[MR] Fwd: FW: Waterbearing going forward.

[Mary Lumpkin]

The only concern that I would have about this, Who is Paying for the waterbearing supplies?  Not such a big deal at a small event, but what about at a war?  Like Pennsic.  I completely agree about the grossness of sucking from the same straw that someone else did.  But what happens to those fighters who are so used to having someone shove water at them?  They forget and fall out from dehydration and heat stroke.

I think that waterbearing should be sponsored by the SCA but with strict sanitation guidelines.

Ldy. Maire


--- On Sun, 6/29/08, logan <logan at ebonwoulfe.com> wrote:
From: logan <logan at ebonwoulfe.com>
Subject: Re: [MR] Fwd: FW: Waterbearing going forward.
To: "'Merry Rose'" <atlantia at atlantia.sca.org>
Date: Sunday, June 29, 2008, 9:49 PM

i am against the concept of waterbearing as its currently done in the sca
because of what i know about food contamination and what i witness at every
large event.  but i feel it's a personal choice and if people desire
sucking
on straws that other people have put their mouths on then i wish them the
best.  why people cant be expected to take care of themselves is beyond me.
but it seems that they cant.  however, corporate isnt saying that
waterbearing cant happen but, simply, that the activity will no longer be an
official activity of the sca.  so, in the end, a few people lose an officer
title.  nothing more.  non-sca groups (most guilds, all households, etc) can
always provide water for those that, for whatever reason, wont do so for
themselves.  

but this isnt a new move for the bod as we all know when they decided to
force fighters to wear redundant armour on their shield elbow even though we
have never had an injury to an elbow behind a properly sized and strapped
shield.  but, nonetheless, the fear of litigation was the support given to
enforcing that silly rule.  this one, though, makes sense because of how
easily these public drinking vessels become contaminated.  of course the
"injury" usually takes a few days to show signs.

in the end waterbearing is still an option for those that wish to provide
that service.  they just wont have an officers position with it.

regards
logan

"I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it
was
hell." 
Harry S Truman 
 
"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his
vengeance need not be feared"
Niccolo Machiavelli

www.ebonwoulfe.com
-----Original Message-----
From: atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org
[mailto:atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of Cian Conor MacQuaid
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 9:38 PM
To: maire_eriksdottir at yahoo.com; Merry Rose
Subject: Re: [MR] Fwd: FW: Waterbearing going forward.

Thank you Lady Maire.

Well, since you asked. ;-)

I think this is an unneeded intrusion of the concept of potential
liability into our activities. If there are known cases of either
illness or lawsuits arising from similar activities that may alter that
perception, but we know of none. In the case of any activity if a lawyer
is asked "Is there a possibility of liability arising from
<activity>?"
they will say yes. There is no activity, including inactivity, that is
free from the potential for liability. I would suggest that what this
has done is taken a needed activity, hydration for the fighters and
populace at large, and made it impossible for groups manage or execute.
It is good that the explanation explicitly states that groups are
allowed to fund self-service water, or this policy would be even harder
to swallow. I suppose making the populace responsible for their own
containers would reduce the potential liability.

Given the rigor of hygiene I have seen enforced in the waterbearing
community here I would find it hard to believe that it would not meet
any "reasonable effort" stricture in any locale. If we want to check,
why not measure against a food-service chain that has locations in every
jurisdiction? It seems farcical that the choices are "abandon control or
regulate into oblivion." It fails the common sense test. Unfortunately,
that is all too often the case in the legal system, particularly as
regards liability. Perhaps if we had access to the details behind the
decision it would be easier to support, or explain.

Sir Cian


Mary Lumpkin wrote:
> Unto the Populace of Atlantia,
> I have been asked to forward this missive to the Kingdom of Atlantia 
> to see what the populace thinks about this change in Society Law.
> In Service to Kingdom and Crown,
> Ldy. Maire Eriksdottir of Telemark

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