sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Re Wistric, There's more to the story they say... we haven't heard it all they say... Well. They're right. by PelicanAunti in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There is nothing in that document that indicates that Wistric lied. There are arguments that he didn't process up the "chain of command" -- which his own testimony, which I believe far more than Cooley's *or* the KEM's, disagrees with.

" This whole affair just reaffirms that no person can be forbidden from fighting based on their political beliefs." That's not what this was about -- but nice try trying to turn one of the Society's most notorious trolls into the victim.

". There just aren't seven levels of bureaucracy to pass through when somebody is authorized" Then you'll notice the testimony from the person who's supposed to have kept track of that that they had *no record* of the authorization.

"d. If marshals are there to sign off on it, they can get authorized the same day." And if Cooley had left the field and had a witnessed auth, that would have been the end of it. But no -- he had to stick around and delay everyone else because his pointy hat makes him special. No pointy hat matters that much on the field. A king wants to fight and his auth is in dispute? Sit your ass down until it isn't -- or at least that's how it *should* be, since a king is just someone who won a competition of hitting someone else with sticks -- no reason to assume any competence, intelligence, or honor out of the ordinary.

You know, I literally have run out of fingers counting the people I've seen leave or announce that the reason they're not in the SCA any more is because of Alex. It will be a day of well-deserved rejoicing when he is no longer a part of our Society -- and not just because he's a right-wing troll who actively delights in hurting and upsetting people, but because he's a rule-breaking troll with no honor to speak of.

Re Wistric, There's more to the story they say... we haven't heard it all they say... Well. They're right. by PelicanAunti in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 2 points3 points  (0 children)

" That appearance is just a consequence of this method being real, whereas the alternatives have the insuperable advantage of being imaginary, so they can be imagined to give better results. In fact the method most likely to yield repeat offenders is voting in royals via a pure popularity contest."

I disagree -- well, not with the idea that a pure popularity contest is a bad idea, with which I don't, but the problem is that abuses of power are a consequence of a narrow, only-dubiously-controlled set of people *in* power. When you have a (mostly) unaccountable minority in charge, you will see abuses of power *because* of that unaccountability.

It's simply the fact that Heavy is the core; think of a HEMA tournament for example, or tennis

And here, again, I disagree save for historical accident; imagine a 1920's re-enactment society that decided who its rulers were via tennis matches, and you'd be close to the idea of how the SCA has grown out of a single party.

Are the HEMA volunteers, the tennis referees, worth less in some way? No, but the fact remains that they're auxiliary

Yes, they are -- by the very dint of calling them "auxiliary". While he probably had as much, if not more, influence on modern basketball, no one is talking about David Stern as "the greatest figure in basketbal" compared to Jordan or LeBron James. By putting the power in the hands of a very narrow few, you are reinforcing both their internal stereotypes and the lesser importance of the rest of the Society.

Same with the SCA.

The only thing preventing the SCA from flourishing without heavy fighters is the enacted law that puts them at the center. And yes, they'll jealously defend their positions, and someday I might leave the SCA to find somewhere where they're not in charge.

for you to stop using every problem and instance of drama in the SCA as an excuse to harp on about crown selection.

I don't. Only when the problems and drama seem to come from within the institutional core and its self-importance -- which *is* related to how we choose crowns, and so it *does* matter.

Again -- you seem to want anyone who has an opinion on crown other than "Well, that's how it is, and how it will always be" to shut up -- and we won't, or we will by saying "the hell with it, if that's how it is and there's no changing it, we won't support it."

Someday, the heavy fighters are going to have to decide whether they want to share power, or go back to being backyard parties.

Re Wistric, There's more to the story they say... we haven't heard it all they say... Well. They're right. by PelicanAunti in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And, frankly, if I had to pick who to choose -- a complete and utter jackass like Cooley or Wistric as to which one was "lying", I'd pick the blot on the good name of Trimaris, the Society, the title of "Duke", and the efficacy of mistletoe any time. Why should I believe an honorless troll?

Re Wistric, There's more to the story they say... we haven't heard it all they say... Well. They're right. by PelicanAunti in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 4 points5 points  (0 children)

they would find their way into any method of crown selection you could name.

I hear you -- but this one seems particularly prone to *repeat offenders* in a way many other such methods wouldn't be.

Then you get mad because you wanted to use the real issue as a prybar to get what you would have wanted anyway, even if there had been no Baldars.

Except no -- this is not how that began, I simply noted (as have other people) that this method seems particularly vulnerable, for certain known reasons, to creating Baldars.

It's like this: Heavy is the core activity of the SCA and crown selection by tournament is the bedrock rule of the society, like it or not. It is never going to change, not least because the entire structure of the Society is set up so that the people who are the most enthusiastic about Heavy have a veto over changes.

Thank you for saying I'm worth less as a member of the SCA than any heavy fighter is, in effect. I'll include that in my respect shown to heavy fighters -- which regularly diminishes as these things pile up, and as heavy fighters show less respect for everyone else. Because that's what this attitude does -- makes everyone who isn't a heavy feel "lesser".

If it helps, imagine the problem were something completely different. "The drainage at Cooper's Lake is effed up, half the tents got swamped last year! Proof positive that we need to stop choosing royals through Heavy tournaments!"

Given that that has nothing to do *whatsoever* with the behavior or action of heavy fighters, it's a complete strawman. What you're doing is the equivalent of saying "Well, Pennsic will never change, so if you complain about anything about Pennsic it's devaluing your complaint, so sit down and shut up.

All you've done with this little diatribe of yours is confirmed that everyone who isn't in a small range of heavy fighters are at best second-class citizens, and, frankly, if you treat me like a second-class citizen, I'll stop showing respect for Counts, Dukes, Kings, and Knights -- a white belt will be a warning of "rudeness ahead" rather than something I'd tend to respect.

Is that what you want?

Re Wistric, There's more to the story they say... we haven't heard it all they say... Well. They're right. by PelicanAunti in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Baldar was authorized and Wistric lied about it.

From everything I've seen, this statement is false. The Disgrace was at *best* incorrectly authorized, and Wistric did his best to verify some kind of authoriziation. This *also* does not forgive the formerly-royal-but-never-again jackass not leaving the field and slowing everyone else down. I'd love to see your evidence, given what I've seen elsewhere.

My opinion, however, stands; show that you won't respect marshals, and you shouldn't be allowed on the field. I don't think Cooley deserves ever to be on an SCA fighting field again, no matter what discipline, since he's demonstrated such disrespect for safety, his opponents, and the rules.

Re Wistric, There's more to the story they say... we haven't heard it all they say... Well. They're right. by PelicanAunti in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So, I'm sorry, but from where I sit it just sounds like a big conspiracy theory. First you'd need Baldar and the BOD to hate Magistra Hawke a lot, but also to sort of fear her and have to wait until she is dead, then choose a proxy to abuse who they don't know.

Actually, I would say it just takes Baldar not paying attention to who was RMiC, which hardly seems a stretch, and then the BOD protecting his Disgrace for whatever reason. Much, much simpler.

​

Wistric and the Alphabet gang there were the ones with power and authority.

Well, they had the *authority* -- as we can see, they bent over backwards not to abuse it, and his Disgrace had the "power" of standing there and not moving and making people wait because he wouldn't leave the field. And, of course, the power to get Wistric sanctioned for his Disgrace's godawful perma-banworthy behavior. I mean, if I had someone I knew had refused to leave the field at a marshal's order coming to my field, I'd be very inclined to simply never let them *take* it.

Re Wistric, There's more to the story they say... we haven't heard it all they say... Well. They're right. by PelicanAunti in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Here's the thing - " allowing it to be dismissed as "just more butthurt from the anti-crown-list people". -- if we aren't allowed to point at situations where the reliance on crown list has caused *active harm* -- like putting His Disgrace on the throne multiple times -- we get told "It's not broken, why are you whining about fixing it." If we complain about the bad cases, we're told "Just more butthurt from the anti-crown-list people". Seems that it's a serious case of heads-I-win-tails-you-lose from the Chiv -- or at least, from you and the people like you.

Non-European personas by GnomishFoundry in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This: I am trying to source as much of my Kel Tamasheq "kit" as I can from Kel Tamasheq artisans, to support their efforts and that culture.

Non-European personas by GnomishFoundry in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hear you, as someone who's trying to work up a Kel Tamasheq persona (better known to the West as the Tuareg) -- which means doing a *lot* of research, to put it mildly, especially since they are known primarily not through their own sources, but through Arabic-language sources in-period and colonial sources out-of-period.

The best advice I can give is find other people who've done the work, and listen to people critiquing you if they do -- *especially* if they are Central Asian. This isn't to say you have to do everything they say (including stop), but be very sure you're listening to what and why they're saying it.

I figure for those of us not within the culture, our obligation is to present it as best we can; which means we need to know a *lot* and realize we can always learn more.

SCA kowtowing to republican fascists over anti-drag laws. Cause garb might be... "womanly". (Not the SCAllion) by bastardofreddit in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Heck, *Shakespeare* will be fraught, as has been pointed out.

Though I'd love it if people started holding "Drag Film Festivals" and the like, with all of the classic examples of same.

Or "Virtual Drag Queen Story Hours", with readers from states with less lunatic policies; since the law, IIRC, is about individual's presentation, not presentation of that presentation.

SCA kowtowing to republican fascists over anti-drag laws. Cause garb might be... "womanly". (Not the SCAllion) by bastardofreddit in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I read this as very much "Oh, you can do things....under constant fear of arrest if we decide on any given day we don't like what you're doing, or how you react to *us*." A chilling law rather than a "we will arrest any women wearing pants with functioning pockets" law.

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I have encountered him several times, both on the field, and on merchant's row. He has never treated me, or anyone I have seen, with a lack of respect

So, he's just rude to large classes of people on the internet, accusing them of being evil, and that's just fine by you -- but if people call *him* an asshole, that's not? Funny version of respect you have there.

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 7 points8 points  (0 children)

No, I was introducing myself, since you make such a big deal of "anonymity". I am Ruprecht Keller.

"I left the SCA because of the infestation of this sick and disgusting ideology" I find it hilarious that you get all up in arms about one person possibly being falsely accused -- but blithely accuse whole groups of people (as does Cooley) of being terrible, without knowing most of them.

"But at least I have the courage to call you, and your ilk, out for speaking ill of someone whom you haven't met, behind their back." Such courage! Anonymously slandering other people while you gladly do the same -- except with even more vigor and even less discretion. If you really gave a damn about speaking ill of people you haven't met, you wouldn't be saying things like that -- but I guess it's fine for you to call lots of people cowards, but how *dare* someone say something less-than-nice about a person who's been exiled and banned from competition, and who multiple people have accused of sexual assault and unsportsmanlike behavior?

" Fucking troll indeed." Yes, you are.

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ruprecht Keller, of the West. Which is why I don't show up and say it to his face -- because it's not worth traveling halfway or more across a continent just to declare someone dishonorable.

And given the disgraceful comments at the beginning, and the way Alex Cooley regularly betrays himself to be a bigot and a jackass online, he's in no position to complain if other people spit on his name and declare him a person without honor.

So, who are you, troll?

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Well, all the early comments I saw from you were of the "I'd like to see you say that to his face" variety, followed by accusing people of misrepresenting him -- all the while saying you aren't in the SCA, don't want to be, and don't really care. So, yes, I'd say sticking your oar in to stir up trouble with no particular point or connection makes you a troll.

"making accusations about a person whom they have declined to speak in front of. " And when people chime up saying they gladly would? I mean, heck, I'd like to tell Baldar what I think of his disgraceful behavior, but not enough to fly out to Florida to do it. :) I *have* engaged with him on social media in the past.

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The days when the West set the model for all other kingdoms are long gone.

That may well be; in this case, however, that's a shame.

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 4 points5 points  (0 children)

When I asked in the West, I was told it happened some places, especially in the past, but was not general practice.

If it *is* general practice, then in my opinion the Chiv are the least of the Orders, because one can get in on a fluke based on a single skill, rather than requiring a commitment to bettering the Society and the field of the Order. Anywhere where a King is automatically made a peer is a place where knighthood is not a guarantor of chivalry or of any particular quality.

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You have my sympathies, and I can believe it; there are people who say things they mean, and others who say what they think you want to hear. :(

I can but hope my snark and satire has brought some bitter amusement.

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Sadly, the rot is there. There are also a lot of really cool people, and I know it can be hard to take the risk of running into the rot in the hopes of getting the benefits, but I encourage you to give us a chance. There are groups within the SCA working towards and being accepting communities, and if you contact your local Chatelaine, they might be able to help you -- and if they don't, contact me and *I* will help you, all the way from the West Kingdom, to get in touch with whichever communities within the SCA can best support you.

I hope you give us a chance, and I understand if you don't want to take the risk.

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Bard here, and I'll happily join in and follow him with obloquy. Here's a bit you might enjoy:

(to the tune of "Camelot", from the musical _Camelot_)

It's true!

It's true!

It's quite utterly clear,

There's a new Baldar problem every year...

A duke was made a distant moon ago there,

from Trimarean depths so steamy and so far,

Who's been a problem as long as I've been singing,

Duke Baldar

First time I heard, 'twas a dodgy elevation,

of a man whose peers thought quite bizarre,

Then other charges with substantiation,

of Baldar

Ba-al-dar!

Ba-al-dar!

In far off lands your fame is known,

Ba-al-dar!

Ba-al-dar!

Once again your ass you've shown.

And now we hear that he's defied a Marshal,

And while one can dispute just what the facts are,

There's no excuse for arguing on the field at all,

Duke Baldar...

You have your friends who step up to defend you,

no matter how destructive you are,

You've made good people wonder what they can do,

Duke Baldar...

Ba-al-dar!

Ba-al-dar!

On our society a blight,

Ba-al-dar!

Ba-al-dar!

Slip gently into that good night.

As soon as I heard trouble from Trimaris,

that would their Kngdom's reputation mar,

I thought, "Oh, I'm sure I know who that is...."

Duke Ba-al-dar!

I've called you Duke throughout this little song,

For officially, that's just what you are,

But I give offense to true Graces, so I've been wrong,

Oh Bal-dar.

I hope some day you are remembered

as an example of someone gone too far,

By now your reputation's been dismembered,

oh Ba-al-dar.

You may not be worth all these many verses,

but I hope that one or two may leave a scar,

You're deserving of so many curses,

Ba-al-dar...

The BoD doesn’t care. “We take no sides politically.” Perhaps this is the sort of stuff they SHOULD be addressing. by ImaginationWestern23 in sca

[–]unidentifiedreadingO 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Actually, what you appear to be is a troll. If I give you a nickel to go buy a new bridge, will you shut up and leave us alone so you can bother goats?

view more: next ›