[MR] Atlantia Digest, Vol 51, Issue 28

Wed Apr 11 14:36:20 PDT 2007

My friends,
   I regularly read this mailing list and have never commented but wanted to
do so here.  I am quite willing to offer a donation to the SCA to help with
the expenses of background checks, etc, if it is needed, or cookies if any
bake sale is nearby. :D   Please feel free to contact me.

Robyn Rayburn
Klara Durer

Mundanely known as Kimberly Johnson Strong.
Mom2jes at cox.net

-----Original Message-----
From: atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org
[mailto:atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of
atlantia-request at atlantia.sca.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:13 PM
To: atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
Subject: Atlantia Digest, Vol 51, Issue 28

Send Atlantia mailing list submissions to
	atlantia at atlantia.sca.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/mailman/listinfo/atlantia
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	atlantia-request at atlantia.sca.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	atlantia-owner at atlantia.sca.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Atlantia digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Society Notice (Wayne (Axel) Remes)
   2. Re: Society Notice (Olwen the Odd)
   3. A&S (Martha Wallenhorst)
   4. Re: Society Notice (Lady Rhiannon of Berra)
   5. Re: Society Notice (Layne R. Sunderlin)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:15:54 -0400
From: "Wayne \(Axel\) Remes" <wremes at carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [MR] Society Notice
To: "'Merry Rose'" <atlantia at atlantia.sca.org>
Message-ID: <000701c77c76$35a85d40$6401a8c0 at axelpc>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

If you are referring to what I think you are referring to your Grace, I do
not believe the individual or individuals were involved with any youth
program, so a background check would not have been done on them anyway.
Also my original calculations for low end cost of the program did not
include probably at least 10 more Rapier Youth Marshals and an undetermined
number Rapier MITs, because youth rapier is pretty much right around the
corner. We also need to think about Youth Rattan marshals and MITs when we
most probably pick up youth Rattan too. Additionally the cost of a minister
of minors at even Baronial level, much less Canton and shire level was not
included. I expect the low end cost to be substantially more than I
originally stated. 
You are right however; I do want everything short of the cost of background
checks to insure the protection of our kids...and our women.

Axel

-----Original Message-----
From: atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org
[mailto:atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of Logan
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:46 PM
To: 'Margaret Cochrane'; 'Merry Rose'
Cc: jwilliams at director.sca.org
Subject: Re: [MR] Society Notice

actually you aren't pointing out anything since you and i agree.  i know
axel wants people, children et al, to be protected.  what i disagreed with
is his protest to the background check.  if the two adult thing was so
foolproof we would never have seen an issue.  weve seen that in this kingdom
already and not too long ago.  so its not working.  i disagree with his
protest, not his heart.  i know his heart to be in the right place.

regards
logan 

I lack "faith" because I possess thought and embrace reason.
http://fighterpractice.com
http://ebonwoulfe.com/

-----Original Message-----
From: atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org
[mailto:atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of Margaret Cochrane
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:36 PM
To: 'Merry Rose'
Cc: jwilliams at director.sca.org
Subject: Re: [MR] Society Notice

Your grace, I would like to point out that you are not in fact disagreeing
with Axel in whether or not children should be protected.  What you are
disagreeing about is the means and method of that protection.  There are
other mechanisms available, including the 2 unrelated adults rule.  I
haven't had time to process all of the implications of this yet, but as a
parent, I'd like to add that while I'm in favour of there being more checks
on who is wanting to interact with the kids, this is not the most prudent
course to take to that end.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Logan <logan at ebonwoulfe.com>
>Sent: Apr 11, 2007 3:26 PM
>To: "'Wayne (Axel) Remes'" <wremes at carolina.rr.com>, 'Merry Rose'
<atlantia at atlantia.sca.org>
>Cc: jwilliams at director.sca.org
>Subject: Re: [MR] Society Notice
>
>i disagree good brother axel.  im glad to see the sca putting a good foot
>forward to protect society visitors and members alike from predators.  for
>too long a blind eye has been turned at those who display inappropriate
>conduct towards women.  i almost said "and children" but i dont think as
>much tolerance has been show for the latter.  a zero tolerance position
>should be the reality of the day, yet the sca tolerates predatory men that
>feel that its somehow a compliment to a woman to be mauled.  this has led
to
>a lackadaisical approach to personal space and that has led to children
>being caught up in this.  we have seen too many examples of children harmed
>by adults and i find it encouraging that the sca is trying to be proactive
>in this and im terribly saddened that this part of society has become such
>that we have to be on guard as well.
>
>im sure that many of us feel that we can protect those we care for and i
>would be the first one to tell you that i would remove, like a stain, any
>person i knew acted in such a predatory manner to a child or a woman.  but
>as much as we would like to feel we can protect everyone we have failed.
>this may never catch or prevent anything my friend but what if we found it
>that it would have prevented something after the fact?  i dont want to feel
>that level of regret.  if it costs the kingdom $700 bucks to protect woman
>and children im all for it.  much more than i am for new crowns and new
>swords.  lets sell cookies for those in the future.
>
>regards
>logan
>
> 
> 
> 
>I lack "faith" because I possess thought and embrace reason.
>http://fighterpractice.com
>http://ebonwoulfe.com/
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org
>[mailto:atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of Wayne (Axel) Remes
>Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:35 PM
>To: 'Merry Rose'
>Cc: jwilliams at director.sca.org
>Subject: Re: [MR] Society Notice
>
>
>You gotta be kidding me...and the Kingdom's gonna have to bankroll the
>background checks of every Youth Marshal. Youth MIT, Children's Activities
>Minister from Canton thru kingdom, are they insane! 
>
>Looking at the Kingdom webpage we currently have 17 youth Marshals, 8 Youth
>MITs, the Earl Marshal, and 7 Chancellor of Youth staff positions. No idea
>how many local minister of youth offices are filled. Assuming that they use
>something like NC123 at 19.95 a pop just to meet the requirements with the
>inadequate people resources we got now is gonna cost the Kingdom $638.00
>probably a lot more, and that's the low end of the scale, if they do any
>sort of real background check it's cost more. We desperately need more
>people involved in all these activities, and should not be making it harder
>to get people involved. Leave it to the BOD to, instead of coming up with
>rational procedures like say...requiring there to be at least 2 adults
>present at all times at youth activities at a SCA event, or requiring the
>kids parents be in attendance at any local SCA non event activity, the BOD
>comes up with this stupidity. 
> 
>
>And I might add it is NOT "...WORTH NOTING that these measures are less
>stringent than those being used today by the Boy Scouts of America."
>We don't as normal planned events take kids out into the woods for
prolonged
>periods without their parents being there. In fact Parents are discouraged
>from dropping their kids at SCA functions and leaving site.
>
>This is bullshit....and ranks right up there with the Banning of ALL minors
>from the list field even if they were already authorized and had parental
>approval to be there, as occured in the mid 80s.
>  
>
>
>Axel
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org
>[mailto:atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of Amy Heilveil
>Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 10:35 AM
>To: Merry Rose; Attilium at googlegroups.com
>Subject: [MR] Society Notice
>
>Passing along information.... Despina
>
>> In response to repeated occurences of the SCA having to deal with abuse
of
>> minors by SCA participants, risk to our membership from such predatorial
>> behavior, and legal liabilities if we fail to execute proper due
>> diligence, the SCA will be implementing a background check program to
>> minimize risk of harm to our people and the organization. This program
>> will revolve around conducting--via a properly licensed
vendor--background
>> checks on all persons wishing to serve in a leadership or supervisory
>> position where minors are expected to be taking direction from--or be in
>> the direct control of adults who are not their parent or legal guardian.
>>
>> An example of officials who must receive the background check are:  Youth
>> activities officers at all levels, Adults acting as youth marshals for
any
>> martial activity, persons organizing/in charge of youth activities for an
>> event.
>>
>> These checks will return a pass/fail status.  A pass status will cause
the
>> corporate office to issue a card good for two years that must be
presented
>> in order to be accepted as an official as described above.
>>
>> It is expected that this process will be streamlined and simplified as
>> much as possible without invalidating the value of the background checks
>> themselves.  The cost of the checks will be billed back to the Kingdoms
>> whose programs these volunteers are supporting.
>>
>> It is worth noting that these measures are less stringent than those
being
>> used today by the Boy Scouts of America.
>>
>> Further details, to include the actual process and an implement-by date
>> will accompany the implementing guidelines to be issued after the April
>> Board Meeting.
>>
>>
>>
>> Aaron Faheud Swiftrunner of the Stone Keep OL OP
>> c/o George L. Reed
>>
>> Society Seneschal and Vice President of Operations
>> SCA, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>> | To: sca-seneschal | From: <seneschal at sca.org>
>> | Mailing list for the Kingdom and Deputy Seneschals of the SCA
>> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>>
>>
>========================================================================
>                   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
>
>========================================================================
>                   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
>
>========================================================================
>                   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

-Margaret
-----------------------------------------------------
Margaret Cochrane (quarterly sable and gules, two feathers fesswise argent)
Kappellenberg
Windmasters' Hill, Atlantia
========================================================================
                   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

========================================================================
                   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

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 20:20:03 +0000
From: "Olwen the Odd" <olwentheodd at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MR] Society Notice
To: atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
Cc: jwilliams at director.sca.org
Message-ID: <BAY141-F73D37D006745EAC1594F7A65F0 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

What!!?????  Why not just say that if people have kids and want them to 
participate in any childrens activities in the SCA then the parents should 
pay into the kitty, not the volunteers who are not always parents.  
Paleeease...this is the SCA and it is what we do for fun, cultural 
entertainment and enlightenment, lack of another life, our passion, or 
whatever.  This is not where we come to "pony up" to be able to do service.

That is why we have fund raisers, which I volunteered to do.
Dame Olwen
>
>If it is a matter of the $700.00 the background checks will cost the
>Kingdom. Then to protect Our young people let each adult wanting to work
>with minors pay for their own background checks. If a person has
>anything to hide, they will stay as far away from Our children as they can.
>The individual price of 3 large
>pizza's is a minor price to pay to protect Our Women and Children.
>
>In Service
>Lord Melcher Lloyd of Hawkwood
>
>
>On 4/11/07, Wayne (Axel) Remes <wremes at carolina.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > I should probably point out in case anyone missed it. I cced the 
>director
> > of
> > BOD on the original email. I thought that it would be a good idea 
>because
> > it
> > would give you his email address if you wanted to write him an irate
> > letter...I got it his email address out of the Acorn. Upon reflection it
> > might not have been such a good idea, as if you generally do a reply all
> > to
> > get a reply easily to the Mary Rose you'll be sending him a copy too, 
>even
> > if you don't want to.  If you don't want your response to go to the
> > director
> > of the BOD make sure you remove him from the CC line if he's there.
> >
> > Axel

_________________________________________________________________
MSN is giving away a trip to Vegas to see Elton John.  Enter to win today. 
http://msnconcertcontest.com?icid-nceltontagline

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:16:49 -0400
From: "Martha Wallenhorst" <lghthse at verizon.net>
Subject: [MR] A&S
To: <atlantia at atlantia.sca.org>
Message-ID: <002101c77c76$56815490$aa057847 at cloister>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

I have tried to stay out of this but... I guess good old Annejke just can't
keep her fingers quiet!  (I tried, really I did)  

The society and the A&S in the society have changed over the years.  In the
beginning it was more, 'gee that sure looks cool' to 'gee that sure looks
period' then 'gee that is great, you have documentation'.  A&S has grown as
the society has grown and we have become more interested and dedicated to
learning about the art and craft of the period.  That growing is part of why
judging is such a difficult job and why preparing to be judged is just as
hard or harder.  A judge's function is to 'score' how well a person has
accomplished the step they have taken in reproducing, and documenting the
item that has been entered in the competition.  One function of the society
is to mentor those people who attempt this reproduction process.  How well a
person has kept to period techniques, imagination, and humanity that has
been added to the piece is often judged.  Some judges like those qualities
and some don't.  The duty of judges is to score fairly and mentor the person
who has produced the piece by giving them fair and constructive comments on
the step or steps shown in the piece itself.  Remember that as a viewer of
the A&S you too make a judgment and have the right to leave a note as well,
although, when I do I make sure they know I am not judging. 

As for not knowing much as a judge, that can be remedied to some extent.  I
am a full time artist; I have knowledge in cooking, sewing, etc, etc.
However, if I was asked to judge something I knew nothing about, a sheet of
paper from an expert or laurel in the field as to what to look for and how
to judge it would be a great help.  The kingdom A&S could have these online
so each group could print them off and hand them to the judge who is a
novice in the field.  If I were doing lace I would be, Oooh pretty.
However, if I had a sheet I could read up on lace and what to look for,
before going into the judging I would feel more qualified to do at least a
novice judging job.  

I do agree with the adage; don't trust a word processor spell checker.  Have
someone else proof your documentation first.  I know several editors that
read with a red pen in hand.  (My children won't let me carry one anymore it
embarrasses them too much.)  There have been folks that come up, read the
documentation, are not judges, but pull out a red pen to correct the grammar
and spelling of the piece anyway.  I have one good friend I just won't let
near an A&S table alone because she is 70+ and an OCD English teacher.  If
someone wants to enter a piece and doesn't have anyone they trust to proof
their documentation, I know she would love to.  Just let me know and I will
send you her email.  Remember you don't have to know how to build a castle
to correct the spelling and grammar.  

I think these things may help the A&S.  I loved getting good comments.  I
loved getting tokens.  I hate being told nothing or nothing constructive.
The worst is being criticized and getting the feeling, you should just give
up.  

Annejke
If you see me at Crown, come wish me a happy anniversary.  I will have been
in the SCA 30 years that day.
(Who will go back to lurking quietly.)

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:39:50 -0400
From: "Lady Rhiannon of Berra" <ladyrhi at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MR] Society Notice
To: atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
Message-ID:
	<7d009a9a0704111339k5d83a1b6o5404ae0dee8027f5 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Anything that keeps predators at bey is a wonderful thing.  Our children
need our protection.  Period.  If a background check helps with that, then
go for it.  The Kingdom can open the coffers or raise money for something as
important as this.  We were able to raise money for the beautiful regalia, I
see no reason why we can't all dig just a tiny bit deeper to help protect
our future.

I realize that background checks only show those who have offended in the
past; and vigilence is the absolute best answer, but any level of protection
more than we have is good.  We run the risk of scarring someone for life
because we don't want to "make waves" and get someone arrested if need be.
In this case, waves should be made.

I don't have children, but I know people who do, and I'd be willing to
contribute.

Rhi.  .

On 4/11/07, Olwen the Odd <olwentheodd at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> What!!?????  Why not just say that if people have kids and want them to
> participate in any childrens activities in the SCA then the parents should
> pay into the kitty, not the volunteers who are not always parents.
> Paleeease...this is the SCA and it is what we do for fun, cultural
> entertainment and enlightenment, lack of another life, our passion, or
> whatever.  This is not where we come to "pony up" to be able to do
> service.
> That is why we have fund raisers, which I volunteered to do.
> Dame Olwen
> >
> >If it is a matter of the $700.00 the background checks will cost the
> >Kingdom. Then to protect Our young people let each adult wanting to work
> >with minors pay for their own background checks. If a person has
> >anything to hide, they will stay as far away from Our children as they
> can.
> >The individual price of 3 large
> >pizza's is a minor price to pay to protect Our Women and Children.
> >
> >In Service
> >Lord Melcher Lloyd of Hawkwood
> >
> >
> >On 4/11/07, Wayne (Axel) Remes <wremes at carolina.rr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I should probably point out in case anyone missed it. I cced the
> >director
> > > of
> > > BOD on the original email. I thought that it would be a good idea
> >because
> > > it
> > > would give you his email address if you wanted to write him an irate
> > > letter...I got it his email address out of the Acorn. Upon reflection
> it
> > > might not have been such a good idea, as if you generally do a reply
> all
> > > to
> > > get a reply easily to the Mary Rose you'll be sending him a copy too,
> >even
> > > if you don't want to.  If you don't want your response to go to the
> > > director
> > > of the BOD make sure you remove him from the CC line if he's there.
> > >
> > > Axel
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN is giving away a trip to Vegas to see Elton John. Enter to win today.
> http://msnconcertcontest.com?icid-nceltontagline
>
>
> ========================================================================
>                    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
>
>

-- 
Gina MacNeill
AKA Lady Rhiannon of Berra, CP
List Moderator of the Atlantianweavers Yahoogroup

Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anything offered to me
as the result of an unsolicited e-mail message. Nor will I forward
chain letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warnings to large
numbers of others. This is my contribution to the survival of the
online community.

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:50:09 -0600
From: "Layne R. Sunderlin" <lray.sunderlin at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [MR] Society Notice
To: "Merry Rose Tavern" <atlantia at atlantia.sca.org>
Message-ID: <000601c77c7a$fe4704f0$6498a8c0 at NORMAN>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

[Snippage]

".legal liabilities if we fail to execute proper due diligence, ."

[Much more snippage]

This fragment is the crux of the matter.

Since the subject of background checks has been breached anything less
could be argued in litigation as not only as less than due diligence, but
also as negligence, or worse, "callous disregard".

Unfortunately, in today's litigious society public entities are forced to
walk a
tightrope whilst in a fog.  Sometimes, having to be careful to a fault.

My 2p worth.

YIS, Hargrove the Wanderer

The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' (I found it!)
but " That's funny..." 
  -Isaac Asimov-

------------------------------

========================================================================
              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

End of Atlantia Digest, Vol 51, Issue 28
****************************************