[MR] Pollings and Associates and the BIG "P" Word (politics)

[Robert Van Rens]

Rebecca,
I'm going to guess that none of the people in this discussion were peers, and that few, if any, were dependents or associates of a peer.
This "hypothetical situtation" shows a total lack of understanding regarding the Peerages and the process the Crown goes through in elevating a Peer.

Peerages, like any group of more than two people, have politics.  There is LITERALLY no way for any long-term association of people NOT to.  This is not a bad thing.  This is not a good thing.  This is an inevitability, like death, or taxes, or gravity, or a rate hike from the phone company.
I currently have one apprentice.  She lives out of Kingdom (Drachenwald, to be exact.)  By your system, my vote for deserving cantidates in Atlantia would only count for half as much as someone whose apprentices are Atlantian residents, and my advice to Drachenwald's crown would be effectively discounted.
Peerages are a Society-wide award.  The elevation process can differ from Kingdom to Kingdom, but ultimately, a Peer is a Peer whereever they reside.  The Drachenwald Crown appreciates my input on one of its subjects that lives in a remote place north of the Arctic Circle and has limited contact with the rest of the Kingdom.  The fact that I live across the Atlantic Ocean isn't important - mileage-wise, it's about as far from here to there as it is from there to the closest SCA group in that kingdom.
I have been known to offer input on other Kingdom's Laurel cantidates.  Peers from other Kingdoms have been known to offer input on ours.  It's not the place of you and yours to discourage that.
Yours in Service, 
Magister Eadric the Potter
 

 

www.eadricthepotter.com




> Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 03:59:32 -0700
> From: bmcellis at yahoo.com
> To: atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
> Subject: Re: [MR] Pollings and Associates and the BIG "P" Word (politics)
> 
> 
> > 
> > By extension, this hypothetical situation would have the
> > potential to extend
> > out to "You don't have a Peer? Then you're not really
> > eligible for our
> > Order." We'd have a lot of people who suddenly would not be
> > eligible for
> > Peerages simply because they don't feel a need or desire to
> > attach
> > themselves to one person.
> 
> 
> Interesting tangent that came up that most people didn't think would be an automatic assumption.
> 
> Although the question came up that is it really forcing peers to play politics since a member of any polling order is expected to encourage others to that order by most opinions.
> 
> 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
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with Hotmail. 
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5