[MR] RE: The Queens Arms

[Richard Fitzgilbert]

Greetings from Richard,

I'd mostly agree.  I think that the vast majority of the populace doesn't care
enough to jump through the hoops necessary to respond to the polling.

I think that Mistresses Alisoun's suggestions, put forward in an earlier post,
are the way to pursue this issue.

If additional responses are collected, are we starting over?  Or, do they get
added to the previous polling responses?

Yours in Service to Atlantia,
Richard Fitzgilbert

-----Original Message-----
From: atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org
[mailto:atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of Nicholas S. Malone
Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 7:55 AM
To: atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
Subject: Re: [MR] RE: The Queens Arms


Actually I think the populace has spoken quite clearly.  It does not 
care. This is not an issue that justifies an e-mail response to Laurel 
let alone a stamp and mail. In all reality this is an issue that only 
matters to a VERY few. I think campaigning has already drummed up more 
responses than would have been made by choice! The polling very 
accurately reflects the feelings of the crowd.  This is a lot like the 
Anderson for president campaign; A neat idea but who cares and what 
difference will it make to more than a dozen people.

David Wendelken wrote:

>>But that last clause is EXACTLY why the latest proposal to change
>>the Queen's arms was returned by the Laurel 
>>Sovereigns of Arms!  Atlantia did not 'think well of it', 
>>but as a whole shrugged and said "Eh. Not important.  
>>Not gonna bother."  There is no way that any reasonable person can 
>>interpret a response of less than 5 percent as 
>>being "well thought of in the kingdom".
> 
> 
> The maxim of the law is this:  "Silence implies consent."
> 
> 95% of those polled gave their consent to the change by their silence.
> 
> Andras