From: doconnor@sedona.intel.com (Dennis O'Connor)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: A Little of Everything
Date: 28 Jan 93 15:03:06
Organization: Intel i960(tm) Architecture
	<4072@creatures.cs.vt.edu>
	<DOCONNOR.93Jan25182804@potato.sedona.intel.com>
	<1993Jan26.225350.8124@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: potato.intel.com
In-reply-to: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu's message of 26 Jan 93 22:53:50 GMT


tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
] In article <> doconnor@sedona.intel.com (Dennis O'Connor) writes:
] >
] >I still don't understand why people need SCA sanction to hold their
] >events with "narrow recreative environments".
]
] Well, I certainly haven't felt the absolute need.  For the last decade or
] better I have more or less followed Bertram of Beringtons advice given
] a few weeks ago, and worked outside of the SCA structure whenever my desires
] and the SCA's desires were not in complete accord.

Then you are a courageous and laudable person. I'm a little puzzled by
your use of the phrase "SCA's desires", tho. The SCA as a body only has
regulations, really : desire is what it's members have. Did you really
mean "SCA's regs", or perhaps "the Local SCA Powers-that-Be's desires",
or perhaps some other meaning I'm just not picking up ?

] The result has been mixed.  I have gotten a lot accomplished...  we have
] built a blast furnace and made bronze castings in the fashion of 1540,
] I have made a Kent-ish long cottage, and am building a North England
] style cottage now...  we have made trebuchet's, done woodworking, and
] all sorts of things in our narrow focus group.   My wife has gone from
] sheep to yarn to cloth to finished clothing, doing all the steps by hand
] (except that we had a professional shear the sheep out of compassion 
] for the poor beast).

This is all great stuff. But I feel like I'm not getting the whole
picture yet. None of these things seem outside the scope defined
by the SCA's bylaws, just going by what you've said so far. I do
not doubt you know more of the situation than I and will respect
your desires if you consider the details inappropriate for the net.

] And because I spent so much time without SCA sanctions, it took me 19
] years to get an AoA, and I wouldn't be surprised if I never see any
] other award.  My poor wife is still unnoticed.  Thats because almost 
] all of these tasks, each of which is probably worth of a Laurel in 
] and of itself, was done without SCA sanctions.

Well, I sympathize. My own wife worked for years without recognition,
because she used to be a quiet worker. Linking up with me, and our
good friend David White ( Lord Daffyd Firedancer ), changed all that.
My wife and I got our AoAs in the same court, tho she had always
worked just as hard if not harder than I ever did, and had been in
the SCA for 5 times as long.

As the result of the labors you've made have been shared with the members
SCA, even if done without SCA sanction, the tardiness of your award
is indeed regrettable. I hope the respect your local comrades
in the Society have for you is a balm to you and your wife.



]
] Thats the problem... it gets cold and lonely out there sometimes.
]
--
Dennis O'Connor			doconnor@sedona.intel.com