(Untitled)

Nov 18, 2007 23:02

 Hey there ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 6

lisette_1528 November 19 2007, 05:04:26 UTC
Rough meeting?

Reply


baronalejandro November 19 2007, 14:28:12 UTC
The only one I'm going to disagree with is the 'autocrat' term. We're not russians, none of us are tsars. I can't stand that word. EVENT STEWARDS IT IS!!!

Reply

bizarro_beppo November 19 2007, 16:56:09 UTC
it was actually Napolean to whom Autocrat was referenced. Autocratic was a verb to describe the Tzars behaviors.

I refer you to Corpora at this juncture and suggest pages 4 and 5 of the governing documents.

It is pointed out that the person APPOINTED by the seneschal is the AUTHORITY at the event, and that their decisions are what matters. The seneschal signed the paper granting the person the position of authority.

There are people who are in positions of authority who do not want to relinquish control so they muddy the water. By leaving the impression that the EVENT STEWARD is a host and not a Leader/Authority via the change in title it allows petty people who push paper to pretend they have a voice at the event.

Maybe if we had more AUTOCRATS we would have more people stepping up and taking charge, and less people getting arrested at the local level( like CM's Exchequer a few years back!)

Reply


mistressrhi November 19 2007, 14:34:20 UTC
Autocrat is a viable term, even though most people think it was made up by the SCA.

They recognize the term "autocracy", but can't make the connection to "autocrat". Sheesh.

Reply


alesia027 November 20 2007, 19:02:45 UTC
Hey darlin'

let me give you a piece of advice I like to give people

~ Never argue with an idiot, they will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. ~

have a good t-day.

b

Reply


Cheers oakashthorn November 21 2007, 17:56:11 UTC
Truth is the glorious hammer used to pound meaning until the slag falls off. Go get'em!

Muin

Reply


Leave a comment

Up