[SCA-AE] Side question on non-member surcharge
hildasca at hotmail.com
Tue Feb 23 10:40:30 EST 2010
With all due respect, Your Excellency, Don Clewin quoted from a relevant official document, and then provided a link to the document so that interested parties could read it in full. The policy itelf directly answered the question.
I think that our populace should be actively encouraged to look up policies relevant to their situations, and share them. I applaud Don Clewin's initiative and helpfulness. If the Society and/or Kingdom Seneschal were required to verify or uphold clear policies (not needing interpretation in a given situation) every time a question comes up, then they would be doing very little else.
I fully agree that, should a policy be unclear in a particular situation, then those who have the official responsibility to interpret it should be the ones to do so. But this was not the case here.
THL Hilderun Hugelmann
> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:54:29 -0500
> From: baron-dur at lazerlink.net
> To: discussion at aethelmearc.org
> Subject: Re: [SCA-AE] Side question on non-member surcharge
> Bismallah Assalam O Alykum Wa Ramatullah Wa Barakatuh
> Not to put to fine a point on it, unless you are the officer who has the
> responsibility for the definition of law and policy (i.e. Kingdom or Society
> Seneschal) your statement has all the force of opinion, and nothing more.
> Which does not take away from it's well reasoned conclusion, and may (with
> my endorsement) be upheld by that same office.
> Warm regards,
> Ma'a al Hob wa al Salam, mukhtar durr
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
More information about the Sca-aethelmearc