning they just don't really realise they should help because
their brains are in a different mode.
Silfren
Susan Carroll-Clark
> It's the unwritten bit I think.
>
> IN other words, acculturation.
<snip>
> I think it depends on size of event too. Small ones are much more
> obviously "everyong pitches in", larger ones have more of a "catered"
> feel about them, and might instead trip people's "paid entertainment"
> buttons, meaning they just don't really realise they should help because
> their brains are in a different mode.
Precisely. The larger an event gets, the less likely you are going to
directly know the people organizing X, Y, and Z, and the less likely you are
going to pick up innately on the stuff that needs to be done (except in your
own camp or for the activities you participate in). You show up at the
event, everything's all nicely organized, and you don't really have to worry
that the field is going to be set up for the next battle or that your A&S
class will have a tent, because they have People for That.
Nicolaa
David Serhienko
<snip>
> Second, our perception of how it was done before was that
> rule-breaking was responded to with one of two responses: a
> warning, or getting booted, if repeated warnings were
> disregarded, or if the infractor presented a bad attitude to the
> Coopers or the autocrat. We feel that a middle ground needed to
> exist. One has to consider that something as minor as taking one
> of the street signs could lead to an unecessary delay for an
> ambulance, but that hopefully the chance of that happening wasn't
> that major-a balance between a lecture and an order to go.
I have a personal problem with the idea of forces volunteerism, and that
is going to feed into my reply.
As you say, they used to have two things they could do: Warn you or
kick you out.
I agree that a middle ground needs to be found, and they think they've
found it in 'conscription'.
I do too, but not the way they're doing it.
The problem was, as I understand it, if someone didn't heed a warning or
three, the only other club in the bag was expulsion from site.
My thought is this: Give the miscreant a choice.
In most cases, a warning is enough.
In cases where a warning seems too weak, but staff isn't sure if
expulsion is really warranted, then give them the choice: work or leave.
If the warnings are being continuously unheeded, again, offer them a
choice between the Chain Gang or Expulsion.
I think that strikes a fair note between the two former options, and
moves the onus of the labor to the person who CHOSE it rather than being
booted.
My Two Never Been To Pennsic Cents.
Deykin
Bronwynmgn
>> there head that... well if we take more land that we're assigned then we'll
>> just have to do hours XYZ for it... what say you we wanna grab the extra
>> land for X hours each? yea? ok then!"
Ah, but the only reason they got that chance this year is because it took the
land staff a couple of days to get out to the groups with the problems. You
can bet that after this, those maps won't get approved until the land staff
have verified that every group has the correct amount of land and the correct
amount of single camping space, if they are supposed to have it, marked on
their map. If not, the map simply won't be approved. And I'll bet they still
doublecheck to make sure tha the land is set up correctly on the block as well
as on the map. They got burnt this year, and they're not going to let it
happen again as easily. Since they are going to have more people on land staff
next year, they will be able to check on things more quickly and not give
people time to get stuff built before the problem is spotted.
Brangwayna
Believe me, the land staff doesn't want another year like this one, either.
Bronwynmgn
>knows I've been wrong before, and been lied to, too - but I did get most of
>my info first hand, from the persons involved. If what I'm saying is
>incorrect, as you state, then why is the person to whom it happened saying
>otherwise? I see no reason why the folks from E23 block should choose to
>lie, what could it get them, now that Pennsic is over? (and this is not a
>rhetorical question, I'd really like your input on this.)
How about sympathy? How about trying to find a way not to say "We tried to get
away with something and we got caught", but to make themselves the victim of
the tale? How many people do you know who can stand up in public and say "I
made a bad decision" and take responsibility for it, rather than trying to make
it sound like somebody else was at fault? This problem is endemic in mundane
society. No one takes responsibility for their actions. It's always someone
else's fault. Like sueing McDonald's for making you fat - unless the employees
of the McDonald's held a gun to your head and forced you to eat there, there is
no way that McDonald's is responsible for your weight problem. Your own choice
to eat there, and lack of effort in finding a healthier place to eat, is at
fault.
I also got my info first hand, from my husband, who was there when this
happened. He's never lied to me in more than 10 years and I have no reason to
believe that he is lying now. But clearly, he has a very different view of the
situation that you have presented.
>But I won't apologise for starting the discussion, and making people
>aware of the situation.
I'm not sure that people who don't go to Pennsic even need to be involved in
this discussion - after all, it doesn't affect them in any way, since the only
place this situation happened or might happen again is at Pennsic. I will
happily agree that people who do attend Pennsic might want to have a say in the
matter, but in that case, it is better to post as balanced a report as possible
so that they may decide what they want to believe and/or support with as full
knowledge as possible.
> My main point, however, and the reason I'm making such a big deal of this,
>is that many of the people involved in these Pennsic land mixups appear to
>have been guilty of **honest mistakes**, not some kind of underhanded
>gerrymandering (which SHOULD be penalized),
Well, at least we agree that people who deliberately try to slide by the rules
should be penalized. I still find it hard to believe that, of all the blocks
at Pennsic, and all the land groups on those blocks, there were only two blocks
that didn't leave the single camping space they were supposed to leave and then
tried to claim that they'd never been told they needed to, and that every
single land agent on each of those blocks made exactly the same mistake.
Maybe they did, but it's a pretty amazing coincidence when everyone else got it
right, supposedly not having been told either.
If there is
>anything that I personally can do to help fix this or make next Pennsic a
>better War, please let me know. As it is, the least we can all do is to
>discuss the matter thoroughly on this and other forums.
Discussing the matter based on a one-sided report is useless in coming up with
anything resembling a reasonable solution; how can you when you only hear the
cries of those who claim to have been wronged and not the reports of those who
supposedly wronged them, but believe they were trying to be as honest and
equitable as possible? Discussing things here or on any other forum is of no
purpose, since it's not going to get the information where it needs to be - to
next year's Pennsic staff. The way to do that, as you have already been told
by this year's Mayor himself, is to contact next year's Pennsic staff with your
concerns and suggestions. Having a bunch of people deluge them with cries of
outrage based on one-sided hearsay will do nothing but prejudice the case of
those who might have legitimate first-hand experience of abuses.
Brangwayna
Drew Nicholson
news:AVHYc.8226$6o3....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Pedro, I find myself in agreement with you on most of this, but, what sort
> of middle ground would you suggest? Let's take moving a street sign as an
> example. This is an obviously deliberate act; there's no way anyone
could
> claim that they moved a street sign by accident or through carelessness,
or
> claim that they didn't know it was wrong. Too, a foolish prank like this,
> while not likely to have been done maliciously, could have serious
> consequences for someone if, as you said, an ambulance was called onto
site.
> I don't think this sort of thing is quite serious enough to warrant
throwing
> someone offsite (unless he has done this before), but politely asking the
> culprit not to do this again seems rather inadequate. As I have previously
> stated, I am personally opposed to the idea of using volunteer work as a
> punishment, but obviously something does need to be done in cases like
this.
> I think we should put the question to the group of us here on
rec.org.sca--
> what do you all think should be done in a case like this?
Three options:
1) Pay a fine to the chirugeonate or other worthy, um, thingy.
2) Take a medievalish punishment -- one hour in the stocks, wearing a sign
that says "I moved a Pennsic Road Sign"
3) Community service.
Purple
Drew Nicholson
> In article <D6idnWepiOB...@comcast.com>,
> Drew Nicholson <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >"Tim McDaniel" <tm...@panix.com> wrote in message
> >news:cgu22f$ae9$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us...
> >> In article <kMydndUup7n...@comcast.com>,
> >> Drew Nicholson <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> >"period punishment" -- a few hours in the stocks, for example
> >>
> >> Unintended Side-Effect: massive road blockage in the Tuchux camp.
> >
> >Not if this year is any indication.
>
> They used stocks as period punishment at Pennsic this year?
> The things I miss.
>
No, no, not as far as I know. I'm simply suggesting it as an alternative
for next year.
Purple
Drew Nicholson
news:10938865...@nnrp2.phx1.gblx.net...
>
> An SCA event has only three critical needs: sufficient appropriate space,
> bathrooms, and usually a way to collect money to pay for 1 and 2.
> Everything else, people can and do voluntarily take care of themselves.
>
An extraordinarily simplistic view of Pennsic. Pennsic is not like
Estrella. It is much, much more.
> Which gets back to Robert's point: if a thing is truly worth doing,
> enough people will _volunteer_ to make it happen. The only
> reason for a draft is to force people to do things they do not
> think are worth doing, things that the People in Charge, in
> their arrogance, vanity and ambition, want to have done for them.
>
Interesting that you, who believes in a world full of goobers, also believes
that this would work.
Purple
Dennis M. O'Connor
> "Dennis M. O'Connor" <dm...@primenet.com> wrote ...
>>
>> An SCA event has only three critical needs: sufficient appropriate space,
>> bathrooms, and usually a way to collect money to pay for 1 and 2.
>> Everything else, people can and do voluntarily take care of themselves.
>
> An extraordinarily simplistic view of Pennsic. Pennsic is not like
> Estrella. It is much, much more.
Oh really ? What else is _neccesary_ at Pennsic ?
Got any _support_ for your position ?
>> Which gets back to Robert's point: if a thing is truly worth doing,
>> enough people will _volunteer_ to make it happen. The only
>> reason for a draft is to force people to do things they do not
>> think are worth doing, things that the People in Charge, in
>> their arrogance, vanity and ambition, want to have done for them.
>
> Interesting that you, who believes in a world full of goobers,
> also believes that this would work.
It worked in the SCA for three decades. What has changed ?
--
Drew Nicholson
news:10939201...@nnrp2.phx1.gblx.net...
> "Drew Nicholson" <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote in ...
> > "Dennis M. O'Connor" <dm...@primenet.com> wrote ...
> >>
> >> An SCA event has only three critical needs: sufficient appropriate
space,
> >> bathrooms, and usually a way to collect money to pay for 1 and 2.
> >> Everything else, people can and do voluntarily take care of themselves.
> >
> > An extraordinarily simplistic view of Pennsic. Pennsic is not like
> > Estrella. It is much, much more.
>
> Oh really ? What else is _neccesary_ at Pennsic ?
> Got any _support_ for your position ?
>
The fact that Pennsic is at least twice, if not three times the size of
Estrella. The fact that Pennsic attracts many more non-Scadians than
Estrella. The fact that it is physically larger than Estrella.
What you're essentially saying is that all the work the coopers do is
unnecessary. Having been to pennsic many times, I can safely say, you're
full of it.
> >> Which gets back to Robert's point: if a thing is truly worth doing,
> >> enough people will _volunteer_ to make it happen. The only
> >> reason for a draft is to force people to do things they do not
> >> think are worth doing, things that the People in Charge, in
> >> their arrogance, vanity and ambition, want to have done for them.
> >
> > Interesting that you, who believes in a world full of goobers,
> > also believes that this would work.
>
> It worked in the SCA for three decades. What has changed ?
Pennsic has grown from a 400 person event to a 15,000 person event.
Some things do not scale.
Purple
Mark S. Harris
"newsreader" <newsr...@charterinternet.net> wrote:
> "Ted Eisenstein" <al...@socket.net> wrote in message
> news:10j57kt...@corp.supernews.com...
> > areas and roadways,and the like? And areas that absolutely need to be
> > staffed 24 hours a day, like Chirurgeons' Point or Troll?
>
> Erm... While there are good reasons why Troll needs to be staffed 24/7,
> Chirurgeon's point is entirley optional.
Huh? Why do you say this? I would think it exactly the opposite.
Folks who arrive at gate late at night or early in the morning can wait
until gate opens the next morning.
If someone is having a medicial emergency, they can't usually wait. I
was awfully glad one year when, as a diabetic I was having a low blood
sugar episode, that Chirugeon's Point was there and open at 10 pm at
night.
> Macsen
Stefan
--------
THLord Stefan li Rous Barony of Bryn Gwlad Kingdom of Ansteorra
Mark S. Harris Austin, Texas
Stefan...@austin.rr.com
**** See Stefan's Florilegium files at: http://www.florilegium.org ****
John Groseclose
<stefanlirous-5C2E...@news-fe-03.texas.rr.com>, Mark S.
Harris <stefan...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> Huh? Why do you say this? I would think it exactly the opposite.
>
> Folks who arrive at gate late at night or early in the morning can wait
> until gate opens the next morning.
They'd wait outside the gate?
> If someone is having a medicial emergency, they can't usually wait. I
> was awfully glad one year when, as a diabetic I was having a low blood
> sugar episode, that Chirugeon's Point was there and open at 10 pm at
> night.
And if you were off camping somewhere else, by yourself, and not at an
SCA event, what would you have done?
The Chirurgeonate is *strictly voluntary* on the part of those people
who work with the Chirurgeonate.
There is no requirement that a Chirurgeon even be present at any
particular SCA event, nor (according to the stuff I'd already posted)
can an event REQUIRE a Chirurgeon be present.
But if people are willing to wait outside the Gate until Gate is
staffed, I'd have no problem with staffing it for banker's hours,
either.
--
spam delenda est
Mark S. Harris
between classes or other activities, I don't want to spend it wandering
around Pennsic trying to figure out where I might help out. Having a
central point means, possibly, that I could run by there, find out if
something needs doing in the next hour or so, go do it, and then go on
to my next activity.
Even before this last Pennsic, my home barony had decided to try this at
our upcoming event this fall.
Stefan
In article <cgtgi8$bkn$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
E.F. Morrill <ge...@panix.com> wrote:
> It was a play onthe fact that I, as Mayor, was going to be "BOss Gendy" at
> PW33. The name has failed miserably I admit and will be changed to the
> Volunteer Co-Ordination Office for future Pennsics. It was/is designed to
> be the clearing house of people who wish to volunteer at Pennsic for
> something but maybe do not know "what" they should volunteer for. The VOOC
> will keep a list of requests from Departments as to special staffing needs
> they may have. For Example, Say the Battel field co-ordinator sees that
> he/she may need extra help on the day of the "GReatBIG BATTLE of The
> Bridge and Town", they may tell the VOOC they need 10 extra bodies to help
> move hay bales at 2pm. Other departments would give simular requests.
> People then could go to the VOOC and say "Hey! WHat can I do?" and be
> given a list of options and times.
>
>
> EDWARD Z
> Mayor PW33
Mark S. Harris
Steve Mesnick <ste...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Viscount Edward said:
> >>The name has failed miserably I admit and will be changed to the
> >>Volunteer Co-Ordination Office for future Pennsics.
>
> ARVAL SAID:
> > If you're going to change the name, it might be nice to try to find a
> > reasonably medieval name that fits the bill. If you think there's any
> > chance that could happen, I'll help.
>
> I SAY:
> ME TOO!!! I have been decrying the mundanification of SCA office
> names and institutions for years, and it really came to a head this
> year at Pennsic.
Well, how about we get rid of "Troll" since we are not a fantasy
organisation and go with "Gate"?
> Steffan ap Kennydd
Stefan
Dennis M. O'Connor
> "Dennis M. O'Connor" <dm...@primenet.com> wrote ...
>> "Drew Nicholson" <anicho...@comcast.net> wrote in ...
>> > "Dennis M. O'Connor" <dm...@primenet.com> wrote ...
>> >>
>> >> An SCA event has only three critical needs: sufficient appropriate
> space,
>> >> bathrooms, and usually a way to collect money to pay for 1 and 2.
>> >> Everything else, people can and do voluntarily take care of
>> >> themselves.
>> >
>> > An extraordinarily simplistic view of Pennsic. Pennsic is not like
>> > Estrella. It is much, much more.
>>
>> Oh really ? What else is _neccesary_ at Pennsic ?
>> Got any _support_ for your position ?
>
> The fact that Pennsic is at least twice, if not three times the size of
> Estrella. The fact that Pennsic attracts many more non-Scadians than
> Estrella. The fact that it is physically larger than Estrella.
Okay, does ANYONE see Drew specificying ANYTHING
that Pennsic needs other that the 3 things I mentioned ?
No ? No. He just keep claiming "it does, because ..."
without any attempt to specify what else it requires.
Clearly, we have another stellar example of Drew's
incredibably poor reading comprehensions. But wait,
there's more !
Oh, Drew: last EW had about 6800 attendees, making your
statement that Pennsic is "is at least twice, if not three times
the size of Estrella" just another example of your ignorance
and complete lack of concern for the truth. Officially,
Pennsic'04 was 11374 people, Pennsic'03 was about 12,000.
>> >> Which gets back to Robert's point: if a thing is truly worth doing,
>> >> enough people will _volunteer_ to make it happen. The only
>> >> reason for a draft is to force people to do things they do not
>> >> think are worth doing, things that the People in Charge, in
>> >> their arrogance, vanity and ambition, want to have done for them.
>> >
>> > Interesting that you, who believes in a world full of goobers,
>> > also believes that this would work.
>>
>> It worked in the SCA for three decades. What has changed ?
>
> Pennsic has grown from a 400 person event to a 15,000 person event.
The official numbers say you are wrong.
Did you just make up that "15,000" ? Of course you did.
Just like you make up so much of the shit you post here.
But the size is still an unsupported bullshit excuse.
--
John Groseclose
<stefanlirous-6329...@news-fe-03.texas.rr.com>, Mark S.
Harris <stefan...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> Well, how about we get rid of "Troll" since we are not a fantasy
> organisation and go with "Gate"?
Or "Toll?" I've been *saying* it that way for years, and occasionally
get the odd look from people who aren't quite sure what I said.
As the former Gatekeeper for quite a few Estrella Wars, "Gate" has been
where people are required to show their tokens in order to pass, while
"Toll" (Troll, if you listen to the people who also can't pronounce
"shibboleth") has been where one purchases the site token and obtains
the Book and maps...
--
spam delenda est
Ted Eisenstein
> Erm... While there are good reasons why Troll needs to be staffed 24/7,
> Chirurgeon's point is entirley optional.
could settle this? What are the chances that in a city of 11,000 people,
someone will be sick or injured enough to require some sort of first
response health help 24/7?
I"m not thinking a full staff all the time, you know; one person on
the graveyard shift might be quite adequate, for that occasional person
who stumbles in at 3:00 AM, and collapses with hypothermia or
something. . . .
(I'm speaking personally here: I, for one, would much rather have
medical help available 24/7 Just In Case, than have Chiurgeon's Point
staffed during regular office hours. But I'm paranoid that way.)
Alban
Ted Eisenstein
> Oh really ? What else is _neccesary_ at Pennsic ?
> Got any _support_ for your position ?
Just out of curiosity, have you ever been to Pennsic, Dennis?
(I'm not accusing you, or supporting you; just curious about
your background with the problem.)
Alban
Dennis M. O'Connor
>> Oh really ? What else is _neccesary_ at Pennsic ?
>> Got any _support_ for your position ?
>
> Just out of curiosity, have you ever been to Pennsic, Dennis?
Yes.
Derek Lyons
>I'm not sure that people who don't go to Pennsic even need to be involved in
>this discussion - after all, it doesn't affect them in any way, since the only
>place this situation happened or might happen again is at Pennsic.
Good Gentle;
Pennsic is not the only place with site rules or a need to enforce
them. I expect that at An Tir's September Crown but a few days and
few miles from me will suffer at least one situation where a warning
is too weak and expulsion too severe.
'tis best that that the remainder of the Laurel Kingdoms watch this
discussion and participate as they will so that when such a system
comes to them, they are prepared.