Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions
From Cunnan
Jump to navigationJump to search
(reasonable disscussion - not arguement) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
- Tobin: *I* feel that there's a number of people who do the 'crafts' of olde, and VERY few who actually do [[astronomy]] - and then they aren't doing the science of it, mearly recreating the 'elements' that were developed. |
:- Tobin: *I* feel that there's a number of people who do the 'crafts' of olde, and VERY few who actually do [[astronomy]] - and then they aren't doing the science of it, mearly recreating the 'elements' that were developed. |
||
Why not leave it as craft and see how many people actually object ? |
:Why not leave it as craft and see how many people actually object ? never hurt to irritate anyone :) |
||
never hurt to irritate anyone :) |
|||
::Point taken but there are people that do astronomy and I dont think it should be thought of as a craft. - [[User:Tobin|Tobin]] |
|||
Revision as of 01:22, 7 August 2003
Okie dokie, re the crafts/sciences. What would you have things such as astronomy under? It could be argued that there are no arts in the SCA only crafts (or the emulation of period art, at any rate). I'll agree that no true science in done in the SCA but there are certainly people who apply themselves to the study of period sciences.
Feel free to tell me I'm wrong (is this the first wiki argument? ;-) - Tobin 14:10 6 Aug 2003 (EST)
- - Tobin: *I* feel that there's a number of people who do the 'crafts' of olde, and VERY few who actually do astronomy - and then they aren't doing the science of it, mearly recreating the 'elements' that were developed.
- Why not leave it as craft and see how many people actually object ? never hurt to irritate anyone :)
- Point taken but there are people that do astronomy and I dont think it should be thought of as a craft. - Tobin
