Message-Id: <199810072135.RAA00416@xkey.com>
Subject: Re: minstrel: Nature of Bardic Competitions
To: flieg@socrates.Berkeley.EDU (Fred)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:35:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Greg Lindahl" <lindahl@pbm.com>
Cc: minstrel@pbm.com
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19981007195049.0122e028@socrates.Berkeley.EDU> from "Fred" at Oct 7, 98 12:50:49 pm
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 3045      
Sender: owner-minstrel@rt.com
Precedence: bulk

>    I ain't calling it no names. I'm objecting to the requirement for
> something which many people feel is a necessary part of the SCA, entering
> competitions.

I don't feel that it is necessary for anything. I'm just saying that
it's fine for someone who organizes a competition to do it however
they like. If you don't like it, don't enter.

If you were going to choose something to object to, research, namely
using the results of your research in an academic fashion to produce a
good, documented competition entry, seems an unlikely thing to object
to. Or call `excessive'. Research is good. Presenting research is good.

If you want to flame competitions, then flame competitions. I don't care.

> It may be a Society for Compulsive Authenticity for some
> and I salute them, 

But that would be attacking a straw man, and so it would be extremely
rude for you to say that, here, in a discussion with me and others who
do NOT represent that view.

> but it is _not_ the Soc. for Compulsory Authenticity,
> at least not while I'm around to fight that mindset. (Not that I am
> accusing you or Arlys of that mindset, but it _is_ out there, and 
> extreme requirements for docco help reinforce it.)

So, you even admit that you're attacking a straw man. BTW, no one has
advocated "extreme requirements for documentation"; I have advocated
not throwing out documentation just because it's too long for your
taste. So there's your second straw man, repeatedly attacked, despite
the fact that I and others have pointed out repeatedly that we don't
hold that view.

Well, I would prefer to talk about something real then to watch you
flame you favorite straw men, thanks. 

>  What I object to is competitions which
> are so picky that you _can't_ find qualified judges for them.

Er, I explained why I thought you were wrong when you first said that;
you completely ignored my reply.

Early music is a big field, and no judge could possibly know your new
pet theory about how to do something. You pretend that early music is
a small field. It isn't.  You pretend that new theories are never
thought up; if you can't tell the judge about your new theory, the
judge will think you are mistaken.

So you can object all you want; I would rather get good feedback if I
enter a composition competition. In your world, I would get back the
following from the judges: "Uh, nice. I don't know anything about the
`In Nomine' form of music, so I have no relevant comments to make
about your entry. But thanks for entering."

> >If you are singing it in a competition that requires documentation,
> >you do need more than that. If you avoid entering such competitions,
> >then you're right. On the other hand, I might ask you about it later.
> 
>      No I don't. I can enter without docco and take my lumps like a man.

You mean you'd ignore a requirement? If you don't want to play
baseball, don't show up to a baseball game with your football.  The
fundamental way to express your displeasure in a volunteer
organization is to not participate.

-- gb

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, send email to majordomo@pbm.com containing
the words "unsubscribe minstrel". If you are subscribed to the digest version,
say "unsubscribe minstrel-digest". To contact a human about problems, send
mail to owner-minstrel@pbm.com