Fencing Draft notes:Changing The Rules: Difference between revisions

From SCA Lochac
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
(Change log cleared as moved to live)
Tag: Blanking
Line 1: Line 1:
==Changes for v6.0==
 
;Chapter renumbered
:Separating earlier chapters and rearranging moves Chapter 9 to Chapter 17.
<hr>
;17.1.3 in Precedence
:
;Insert new rule
:Where there is conflict between Lochac and Society fencing rules, Lochac's rules have precedence. They are the rules accepted by the Board of SCA Ltd Australia and Committee of SCA NZ Inc (and their insurers), and they hold the legal liability, not SCA Inc. Lochac has variances which have been approved by the Board of SCA Inc.
;Functional change
:None
;Reason
:Explains why we don't immediately adopt Society rule changes.
<hr>
;Was 9.2.2, now 17.2 in Changes to the rules
:
;Was
:Permanent changes to the rules can only be made using the following procedures, and shall only come into effect after all of these steps are complete:
:(a)The change is approved by:
::i. the Crown; and
::ii. the Kingdom Seneschal; and
::iii. the Board of SCA Ltd, and
::iv. the Committee of SCA NZ Inc.
;Now
:Permanent changes to the rules can only be made using the following procedures, and will only come into effect after all of these steps are complete:
:(a) The change is approved by:
::i. the Kingdom Earl Marshal, then
::ii. the Crown, then
::iii. the Kingdom Seneschal (who will consult with relevant depurties with
regards to risk), then
::iv. the Board of SCA Ltd and the Committee of SCA NZ Inc (who will
confirm coverage with our insurers).
;Functional change
:None
;Reason
:Clarifies that they must be done in order, and additional steps.
<hr>
;17.2.5-6
:
;Insert new rules
:5. Where a proposed rule is less restrictive than Society level rules, a variation must be sought from the SCA Inc Board of Directors, via the Society Fencing Marshal and Society Marshal.
:6. There may be activities or equipment permitted in New Zealand and not in Australia, or vice versa, whether due to mundane law or insurance requirements. If so, the rules will include a clear statement as to which country the rule applies to.
;Reason
:Explanation and clarification that we can do things differently in parts of the kingdom, and differently from Society with permission.
<hr>
;Was 9.3, removed
:Information is included in following section.
<hr>
;Was 9.4.3, now 17.3.3
:
;Was
:The Kingdom Fencing Marshal can approve an experimental program, subject to the agreement of the Kingdom Earl Marshal and the Society Marshal.
;Now
:As experiments may create liability issues, the Kingdom Fencing Marshal can only approve an experimental program with the agreement of:
:*the Kingdom Earl Marshal; and
:*the Society Fencing Marshal (if the rule change needs to happen to Society fencing rules); and
:*the Committee of SCA New Zealand Inc and Board of SCA Ltd Australia, and their insurers.
;Functional change
:Clarifies who needs to be involved in the experimental process and why
;Reason
:Board and Committee hold liability for our activities, and our insurers need full disclosure of our activities. This was not previously articulated in the rules.
;For notes section
:January 2024 - Experiments may create liaibility issues, which rest with our Board and Committee, so they need to consent to accept that risk. Our insurance company may not cover us for any activity that we have not provided full disclosure of, so they also need to approve any experiements in the same way that actual rule changes are approved.
<hr>
;17.3.4 in Experimenting with the rules
:Insert new rule and subsequent rules renumbered
;Now
:If an experiment is approved in one country and not the other, it may only be conducted in the approved country.
;Functional change
:Experiments can occur where the relevant affiliate approves the experiment, even if the other does not.
;Reason
:This allows for experimental activities that might be mundanely illegal in one country due to weapons legislation or prohibited by insurance issues, but permitted in the other country.
<hr>
;17.3.5 in Experimenting with the rules
:
;Insert bullet point
:Which rules don't allow it to occur now and how the rules would need to change to allow it.
;Functional change
:Experimental proposals need to investigate why it currently isn't allowed, and provide example rules or rule changes that would permit the activity/weapon/material.
;Reason
:Additional rigour for process and confirmation that the rules don't already allow for it. Simplify process for incorporating the activity/weapon/material is accepted after experimentation.
<hr>
;Was 9.4.5-6. now 17.3.6-7 in Experimenting with the rules
:"where relevant" added in relation to the Society Marshal, as we may conduct experiments where the activity/weapon/material is already permitted at Society-level, but had been restricted locally.
;Reason
:Lochac may conduct experiments where the activity/weapon/material is already permitted at Society-level, but had been restricted locally.
<hr>
;17.3.9 in Experimenting with the rules
:Insert new rule and renumber subsequent rule
;Now
:Incorporating the change into the rules permanently will follow the procedures set out in Changes to the rules.
;Reason
:Reiterates that changes following experimentation are just like all other changes.

Revision as of 09:53, 23 December 2023

Retrieved from ‘https://sca.org.nz/wiki/index.php?title=Fencing_Draft_notes:Changing_The_Rules&oldid=7081’