[Letters contained herein are completely made up and unreflective of the actual letters we have received. We don’t want your letters. Our newsroom is already busy enough. Seriously. Shoo. Go away. Put down that quill now.]
I’m writing in response to your recent article “Knight returning to SCA after 30-year absence can’t understand how fencers are now considered people.” I was an active Knight during that time period, and I demand a retraction. We would never have referred to fencers as “wire weenies,” because even that validated their ridiculous excuse for historical combat. We ignored them completely. I demand an apology and correction.
Dear Sir,
With absolutely no due respect, no.
The SCAllion
I’m absolutely loving your publication so far: no notes. Just one question, though. When will Goaty get his own spin-off series?
Dear Goatfan,
Goaty’s agent refuses to respond to any further communication, despite many peers pointing out Goaty’s need for exposure. We regret that we will not be able to continue with a further series on Goaty.
The SCAllion
As a relatively high-ranking member of the SCA, on behalf of many of us, we’d love to show the depths of our support. Please provide an address where we can send flowers, ideally Wolfsbane, Larkspur, Foxglove, or Oleander.
Dear Florist,
Thank you. You may send this bouquet to the Board of Directors. They will love it.
The SCAllion
You published an article entitled “First SCA DEI symposium held in person; location only accessible via car, stairs“. I do not appreciate the tone of this piece. Autocrats already have a hard time hosting events. There are 1,000 passive aggressive comments from the local grant level service members who want to get all the credit for running the event, without actually running the event. There are inevitably frustrated marshals of the heavy-list community who don’t understand why they can’t have a field for a tournament at a cooking schola. And Heaven help you if the Baron wants to make it a royal progress without consulting you. The list of things to consider while hosting an event is exhausting.
Furthermore, to add to this pedantic list of pedantry, I would like to point out that although in Section XVIII of Cupora “disability” is listed as one of the things we don’t discriminate against, nowhere in Section II. EVENTS does it require Autocrats to consider accessibility a factor when planning events. The autocrat is given the option to make a site accessible, not required to make a site accessible, therefore the autocrat of a theoretical DEI event does not need to make sure their people in wheelchairs and crutches can get to panels.
Really, I do appreciate your satire, but if you don’t get the details right, it’s just not funny.
Sincerely, Autocrat #9
Dear Event Steward #9,
Please consult literary sources on satire. In many cases, satire may be presented in a manner to point out egregious human error or folly in a way that embraces hyperbole, understatement, sarcasm, and irony. This article used all of these items to demonstrate a theoretical DEI event that did not actually embrace the ideals of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. But really, we’re just being pedantic.
While pedantry is on the table, we should also point out that it is “Corpora,” and even though autocrat has been the traditional title, modern events are using “Event Steward” as the more appropriate medieval alternative.
Thank you for your commentary; please believe we are giving it the value it deserves.
The SCAllion
the SCAllion 