[MR] [Archers] I'd like to point out.....

[Garth G. Groff]

  My Lord Siegfried,

Ah, you see the glass half-full. I see it as half-empty. I hope you are 
right if this ever comes to pass, but I expect it would end otherwise. 
If it did, I think we should make a lot of noise and demand refunds, but 
the Powers That Be (PTB) are very likely to say, "Too bad, but it was 
their choice, and there's nothing we can do about it now", perhaps 
sending a mild "tsk, tsk" to the autocrat. Remember, "It's all about the 
fighting."

Kind regards,


Lord Mungo Napier, Who Has Spent Too Many Years Working for UVA

On 9/16/2010 9:53 AM, Siegfried wrote:
>> Closing the range would undoubtedly cause a lot of hard feelings, a
>> blizzard of emails, probably not be taken seriously by the powers that
>> be (outside of the archery community), and possibly cause archery to be
>> excluded at that event in the future, but it is the only possible course
>> of action.
> Lord Mungo, I disagree.   I feel that if/when a range needs closed by
> the MiC-Archery, because the autocrat/event-staff/MiC-Event/etc were
> unable to provide suitable space...
>
> Would actually send a strong message to the 'powers that be'.  For in
> doing said closing, the reason for it should be well shared with all the
> dissapointed archers.  And we archers are not known for 'keeping our
> tongue' well.
>
> Therefore, numerous complaints would most likely be filed, to autocrat,
> to seneschal, to MiC, and perhaps higher as they'd have to be included
> in the MiC-Event's report, etc.
>
> Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if some attendees might not even ask for
> event refunds.  If the sole reason they drove 4 hours was to do archery,
> to be told the range had to be closed because the autocrat didn't allow
> enough room to do it safely.
>
> So, while I hope that this situation never comes to pass.  I think if it
> does, the message will be quickly driven home.
>
> In Service,
> Siegfried
>
>