@Arthur Your post about the character summaries isn't an editable wiki post. That may be why there are a bunch of replies in that thread, or maybe people just lost track of which thread it is.
Everyone, are we using probably the most common house rule/interpretation: you can change specialties when you improve the level of an Ability? That may matter with post-apprenticeship advancement.
Where do we land on Creo Circle/Mom rituals?
I agree that RAW seems to indicate they work as intended but it can seriously change the vis consumption in a campaign....I will therefore be content with either interpretation. Not looking to rehash the thousand and one discussions on the topic we can find all over the site...just need a ruling for this campaign.
Circle/Mom, you mean, right?
Yes, RAW allows them, as long as you're talking healing/improvement rather than de novo creation.
I don't think it changes vis consumption that much. Even without it you could do Group instead. With Mercurian Magic, you're looking at a 1-pawn difference. Is that noticeable? Yes. Does it seriously change vis consumption for the campaign overall? I doubt it. It makes developing those rituals 10 levels easier, though, which speeds up development more noticeably than the vis reduction in my mind.
Did we decide on starting year, something other than 1220?
Not precisely, though we did discuss starting a number of year before 1220.
Would 1205 be agreable to everyone?
That's the year after the sack of Constantinople, so House Jerbiton is in turmoil and people might not react to our covenant getting settled right away. It is also 2 years before the next Tribunal meeting. Four years before the Albigensian Crusade.
Plenty of historical and Hermetic events that can be weaved into our stories.
Fine with me.
Works for me.
Note that I will be offline tomorrow.
I've been wiped out after work the last few days. I should have some time today and tomorrow to get my magus entirely together at least though.
I am back online, self-evidently. 
I'd like to ask for a "Named character thread", as I believe I have my character at Gauntlet down?
I will do that today, Rofrof.
Just thought I'd mention it, but I am somewhat uneasy with the use of photographs of real people in the character description, even when they are actors. The right to self-image, copyrights infrigements, and all that...
No worries, I removed it.
I'll remove mine. I'd note for you that if copyright is your worry, you generally a lot better off with pictures from shows or social media than with artwork, even artwork of a non-real person. Usually networks and the like want a bunch of images in the public domain so that they may be used by anyone for advertising, reviews, etc., while created artwork is nearly always copyright protected.
Oh, I'm not worried about lawsuits or anything like that. But associating our fictional characters to the image of someone real makes me a little uneasy.
I know it helps us and others visualize our characters, and I have done it myself in the past for those reasons.
As a real example, I have actually seen a photograph of me I didn't realize would be used on the front of a Broadway venue. As someone part of the event being filmed the prior year that I was knowingly a part of, I actually did not have any right to my own image in that case. Now, I was flattered they chose an image of my partner and me from among all the dancers to display on Broadway, so I certainly had no objection anyway. Same thing happened with a magazine cover.
On the other hand, if your image was being used in a political context, or to promote something your object to, I'm sure you would not be pleased.
It is one thing for an actor to have played a role, and another for an image of that role to be used in a different context. If I had an NPC diabolist, would the actor be pleased to have his image associated to that? Can I know what he would find objectionable if he knew about it?
That's why I prefer to err on the side of caution.
We live in a more and more digital age. That comes with a whole lot of ethical issues that did not exist a few decades ago.
l would say that in this DMCA will allow you to delete this image and be done with it easily.