[Archers] Trying to make some sense...

[John Atkins]

Siegfried,
As usual, I defer to your judgment.  My main point is that, and this is
my personal opinion, archery marshals should be responsible for what
occurs on their range.  I have seen situations where that has not
occurred and I we have seen "rules" enacted by non-archery personnel
because of it.  This disturbs me.  I personally feel an archery marshal
should be the responsible individual for the range.  If this means they
don't get to shoot at that event, so be it. Their function is a safety
officer and they should act as such and take responsibility for what
happens on that range.  That was my only point.

cog

-----Original Message-----
From: archers-bounces at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
[mailto:archers-bounces at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of
Siegfried
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2010 9:00 PM
To: archers at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
Subject: Re: [Archers] Trying to make some sense...


COG, if I may attempt to gently respond to some of your non-gentle
statements:

> My personal perspective on rules is that they exist only to back us up

> when/if we run into an individual who needs a gastrointestinal window

I highly disagree here with you.  Rules exist to give us a 'guideline'
and 'common understanding' of what is safe, and what the game is that we
play.

Without rules, there would be no consistency and even disregarding the
safety aspects, tempers would flare as one marshal allowed fiberglass
arrows, another didn't, one had people straddle the line, another
didn't, and another didn't care.  (The list could be endless here, I'll
stop)

Rules, therefore, to me, are extremely important for the operation of
our game, keeping everyone safe, and keeping the 'flavor' of our game at
a consistent level.

That being said, traditionally many of our rules have been guidelines,
and/or had the ability for a marshal to relax them temporarily (such as
the ability for someone to use non-wooden shafts for a period of time.

> Therefore my position is that common sense and a concern for safety 
> often solves whatever problem may exist.

The one problem with this COG, is that no everyone's common sense is the
same.  Or as it's often said:  "Common sense isn't common".  While one
person may feel perfectly fine having someone standing 3 feet over from
a target being fired at. (See some modern ranges), someone else may want
a 180 degree arc to be clear for 3 miles.

Without having a common baseline, that then common sense can be applied
to.  Things would be drastically different.  By having a common
baseline, we all have a starting point and can move from there.

>   I also believe strongly that
> many new archers should be FIRST and FOREMOST encouraged to join us on

> the range.  i.e. An archer who has a very long draw length such that 
> they can not find wooden shafted arrows.  I'll give them a 
> dispensation to use aluminum or carbon shafted arrows but not if they 
> are shooting for Royal Archer or the like.

I agree, and our rules allow for that exact reason.  (I also might start
a discussion/argument at this point in time about whether we should
relax the wooden arrow rule in general, but that's a bigger
question/issue at this point that needs discussed at Society)

> That said, our rules are currently is a miserable state of 
> confliction. There has been much said and accepted as the norm that is

> NOT actually written down or incorporated into either our rules or the

> SCA wide rules.

I would love to hear what those are COG.  You make a statement that 'so
many of our rules aren't written down'.  But I don't know of any of them
that aren't, other than the aformentioned 100yd rule, which was
officially announced, and hasn't been transcribed into the kingdom rules
yet as we are waiting to see how it plays out.

>  I have participated in shoots at other events, i.e. highland games 
> and Ren Faires, and believe me when I say the SCA is MUCH safer than 
> these other venues by far!

Which also reflects a problem with your previous 'common sense'
statement :)

>  I also firmly believe that a change in
> the rules or, as in this case, correction of the rules should be done 
> in a public forum.  What I mean here is we should not have edicts from

> "on high" but solutions should be proposed, discussed within/by the 
> marshal community, then a consensus achieved and the final decision 
> made.  That final decision should rightfully come from the DEM and EM 
> as they are ultimately responsible.  However I adamantly disagree with

> decisions made in the absence of this discussion.  Situations happen 
> but there are ALWAYS multiple reasons for them happening.  Therefore 
> there are multiple solutions to the "situations".  Selecting the best 
> one that works for all is the real challenge but the right choice.

COG, I understand and agree on principal.  And there should definitely
IMO never be a rule that was completely without discussion coming from a
single person (or two, Earl Marshal + Activity Deputy), unless perhaps
an emergency rule that's needed immediately, and then RETROACTIVELY
discussed before being codified.

However, that being said, I disagree with you.  There are MANY rules
that benefit from grand discussion of thousands of people and everyones
POV taken into account.

However, there are also times when there is something needed that
discussion 'behind the scenes' among senior marshals, those most
familiar with the game and it's intecracies, is the most fruitful, when
public discussion may instead degrade.

This, for example, is exactly why in the US we are not a democracy,
regardless of how some people wish to portray it.  We are a republic
(That is democratically elected).  We have 'senior folks' in charge,
that we trust, and that take care of making sure that the rules are
handled.  Just in the SCA said people tend to be chosen by merit (Their
experience and tenure as marshals), rather than public popularity.

That being said, I'm still a fan (And was, both during my times in
Kingdom and Society marshallate positions) of getting more open/general
discussion when the situation warrants.

>   Out West there has
> been "noise" about archer authorizations.  Personally I would really 
> hate to see this.  I believe if a marshal is actually controlling the 
> line, as they should, then a simple run through of the commands and an

> equipment inspection should suffice.

At least one kingdom already requires authorizations, and upon
discussion with that Kingdom, the reason was clear.  In Atlantia, our
culture is blessed with the fact that we tend to have marshals
outnumbering archers at any given event.

In that kingdom, it was common for the marshal running the archery to be
the only marshal in attendance.  It therefore was highly useful for them
to 'authorize' archers as understanding the basics, so that said single
marshal could feel safer about everyone on the line, many of which he
may not know, instead of watching everyone like a hawk.

In Atlantia, it's quite common for people on the line shooting, who are
marshals, to be giving guidance/help/safety tips to those around them.

In said kingdoms, the authorization is an extremely minor thing. Usually
going through about 15 minutes of basic instruction about the SCA rules,
understanding what we do, understanding the common line commands, and
proving you can handle the bow well enough to not be a danger on the
line to those around you.

That's it.  In a sense, no different than a heavy authorization, EXCEPT
it's much more 'class where you get a cert at the end', instead of a
'test' you can fail.

Do we need this in Atlantia?  Not at all IMO.  Do some kingdoms?
Perhaps.

> Last year at the Masters shoot at Pennsic many of us Atlantians 
> witnessed an act that we considered extremely unsafe and careless.  
> When I brought it to the attention of the Eastern Archer General, 
> their DEM, he knew of it and simply dismissed it.

And yet again, you want 'common sense' to exist in liu of rules?  Again,
everyone's common sense and experience is different.


>   Those Atlantian rules that vary from the SCA wide rules should be 
> noted as such, i.e. 3.2.1 SCA rules modified to blah, blah, blah.  
> That way we don't have to totally re-write the archery rules and if 
> changes are made either in Atlantian or SCA it minimizes the effort 
> required to post the change.

That is in fact how the rules are written.  They are available here:

http://law.atlantia.sca.org/Policy.html#3.9

The only difference is that we don't have any "Rule X changed to Y"
Simply because none of our 'new rules' are actually modifications to
existing rules.  They are completely separate from the rules in the SCA.
Or are codifications of 'suggestions' in the SCA rules.  (It also would
be difficult to even do it, since the SCA TA rules aren't 'structured'
like all the rest of the rules in the SCA.

>   After these changes have been made by the
> TA DEM (it would be their ultimate responsibility), they get posted to

> the marshal's list for review and comment.

I should point out that:

1) While this list was originally used as a marshals list when first
setup, it later became a more general 'archers of atlantia list' that
lots of marshals happened to be on.

2) The only official 'marshals' list in Atlantia, is a general one for
ALL marshals of ALL types.  If you are a marshal, you can request to be
added to it.  Do note that most discussion tends to be Heavy centric
with a moderate dose of Rapier.  Though other topics are brought up as
well.

Siegfried

PS.  If anyone has any questions/concerns/wonders about the reasoning
behind any of Atlantia's current TA rules, I'd be happy to provide them.
The current set of rules at http://law.atlantia.sca.org/Policy.html#3.9
were put in place during my tenure in office, As was the last revision
of our RR rules, currently hosted here:
http://www.scores-sca.org/public/scores_rules.php?R=2&Shoot=2


-- 
Barun Siegfried Sebastian Faust - Barony of Highland Foorde - Atlantia
http://hf.atlantia.sca.org/ - http://crossbows.biz/ - http://eliw.com/
_______________________________________________
Archers mailing list
Archers at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/listinfo.cgi/archers-atlantia.sca.org