Responding to the Board’s Feedback Regarding the Spring Crown Variance

Unto the People of the East do Matthias and Feilinn, Sovereign and Consort of the East Kingdom, send greetings. 

We have received an official response from the Board of Directors describing why they returned our request for a variance to hold a Crown Tournament using rapier combat instead of rattan combat. We are going to share their reasons with you and the steps we are taking to respond. However, first we need to make something very clear.

The Board is not saying that the variance would be granted if a new proposal addresses these issues. They want the issues removed because they felt it was making it hard to judge the proposal on its merits (you can read the proposal and FAQ here). Even if another proposal is presented with those issues resolved, the Board may not grant a variance. The letter stated that “there is no consensus view held by the Board regarding the path forward.”

Now to the two issues that they want to see resolved.

  1. “…logistical challenges associated with the proposed test emerged, particularly concerning location and timeframes. Factors such as transportation availability and delays in passport processing have been identified.”

We disagree about passport issues given that processing time is now 6-8 weeks even without expedited processing. If the Board had granted the variance at the end of January, there was enough time to get a passport. The larger problem we see in their objection is the amount of time they want between a variance being approved and the tournament.

We are a large kingdom with our crown tournament locations on rotation. Someone is always going to have to make a trek and cross a border. If the Board feels that participants need more time to make plans, that could be challenging given the schedule of their meetings and our crown tournaments. Therefore, we are asking the Board to provide the following information:

  • A list of requirements detailing who can submit a variance request, at what time in their reign can they submit it, and who has to sign off on the request
  • How long they view as sufficient time between the granting of the request and hosting the crown tournament.
  • Confirm if they are willing to hold an ad hoc meeting outside of their regularly scheduled meetings to rule on future variance requests
  1.  “…feedback received suggests a lack of sufficient consultation within the Kingdom before submitting the proposal.”

We are concerned about how the Board defines “sufficient consultation.” We would hate for another variance to be returned because the consultation done wasn’t judged adequate. We are asking them to provide the following information:

  • What they will accept as sufficient consultation
  • A list of any other information that they require to be included in the proposal, so we know in advance what they want to see

We have heard the overwhelming – although not unanimous — support for our variance request in the emails you sent us. We are considering running an online poll to provide data as to the specific interests of the populace in alternative approaches to crown tournaments. (We both love data.) Please watch for it. It is important that everyone’s voice is heard and that you hear each other. The strength of the East depends on all of us having these conversations and moving them forward into action.

Yours in service to the East,

Matthias Rex & Feilinn Regina 

5 thoughts on “Responding to the Board’s Feedback Regarding the Spring Crown Variance”

  1. Marina of Eastcliffe

    “Transportation availability and passport processing” will be of concern regardless of the format of the tournament.

    1. I believe the “transportation availability” concern centered around the attempt to do this quickly; as some heavy fighters already prepared and purchased flights, etc. to the event.

      While I have no issue with an alternative crown. It should be planned and not thrown together last minute.

      1. Galefridus Peregrinus

        I doubt it was a “last minute” decision on the part of Their Majesties, and I would hope that They discussed the matter with the EK fencing community pretty extensively well in advance of the decision. That said, I concede that a case can be made for being extra cautious/careful.

  2. Can someone help me with understanding this. Why would a passport be necessary for an East Kingdom crown lyst?

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top