Nick B II;89343 wrote:
As for supporters, please read that thread and reply there if you feel you have something genuinely new to add.
Discussions of that type have a tendency to morph into 20-page monstrosities, and I’d much prefer to keep them in their own special threads that I can avoid when I’ve only got five minutes to get to the bus.
Nick
Oh, pity the poor forum member who has been so inconvenienced by those "20-page monstrosities"!
Who are you kidding, Nick? You were an active contributor to the most recent supporters thread of any duration. If you were avoiding it at the bus stop, you must have been waiting with bated breath to join it during breaks in your shifts at Home Depot.
In any case, you have no business giving directives to Chris Chambers or any other member of the forum.
Whilst I agree that citizens of the United States are at liberty of adopt/assume armorial bearings certain constraints are required in order for an individual not to appear in a guise that he/she is not. Just because there is no heraldic authority operating in the United States does not mean that there should an heraldic free for all when it comes to coronets, supporters and the like. This is not a criticism, but an observation. If heraldry is to have any meaning at all in the United States it needs to be codified in some way - this Society’s guidelines would appear to be sufficient for this purpose at present. The current debate regarding the bona fides of a certain gentleman to be chief of his name is based on long correspondence on other fora. Notwithstanding, the gentleman is question is an American citizen and just because there is no heraldic authority in the United States does mean that he can adopt at will such a status. If he believes his case to be sure, why does he not approach Lord Lyon with his proofs to be adjudged if he entitled to the undifferenced arms of his family and, therefore, the chief thereof? I believe we know the answer to this. As I mentioned above, I have no concern if Americans adopt/assume arms, but if they have a pretence to a certain heraldic tradition (in this case Scottish) and use a chiefly style or claim a territoral designation this should backed up by the relevant ‘paperwork’, otherwise such conceits are merely ‘hot air’ and we find that we have entered into the world of Walter Mitty.
John
Fred White;89321 wrote:
The Ilks are clearly a rare and distinguished breed, and our late honored guest himself has done such an impeccable job of lending credence to the idea that Americans should feel free to assume supporters that I, personally, feel very much in his debt.
People of this kind are not so rare and I had a doubtful pleasure to deal with them on many occasions.But it’s true that only few of them displaying shameless lack of respect for what is considered ‘an objective truth’ will continue campaigning in order to gain supporters among the respectful members of the society .Mr Akins was willing to join (conditionally !) the AHS and eager to become one of the major contributors to form the regulations for any sort of officially recognized heraldic authority if such happen to be created !
If people of this sort will be allowed to become God fathers of an American heraldry then it will be a mockery.
My point of view is simple - let them talk and the more they do , the more assured you will be that they are the people to avoid.
kimon;89296 wrote:
Well, if we were to deny entry or kick out all the poseurs, the forum would be left with perhaps 2-3 members….
Every person is free to make an ass of themselves, provided they don’t disrupt the forum. If you disrupt the forum and don’t heed the warnings, you will be suspended or banned regardless of whether you are a wannabe Clan Chief or an actual sitting monarch.
Though I don’t contribute much, I’m always lurking about. I like drawing from the knowledge of the others on this forum.
And since supporters have been brought up again, I’m going to have to cast my vote in favor of them. I’ve fancied a fox for a supporter of my arms. Specifically Megan Fox!
liongam;89345 wrote:
Whilst I agree that citizens of the United States are at liberty of adopt/assume armorial bearings certain constraints are required in order for an individual not to appear in a guise that he/she is not. Just because there is no heraldic authority operating in the United States does not mean that there should an heraldic free for all when it comes to coronets, supporters and the like. This is not a criticism, but an observation. If heraldry is to have any meaning at all in the United States it needs to be codified in some way - this Society’s guidelines would appear to be sufficient for this purpose at present.
John
Why does an American individual appear in a guise that he/she is not ? Well they don’t if you see the U.S. as the separate herraldic entity without the noble titles that it is. What I mean is that you extend the U.K. rules to the U.S. because you are used to identify for instance a certain helmet as being that of a peer but you should not do that in another heraldic realm. So I do not agree with your observation that if these things are used U.S. heraldry has no meaning because the meaning of heraldry is to identify a person or family but you always have to take into account where the arms/person hail from.
Fred White;89344 wrote:
Oh, pity the poor forum member who has been so inconvenienced by those "20-page monstrosities"!
Who are you kidding, Nick? You were an active contributor to the most recent supporters thread of any duration. If you were avoiding it at the bus stop, you must have been waiting with bated breath to join it during breaks in your shifts at Home Depot.
I’m not trying to kid anybody. I just don’t want to spend hours rehashing debate we already had.
All the points he brought had already been brought up. Their counters have been brought up. His likely counters to those counters, etc.
If he wants to continue the debate fine. I just don’t want to spend a week telling him "Joe already debunked that," and "Fred tried that argument, and it didn’t convince nobody." It just doesn’t strike me as an efficient use of my time or his.
Fred White;89344 wrote:
In any case, you have no business giving directives to Chris Chambers or any other member of the forum.
Re-read my post. I didn’t tell him to do anything. I asked. You’re the one whose telling people they can’t do reasonable things such as ask other people to do reasonable things.
Nick
Could I suggest that if there’s anything further to be said on the significance of supporters, we say it in the thread on the significance of supporters? Anyone coming late to this discussion is apt to think that somebody’s proposing to use tumbleweeds as supporters.
Joseph McMillan;89350 wrote:
Anyone coming late to this discussion is apt to think that somebody’s proposing to use tumbleweeds as supporters.
Actually, I thinks that’s kind of a cool idea.
Nick B II;89349 wrote:
You’re the one whose telling people they can’t do reasonable things such as ask other people to do reasonable things.
Sho’ now.
Joseph McMillan;89350 wrote:
Could I suggest that if there’s anything further to be said on the significance of supporters, we say it in the thread on the significance of supporters?
An excellent suggestion, to which I would add the suggestion that references to that thread and contributions to it stop conflating the meaning of supporters with the meaning of other elements of heraldry. If one has to distort the position he’s arguing against, his case is weak.
Aquilo;89346 wrote:
People of this kind are not so rare and I had a doubtful pleasure to deal with them on many occasions.But it’s true that only few of them displaying shameless lack of respect for what is considered ‘an objective truth’ will continue campaigning in order to gain supporters among the respectful members of the society .Mr Akins was willing to join (conditionally !) the AHS and eager to become one of the major contributors to form the regulations for any sort of officially recognized heraldic authority if such happen to be created !
If people of this sort will be allowed to become God fathers of an American heraldry then it will be a mockery.
My point of view is simple - let them talk and the more they do , the more assured you will be that they are the people to avoid.
I suspect the tone—and, therefore, the intent—of the post you’re responding to were lost on you, Anna.
tumbleweeds…good one Kenneth! the ‘bump’ (is that the right MB word?) got things going again. lol. good job.
seriously, i didn’t want him being here from get go. unfortunately, i was meaner than i needed to be in dealing with him. i’m all for free speach, but i have limits one of them is racism. that was my biggest issue with him.
as for attitudes, though, having been here a litle while and having been in more than my share of fights, including with present day powers that be, i can honestly say these things come and go. they will happen again and it will be someone else. heck, it may be me again. i don’t know.
but, let’s not kid ourselves that this was an isolated incident and that most everyone who’s posted here has not crossed the line at least once including higher ups at some point on this MB.
the moderation of not banning people for their slip ups right away, including myself and powers that be, is a good one and one i hope stays in place. while i wanted Mr Ilk gone right away it was best to let him make his own mess so that no one could say, ‘how come that guy got popped right away and in reading archives many others here are still here?’ so, i think it was prudent of the mods/govs/board/whatever that he not be removed right away and i hope that policy action stays in place.
i’m on new meds for my tremors and they make me tired, so perhaps i’m not makin sense and sorry if not, but then that’s probably par for the course anyway, so whatever. 
Joseph McMillan;89350 wrote:
Could I suggest that if there’s anything further to be said on the significance of supporters, we say it in the thread on the significance of supporters? Anyone coming late to this discussion is apt to think that somebody’s proposing to use tumbleweeds as supporters.
Dibs!
<div class=“bbcode_center” >
http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/1553/tumbleweeds.png
</div>
Surely tumbleweeds are more of a (mobile) compartment than supporters. After all the shield will be holding them down rather than they it up.
James
So random question about our dear friend Mr. Ilk that I didn’t want to ask while he was on the board for fear of what would transpire afterwards, but what exactly does "....of That Ilk" refer to? Is that supposed to reference his "clan"? I was always confused by that title.
