Talk:Households - Revision history

Cian at 01:10, 14 March 2011

2011-03-14T01:10:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:10, 14 March 2011
Line 22:		Line 22:

	[[User:BaronRudolf\|BaronRudolf]] 20:02, 13 March 2011 (EST)		[[User:BaronRudolf\|BaronRudolf]] 20:02, 13 March 2011 (EST)
			* In light on your response, I have editted this article and removed all descriptions within it of the household. As you say, there is much that has been placed on wikis like this that may be "of concern" to admins and editors. Unfortunately, Cunnan is voluntary, unofficial and rather unregulated (well, we do have [[Cunnan: What is Cunnan?\|some policies]]). I tend to forget what queries etc. I ask of editors if I don't get a response within a week. Hence, they don't always get resolved.
			:Thank you for your response. Please remember that you too are welcome to edit any of the pages on Cunnan.
			: - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 12:10, 14 March 2011 (EST)

BaronRudolf at 09:07, 13 March 2011

2011-03-13T09:07:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:07, 13 March 2011
Line 9:		Line 9:
	I do not find it unusual that this has gone undiscovered for so long, there is so much content on the web worth perusing and often times words can go unnoticed for a long time.		I do not find it unusual that this has gone undiscovered for so long, there is so much content on the web worth perusing and often times words can go unnoticed for a long time.

	For the record, House Woodrose counts among its small population ~~five~~ ~~baronetcies~~, three Pelicans, one White Scarf, two retired members of the Board of Directors and those who have held numerous Kingdom and Principality offices. Several have contested Crown events, and in some cases reached at least quarter finals several years running.		For the record, House Woodrose counts among its small population six Baronetcies, three Pelicans, one White Scarf, two retired members of the Board of Directors and those who have held numerous Kingdom and Principality offices. Several have contested Crown events, and in some cases reached at least quarter finals several years running.

	Can the person who posted that remark claim such service themselves?		Can the person who posted that remark claim such service themselves?

BaronRudolf at 09:03, 13 March 2011

2011-03-13T09:03:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:03, 13 March 2011
Line 2:		Line 2:
	* I strongly suspect that it was written in jest by one of the [[household]] members. They are longtime contributors to this wiki and I doubt whether they would let anything they disliked remain. But they all have a great sense of humour. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]]		* I strongly suspect that it was written in jest by one of the [[household]] members. They are longtime contributors to this wiki and I doubt whether they would let anything they disliked remain. But they all have a great sense of humour. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]]

			===Response from House Woodrose===

	This was not written in jest by any of our household members. Yes, we do have a sense of humour, but this goes well beyond it.		This was not written in jest by any of our household members. Yes, we do have a sense of humour, but this goes well beyond it.

BaronRudolf at 09:02, 13 March 2011

2011-03-13T09:02:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:02, 13 March 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	This seems to me like a personal attack on House [[Woodrose]] - violating NPV. Am I missing something?		This seems to me like a personal attack on House [[Woodrose]] - violating NPV. Am I missing something?
	* I strongly suspect that it was written in jest by one of the [[household]] members. They are longtime contributors to this wiki and I doubt whether they would let anything they disliked remain. But they all have a great sense of humour. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]]		* I strongly suspect that it was written in jest by one of the [[household]] members. They are longtime contributors to this wiki and I doubt whether they would let anything they disliked remain. But they all have a great sense of humour. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]]


			This was not written in jest by any of our household members. Yes, we do have a sense of humour, but this goes well beyond it.

			I do find it offensive, and its posting without honour. I do not believe whomever was responsible was displaying appropriate behaviour for one who aspires to the ideals of courtesy and chivalry exemplified by the SCA.

			I do not find it unusual that this has gone undiscovered for so long, there is so much content on the web worth perusing and often times words can go unnoticed for a long time.

			For the record, House Woodrose counts among its small population five baronetcies, three Pelicans, one White Scarf, two retired members of the Board of Directors and those who have held numerous Kingdom and Principality offices. Several have contested Crown events, and in some cases reached at least quarter finals several years running.

			Can the person who posted that remark claim such service themselves?

			Was it a deliberate attempt to evoke tears from the noble ladies of our house? And if so, is this the sort of behaviour you wish to hold up as an example to all?

			Rudolf von der Drau

			4th Baron Stormhold (retired)

			Head of Household, Woodrose

			[[User:BaronRudolf\|BaronRudolf]] 20:02, 13 March 2011 (EST)

Cian: Woodrose comment

2005-06-13T01:19:07Z

Woodrose comment

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:19, 13 June 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
	This seems to me like a personal attack on House Woodrose - violating NPV. Am I missing something?		This seems to me like a personal attack on House [[Woodrose]] - violating NPV. Am I missing something?
			* I strongly suspect that it was written in jest by one of the [[household]] members. They are longtime contributors to this wiki and I doubt whether they would let anything they disliked remain. But they all have a great sense of humour. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]]

Elyas: Ad hominem?

2005-06-08T15:27:10Z

Ad hominem?

New page

This seems to me like a personal attack on House Woodrose - violating NPV. Am I missing something?