From: ddfr@aol.com (DDFr) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Scaring Authenticity "police" Date: 9 Jan 1998 16:43:12 GMT Lines: 23 Message-ID: <19980109164300.LAA00273@ladder02.news.aol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder02.news.aol.com X-Admin: news@aol.com Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com References: <34b54b77.28038286@news.nothinbut.net> Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!newsfeed.internetmci.com!152.163.199.19!portc03.blue.aol.com!audrey02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail Neil write: "But if "the authenticy police" is a phenomenon consisting of rude, supercilious people who use their notion of authenticity in what looks like either hazing or an unpleasant game of one-upsmanship, they certainly do. I've heard far too many "it happened to me" stories to ignore them, and indeed, it happened in front of me, twice:" Let me offer one more reason why "authenticity police" is a misleading term for the people you describe: the basis of their criticism is not essentially concerned with authenticity. The SCA, like any subculture, has lots of customs, ingroup language, etc. Some of it is historically based, much of it ("Troll," "Remove," white belts reserved for knights, multiple titles as routine forms of address, ...) is entirely unhistorical. I suspect that if you observe the people you are describing, you will not find them limiting their attacks to issues of historical authenticity--they will also include attacks on people for not following inauthentic SCA practice. What is basically going on is an attempt to claim status on the basis of being deeper into the subcultural ingroup than someone else. That, at least, is my suspicion. David/Cariadoc ###### From: ldcharls@swbell.net Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Scaring Authenticity "police" Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 04:39:21 +0000 Organization: Southwestern Bell Internet Services, Richardson, TX Lines: 32 Message-ID: <34B99E79.5FBC@swbell.net> References: <34b54b77.28038286@news.nothinbut.net> <19980109164300.LAA00273@ladder02.news.aol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-207-193-25-53.austtx.swbell.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: nnrp1.rcsntx.swbell.net 884600898 16019 (None) 207.193.25.53 X-Complaints-To: usenet@nnrp1.rcsntx.swbell.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01-C-SBMH (Macintosh; I; 68K) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-backup-west.sprintlink.net!news-in-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!151.164.1.34!swbell!not-for-mail DDFr wrote: > > The SCA, like any subculture, has lots of customs, ingroup language, etc. Some > of it is historically based, much of it ("Troll," "Remove," white belts > reserved for knights, multiple titles as routine forms of address, ...) is > entirely unhistorical. I suspect that if you observe the people you are > describing, you will not find them limiting their attacks to issues of > historical authenticity--they will also include attacks on people for not > following inauthentic SCA practice. What is basically going on is an attempt to > claim status on the basis of being deeper into the subcultural ingroup than > someone else. That, at least, is my suspicion. > > David/Cariadoc Actually, I would go even farther and state that just about all of those I have seen indulge in this execrable behavior have some rank in the SCA, be it as local officer, noble, or peer. They target those they see as 'beneath' them, so as to ensure that the target knows he/she is below the attacker in the SCA's "pecking order." The question I've always wrestled with is how to deal with them while not exceeding the bounds of courtesy expected in the SCA. I've had to deal with the victims afterward, but I would REALLY like to find a good way to drive home to the attacker that this behavior is not acceptable. Any ideas? Except Tadhg's human tent-peg idea (While that would be quite satisfying, I'd like to have something a little subtler to try first.) Lord Charles MacKinnon Barony of Bryn Gwlad Kingdom of Ansteorra ###### From: Jan Frelin Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Scaring Authenticity "police" Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 16:13:42 +0100 Organization: WinEasy AB Lines: 32 Message-ID: <34BA3326.11E9@wineasy.se> References: <34b54b77.28038286@news.nothinbut.net> <19980109164300.LAA00273@ladder02.news.aol.com> <34B99E79.5FBC@swbell.net> Reply-To: jan.frelin@wineasy.se NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.42.193.51 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!fci-se!fci!news.dalnet.se!seunet!news2.swip.net!news.wineasy.se!postmaster@wineasy.se ldcharls@swbell.net wrote: > Actually, I would go even farther and state that just about all of > those I have seen indulge in this execrable behavior have some rank in > the SCA, be it as local officer, noble, or peer. They target those they > see as 'beneath' them, so as to ensure that the target knows he/she is > below the attacker in the SCA's "pecking order." > The question I've always wrestled with is how to deal with them while > not exceeding the bounds of courtesy expected in the SCA. I've had to > deal with the victims afterward, but I would REALLY like to find a good > way to drive home to the attacker that this behavior is not > acceptable. > Any ideas? Except Tadhg's human tent-peg idea (While that would be > quite satisfying, I'd like to have something a little subtler to try > first.) 1. Tell them. I don't know about you, but I find that in most instances, the displeasure the target feels is not communicated. I know a few people (not only at the Rialto...) that honestly believe they're doing you a service when they insult you. If you don't tell them they may never know! 2. Exert peer pressure. If somebody behaves like that, ask their superiors or peers to deal with the issue. It's easier to get people to help you with 2 if you went through 1 first... Cheers, ======================================================================== Hartmann Rogge Holmrike, Nordmark, Drachenwald Jan Frelin Stockholm, Sweden jan.frelin@wineasy.se ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil.Franklin.nospam@ccw.ch (remove .nospam) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Scaring Authenticity "police" Date: 13 Jan 1998 04:42:50 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 34 Message-ID: References: <34b54b77.28038286@news.nothinbut.net> <19980109164300.LAA00273@ladder02.news.aol.com> <34B99E79.5FBC@swbell.net> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 ldcharls@swbell.net asked: > Any ideas? Except Tadhg's human tent-peg idea (While that would be >quite satisfying, I'd like to have something a little subtler to try >first.) Not just something more subtle but also something that will make them reconsider their behaviour. Aggression just produces defensive behaviour, shutting out, no learning, see the reactions to Tadhg's writing style, people didn't take in the points he said. What about trying to destabilise their belief in their superiority? As they believe to know everything (else they would not behave so) just innocently(!) ask* them for their sources. As they don't have all sources on earth, then exploit their soure holes (sources you have and they didn't mention) with questions such as "and how does xxx fit in?" After a while they get caught in the net of their own making, start mumbling evasions, then depart. * you are of course not _really_ asking, you are just using an asking form of statement to catch them off guard (questions suggest to an dominant person that you are weak, so not an attacker). The first time it just stops them, after a few times the subversive mental side-effects start acting, they start doubting themselves and become less dominant. Oh: subversion is period, and done tastefully also befitting of an gentle. -- Neil.Franklin.nospam@ccw.ch (remove .nospam), http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http: If I go missing, its once again my newsfeed that has craped