[MR] Permanent Crown event site

[Girard le Bourguignon]

If I may interject,

It seems that we're talking about the possibility of losing access to Betsy
Jeff Penn.  Considering the site is in my Barony's zip codes, and is a great
candidate for an Ymir site, it's something I've considered for quite some
time.

It seems that we lose sites for one of two reasons (that are within our
control).  Reason one is, we as a group do something that the site
disapproves of, such as parking where we shouldn't, destroying their fields,
losing/breaking their kitchen gear, etc.  Reason two is some attendee to the
event does something that the site disapproves of, such as drinking at a dry
site, attacking another member, etc.

If we were to use BJP more and more frequently, we'll in general know their
rules and likes better and better.  If you've been to the site 3 or 4 times,
you don't need to be told where (not) to park on the fifth time.  Thus, it
seems it would make reason #1 less likely to happen.

As for reason #2, if someone does something illegal or against the site
rules, not only would the Autocrat be well within their traditional powers
to see them thrown off site - but could we not also petition the Crown for
other traditional forms of redress?  Not only would that see justice done
(at least as best we can provide it), but would provide a powerful incentive
to obey the site rules.  It may even help mend fences with the site in
question, if we show that we remove those who don't respect their rules.

This may be over-thinking an issue, but hopefully, this can calm some
fears.

Yours in Service,
Baron Girard of Windmasters' Hill

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Jim <jsfrodo at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Milady,
> Asking for data to assess the potential risks of a hypothetical problem is
> not ignoring the question.
>
> Any meaningful risk assessment has to have some "numbers and percentages",
> even if it's sketchy or anecdotal data, to decide A) how likely the problem
> is to happen, B) whether that potential risk makes preventive measures worth
> the time and effort to put them in place, and C) what chance any potential
> preventive measures have of actually fixing the problem.
>
> I don't pretend to speak for His Majesty, but I believe that is what he's
> asking for.
>
> Lord Mathias von Oldenburg
>
> --- On Tue, 4/14/09, Becky McEllistrem <bmcellis at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> From: Becky McEllistrem <bmcellis at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [MR] Permanent Crown event site
> To: atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
> Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 1:02 PM
>
> I don't believe in ignoring hypothetical situations just because they
> haven't happened.
>
> I also don't get bogged down in arguments about numbers and percentages.
>
> I had a legal friend who used to say "that's not a concern because
> there's never been a lawsuit in the history of the USA about that
> before".
>
> We should consider all possible concerns and in a society of courtesy work
> to
> prevent possible problems.
>
> I do appreciate the listening skills though.
>
> Rebecca
> ========================================================================
>                   The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>    List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>  Submissions: Atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
> Subscriptions:
> http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/listinfo.cgi/atlantia-atlantia.sca.org
>