[Ponte Alto] Re:Saftey after dark

[Nicole Spaun]

Greetings,

I think we're on the same side of the argument here but the tone of your 
email sounds somewhat otherwise.

>I agree in theory with your comment about the necessity of courtesy in the 
>SCA "I often wish that we could require a courtesy class every two years to 
>maintain one's membership."  However, I'm sorry to say that I believe the 
>problem lies not within the bounds of SCA govern ship nor is wholly the 
>fault of those who choose not to participate.
>
Then where does the problem lie, in your opinion?

You'll note that I said...

>I'm talking about what folks consider themselves to be and are
>playing- and many at Pennsic are almost boastful that they're not SCA and 
>not playing by SCA rules.  *sigh*
>
Remembering that "SCA rules" generally include chivalry and courtesy and 
that the perp was clearly not playing by those rules, well, then: as he 
chose not to participate in those rules then the problem DOES rest with that 
behaviour.  Note the AND in that last sentence... it's not an OR because 
that would imply that anyone who doesn't pay the SCA is to blame (far be it 
from me to ever make such a statement *haha*- I lived in the Mists, I know 
Corpora, and I don't pay either).  What I did say is that it's the lack of 
playing by the rules of courtesy and chivalry that is to blame.  No one (as 
far as I can see) has blamed "the swampies".   Your email seemed to make an 
effort to explain that swampies are not thugs (this I know already as I have 
many friends deep in the swamp) so I just want to make sure you understand 
that "the swampies" were not being blamed in my email.  Those who choose not 
to play with SCA manners (ie that courtesy and chivalry) are the ones I 
blame.  You seem to suggest otherwise?

~Nicole/Bianca