[MR] RE: The Queens Arms

[Richard Fitzgilbert]

Greetings from Richard,

I apologize for not making my query clear.

You wrote "A lack of response can not and will not be construed as support."

I believe that "can not and will not" is incorrect as there is nothing to stop
anyone from drawing that conclusion.  At least two posters to this forum have
already construed silence as support. If you meant that certain corporate
entities will not make that interpretation, I'd believe you.  But, that's far
different from the broad unlimited statement you've made.  I know, I'm being
difficult.  It's easy to infer and implied "by Laurel" on the end of your
statement.  But, I'm not positive that's what you meant.  I hope for the favour
of further enlightenment.

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 Michael Houghton
Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 8:43 PM
To: atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
Subject: Re: [MR] RE: The Queens Arms


Howdy!

On Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 07:04:34PM -0400, Richard Fitzgilbert wrote:
> Greetings from Richard!
> 
> I think there's something missing from the statement below.  It 
> certainly seems, to me, patently incorrect.

In what way was my statement incorrect? Set that evaluation in the context of
the long-standing and well published administrative requirements. Please also
point out what is missing from my statement. I am puzzled.

> For, I certainly construe this lack of response as
> support.  Very tepid support, but support none the less.  Is this 
> meant to say that it will not be construed by the corporate entities 
> as support?  That may well be, but those corporate entities are not 
> the only ones interested in evaluating the lack of response.  If 
> someone, say the Queen, decided to construe a lack of written polling 
> response as support, that would clearly point out the mistakes in the 
> below statement.

The lack of response is a weak indication of anything. One can reasonably infer
that there was not a swell of vehement opposition; that tends to 
appear when it exists. However, the strongest inference to be drawn is that
hardly anybody really cared about the issue. That is neither support nor
condemnation. 

The registration process demands demonstrated support. A lack of response to a
polling is not a demonstration of support. Neither is it substantial opposition.

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org 
> [mailto:atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of Michael 
> Houghton
> 
> Groups are required to demonstrate affirmative support for changes to 
> their names and arms. That is clearly stated in the governing 
> documents. A lack of response can not and will not be construed as 
> support.
> 
yours,
Herveus
-- 
Michael and MJ Houghton   | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
herveus at radix.net         | White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA            | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
                          | http://www.radix.net/~herveus/
========================================================================
                   The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
    List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
  Submissions: Atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
Subscriptions: http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/mailman/listinfo/atlantia