From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 22 Sep 1998 00:11:57 EDT
"In my opinion, Percy, if Avery had decided to go Renegade in the first place, instead of jerking us all around, it wouldn't have been so bad."
Lady Sidartha, maybe you are right. At the time, however, Avery was unaware of the rather major difference in philosophy and had no differences with Dal's policy. Or thought he had none. Since then he has discovered that he and Dalamar have a polar disagreement on what is, apparently to some, a fairly sizeable issue, and has a direct disagreement with an act of Dal's regarding policy. If he truly disagrees as strongly as he seems to, it is
better than he change his alignment, out of honesty, than have pretended to remain Loyal.
Simply put, for the record, whether or not we agree with Avery's reasons for doing what he did, as long as he believed those reasons were valid it would have been wrong for him not to act on them. Everyone has to make their own decision. He is facing the consequences of his decision in the form of the present challenge from Sartan and the almost certain future challenge from Drake.
All in all, I see very little reason to criticise him here on the Boards. He is going to be made to put his money where his mouth is in the ring.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Etc, etc.
Overlord Challenge
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: shivblade@aol.com (SHIV BLADE)
Date: 22 Sep 1998 00:39:05 EDT
Percy,
Much of your reply for me has been well put. I thank you for your words.
Sid,
You still confuse me.... I am the same man. I have lost or done nothing. I hold hte same honor i did. Just because i disagree with Dal does'nt make me any less of a man. I also don't think i "Jerked" Anyone around. I followed my heart. I at first went loyal to Dal. That was on what i knew then..... but stated even then that i would change if i found fault.... So if i stated i would change isn't that warning enough?..... i did not Jerk any one around.
I followed my heart to what i believe was right.
Var....
you are right.... Dal has that right as given him. Yet, that is what i say. He should not use that right for it takes away every right the neutral baron has. Either the Neutral barons rights should be taken away, or the OL rights to change the alignment of the neutral should be taken away. Dal sees it one way, i see it the other.
Avery Shiv Blade
Baron of the 6th
Holder of the Red opal Firestar
Date: 22 Sep 1998 00:39:05 EDT
Percy,
Much of your reply for me has been well put. I thank you for your words.
Sid,
You still confuse me.... I am the same man. I have lost or done nothing. I hold hte same honor i did. Just because i disagree with Dal does'nt make me any less of a man. I also don't think i "Jerked" Anyone around. I followed my heart. I at first went loyal to Dal. That was on what i knew then..... but stated even then that i would change if i found fault.... So if i stated i would change isn't that warning enough?..... i did not Jerk any one around.
I followed my heart to what i believe was right.
Var....
you are right.... Dal has that right as given him. Yet, that is what i say. He should not use that right for it takes away every right the neutral baron has. Either the Neutral barons rights should be taken away, or the OL rights to change the alignment of the neutral should be taken away. Dal sees it one way, i see it the other.
Avery Shiv Blade
Baron of the 6th
Holder of the Red opal Firestar
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: skylerjc@aol.com (Skyler JC)
Date: 22 Sep 1998 14:53:17 EDT
Var, you need to mind your own business. Let the Overlord handle his challenges himself. Why don't you just retire and get out of here so I can have a break from reading the mangled verbosity of incoherency that you call posts?
Skyler
Date: 22 Sep 1998 14:53:17 EDT
Var, you need to mind your own business. Let the Overlord handle his challenges himself. Why don't you just retire and get out of here so I can have a break from reading the mangled verbosity of incoherency that you call posts?
Skyler
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: xgnortx@aol.com (X Gnort X)
Date: 22 Sep 1998 15:25:43 EDT
Gee, Skyler sounds like he's competing with Dick and the others for most annoying DoS personality.
*G*
Warlord of the DoS
Twice Baron
"When I left you, I was but the learner, now I am the master"
Date: 22 Sep 1998 15:25:43 EDT
Gee, Skyler sounds like he's competing with Dick and the others for most annoying DoS personality.
*G*
Warlord of the DoS
Twice Baron
"When I left you, I was but the learner, now I am the master"
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: rlupton@aol.com (RLupton)
Date: 22 Sep 1998 16:21:05 EDT
At least Skyler can write with some hint of intelligence.
~Lup
Date: 22 Sep 1998 16:21:05 EDT
At least Skyler can write with some hint of intelligence.
~Lup
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sidarthae@aol.com (Sidartha E)
Date: 22 Sep 1998 23:21:03 EDT
>>Lady Sidartha, maybe you are right. At the time, however, Avery was unaware of the rather major difference in philosophy and had no differences with Dal's policy. Or thought he had none. Since then he has discovered that he and Dalamar have a polar disagreement on what is, apparently to some, a fairly sizeable issue, and has a direct disagreement with an act of Dal's regarding policy. If
he truly disagrees as strongly as he seems to, it is
better than he change his alignment, out of honesty, than have pretended to remain Loyal.<<
Percy~
As far as I've know, Dal's policies and philosophies have never changed. Were he to have done a little more research, he would have known from the start how Dal conducts himself, and whether or not that would conflict with his own.
>> Simply put, for the record, whether or not we agree with Avery's reasons for doing what he did, as long as he believed those reasons were valid it would have been wrong for him not to act on them.<<
I agree. What I am saying is that he should have acted on them by aligning Renegade, right from the start. I don't believe it was a devious plot by any means. It simply was the fact that he did no research beforehand.
>> Everyone has to make their own decision. He is facing the consequences of his decision in the form of the present challenge from Sartan and the almost certain future challenge from Drake.
All in all, I see very little reason to criticise him here on the Boards. He is going to be made to put his money where his mouth is in the ring.<<
I see no reason to be completely silent on the matter simply because I cannot formally settle my protest in the ring, seeing as since I'm not a Warlord, I have no way to punish him in the least. We could duel now and I could possibly win, but how would that prove that he was and is wrong in this matter?
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
Date: 22 Sep 1998 23:21:03 EDT
>>Lady Sidartha, maybe you are right. At the time, however, Avery was unaware of the rather major difference in philosophy and had no differences with Dal's policy. Or thought he had none. Since then he has discovered that he and Dalamar have a polar disagreement on what is, apparently to some, a fairly sizeable issue, and has a direct disagreement with an act of Dal's regarding policy. If
he truly disagrees as strongly as he seems to, it is
better than he change his alignment, out of honesty, than have pretended to remain Loyal.<<
Percy~
As far as I've know, Dal's policies and philosophies have never changed. Were he to have done a little more research, he would have known from the start how Dal conducts himself, and whether or not that would conflict with his own.
>> Simply put, for the record, whether or not we agree with Avery's reasons for doing what he did, as long as he believed those reasons were valid it would have been wrong for him not to act on them.<<
I agree. What I am saying is that he should have acted on them by aligning Renegade, right from the start. I don't believe it was a devious plot by any means. It simply was the fact that he did no research beforehand.
>> Everyone has to make their own decision. He is facing the consequences of his decision in the form of the present challenge from Sartan and the almost certain future challenge from Drake.
All in all, I see very little reason to criticise him here on the Boards. He is going to be made to put his money where his mouth is in the ring.<<
I see no reason to be completely silent on the matter simply because I cannot formally settle my protest in the ring, seeing as since I'm not a Warlord, I have no way to punish him in the least. We could duel now and I could possibly win, but how would that prove that he was and is wrong in this matter?
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sidarthae@aol.com (Sidartha E)
Date: 22 Sep 1998 23:22:48 EDT
>>You still confuse me.... I am the same man. I have lost or done nothing. I hold hte same honor i did. Just because i disagree with Dal does'nt make me any less of a man. I also don't think i "Jerked" Anyone around. I followed my heart. I at first went loyal to Dal. That was on what i knew then..... but stated even then that i would change if i found fault.... So if i stated
i would change isn't that warning enough?..... i did not Jerk any one around.
I followed my heart to what i believe was right.<<
Your heart lead you in this? Then a truly fickle heart you have. As I said to Percy, Dal's policies and philosophies have never changed, so why do you find fault now instead of earlier?
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
Date: 22 Sep 1998 23:22:48 EDT
>>You still confuse me.... I am the same man. I have lost or done nothing. I hold hte same honor i did. Just because i disagree with Dal does'nt make me any less of a man. I also don't think i "Jerked" Anyone around. I followed my heart. I at first went loyal to Dal. That was on what i knew then..... but stated even then that i would change if i found fault.... So if i stated
i would change isn't that warning enough?..... i did not Jerk any one around.
I followed my heart to what i believe was right.<<
Your heart lead you in this? Then a truly fickle heart you have. As I said to Percy, Dal's policies and philosophies have never changed, so why do you find fault now instead of earlier?
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: kalamere@aol.com (Kalamere)
Date: 23 Sep 1998 09:49:51 EDT
> As far as I've know, Dal's policies and philosophies have never changed.
> Were he to have done a little more research, he would have known from
> the start how Dal conducts himself, and whether or not that would conflict
> with his own.
Sidartha,
When one speaks of others performing more research, it might well behoove them to do the same. Had you been paying attention, rather than lending support without checking on your facts, you will find that Dalamar has, indeed, altered his stance on at least two issues since having taken the crown. The most recent change in policy is the reason for which I have become loyal to the overlord instead of my previous, renegade, status.
As a Loyalist now, I'm all for supporting the Overlord. However, when the words one uses in his defense amount to lies, it impacts him negatively... which is not to mention the impression it leaves on the one who spoke them.
~Kalamere Ar'Din...
Date: 23 Sep 1998 09:49:51 EDT
> As far as I've know, Dal's policies and philosophies have never changed.
> Were he to have done a little more research, he would have known from
> the start how Dal conducts himself, and whether or not that would conflict
> with his own.
Sidartha,
When one speaks of others performing more research, it might well behoove them to do the same. Had you been paying attention, rather than lending support without checking on your facts, you will find that Dalamar has, indeed, altered his stance on at least two issues since having taken the crown. The most recent change in policy is the reason for which I have become loyal to the overlord instead of my previous, renegade, status.
As a Loyalist now, I'm all for supporting the Overlord. However, when the words one uses in his defense amount to lies, it impacts him negatively... which is not to mention the impression it leaves on the one who spoke them.
~Kalamere Ar'Din...
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: dukeuziei@aol.com (Duke UzieI)
Date: 23 Sep 1998 15:28:35 EDT
::notes Kalamere, while a propundit of the Crown, at least does not tolerate complete balderdash::
Date: 23 Sep 1998 15:28:35 EDT
::notes Kalamere, while a propundit of the Crown, at least does not tolerate complete balderdash::
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sidarthae@aol.com (Sidartha E)
Date: 23 Sep 1998 18:38:59 EDT
>>When one speaks of others performing more research, it might well behoove them to do the same. Had you been paying attention, rather than lending support without checking on your facts, you will find that Dalamar has, indeed, altered his stance on at least two issues since having taken the crown. The most recent change in policy is the reason for which I have become loyal to the overlord instead of my
previous, renegade, status.
As a Loyalist now, I'm all for supporting the Overlord. However, when the words one uses in his defense amount to lies, it impacts him negatively... which is not to mention the impression it leaves on the one who spoke them.<<
Kalamere~
I now know where I went wrong, but may I say that you were a tad harsh? I did not lie, and yes he has changed his policies. However, where my mistake lies, is specifying the fact that his policy did not change in between the time Avery earned his ring and then later re-aligned Loyal. What does his policy changes *now* have to do with back when Avery changed to Renegade?
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
Date: 23 Sep 1998 18:38:59 EDT
>>When one speaks of others performing more research, it might well behoove them to do the same. Had you been paying attention, rather than lending support without checking on your facts, you will find that Dalamar has, indeed, altered his stance on at least two issues since having taken the crown. The most recent change in policy is the reason for which I have become loyal to the overlord instead of my
previous, renegade, status.
As a Loyalist now, I'm all for supporting the Overlord. However, when the words one uses in his defense amount to lies, it impacts him negatively... which is not to mention the impression it leaves on the one who spoke them.<<
Kalamere~
I now know where I went wrong, but may I say that you were a tad harsh? I did not lie, and yes he has changed his policies. However, where my mistake lies, is specifying the fact that his policy did not change in between the time Avery earned his ring and then later re-aligned Loyal. What does his policy changes *now* have to do with back when Avery changed to Renegade?
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: maxim128@aol.com (Maxim128)
Date: 23 Sep 1998 22:27:53 EDT
::reads the post and decides to respond::
Sidartha,
This is not to be harsh or anything, but people to change their alignments from time to time. Avery may have changed his policies just as Dalamar had recently done, so he changed his alignment. Kalamere also changed alignment, but she changed to Loyal. You dont jump on his back. Are you only on Avery's because he had become a renegade. Not that it matters so much now, just something to think about.
And I dont mean to be mean in this statement, so I am sorry if it offends you.
~Magnus~
Baron of the 13th
Guardian of Polaris
Date: 23 Sep 1998 22:27:53 EDT
::reads the post and decides to respond::
Sidartha,
This is not to be harsh or anything, but people to change their alignments from time to time. Avery may have changed his policies just as Dalamar had recently done, so he changed his alignment. Kalamere also changed alignment, but she changed to Loyal. You dont jump on his back. Are you only on Avery's because he had become a renegade. Not that it matters so much now, just something to think about.
And I dont mean to be mean in this statement, so I am sorry if it offends you.
~Magnus~
Baron of the 13th
Guardian of Polaris
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sidarthae@aol.com (Sidartha E)
Date: 25 Sep 1998 11:49:50 EDT
>>This is not to be harsh or anything, but people to change their alignments from time to time. Avery may have changed his policies just as Dalamar had recently done, so he changed his alignment. Kalamere also changed alignment, but she changed to Loyal. You dont jump on his back. Are you only on Avery's because he had become a renegade. Not that it matters so much now, just something to think about.
And I dont mean to be mean in this statement, so I am sorry if it offends you.<<
Truly, I'm not sure. The fact that Avery was so put off by Dal's policy concerning Neutrals and (I think) Testing that he changed his alignment to Renegade, when Dal's policy never changed from the time Avery earned his ring and aligned Loyal to the time that he re-aligned, bothers me. The reason why I don't berate Kalamere for changing his alignment was the fact that it took Dalamar's policy to change before his alignment did. Kalamere actually
gave it thought, where Avery didn't give it any thought until after the fact. If Dal's position on Testing never changed, and Kal simply just decided to be Loyal, I would wonder about whether or not he was aligning Loyal just for the benefits, rather than actual loyalty. Since this is not the case, I have no reason to wonder.
I guess my point would be that if Avery had done some reasearch and some serious thinking, and decided to be Renegade from the start, I don't think I would have a problem.
And really, I'm not offended. I had never been really angry in this whole discussion until I was called a liar by Kalamere.
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
Date: 25 Sep 1998 11:49:50 EDT
>>This is not to be harsh or anything, but people to change their alignments from time to time. Avery may have changed his policies just as Dalamar had recently done, so he changed his alignment. Kalamere also changed alignment, but she changed to Loyal. You dont jump on his back. Are you only on Avery's because he had become a renegade. Not that it matters so much now, just something to think about.
And I dont mean to be mean in this statement, so I am sorry if it offends you.<<
Truly, I'm not sure. The fact that Avery was so put off by Dal's policy concerning Neutrals and (I think) Testing that he changed his alignment to Renegade, when Dal's policy never changed from the time Avery earned his ring and aligned Loyal to the time that he re-aligned, bothers me. The reason why I don't berate Kalamere for changing his alignment was the fact that it took Dalamar's policy to change before his alignment did. Kalamere actually
gave it thought, where Avery didn't give it any thought until after the fact. If Dal's position on Testing never changed, and Kal simply just decided to be Loyal, I would wonder about whether or not he was aligning Loyal just for the benefits, rather than actual loyalty. Since this is not the case, I have no reason to wonder.
I guess my point would be that if Avery had done some reasearch and some serious thinking, and decided to be Renegade from the start, I don't think I would have a problem.
And really, I'm not offended. I had never been really angry in this whole discussion until I was called a liar by Kalamere.
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: shivblade@aol.com (SHIV BLADE)
Date: 25 Sep 1998 12:45:31 EDT
Well i have satyed out of this for a while now, but now i must say this,
Sid, while you are not offended (or are), i must say i am. Really now, i did no serious thinking eh? Perhaps you have already forgoten that i didn't throw out my alignment on a whim. It took me a week to change to neutral, and then when i did so i gave my reasons in depth. I wrote a long memo on why it was.... a memo probably most people did not read beacuse it was very long and difficult to read. Difficult because I made a strong argument, bu tin
order to do so i had to put some in depth thinking in it. Well not many people comment against it, save for the ussually line.. well Neutral means to stay out of it.... thats why they should be banished. Well, believe it or not htat has no basis, for i too can give something that is my OWN opinion. Neutral should not stay out of it becasue they are more like the balances between good, and evil. There you go.. My own opinion. Yet my memo was thought
out long and hard. It contained within it a detailed explaination why Neutrals should be the way i see it. To this date i have seen no one challenge that memo really. There were ones that did make strong arguments, but failed to answer a couple of key questions, that basically go against their arguments. now the only reason i bring this up, is not to bring the debate back, god knows i am not getting involved in that again. Yet rather to show you that
i did seriously think abou tit. And then in my change to renegade i took another week to change. Yes i thought a lot about it. I would not have changed if i did not put thought into it.
As far as not doing reaserch... That to has been explained. I knew of Dal's policy on neutrals... slightly. Yet i did make a statement after getting my ring that i would stay loyal to Dal because i respected the man and never saw him ACT Aganist my views. After all one can be loyal but still have slightly different views. Plus those views had never been acted upon earlier. So i went loyal and DID say that i would remain loyal until Dal did something
i did not like. Well guess what.. it happened. I took some time to think about what i would do... to see if what was done is a big enough view difference to change. And i did. But i did think about it... i gave Dal the benifit of the doubt at first. Later i changed.
So Sid, i did think about it. I have not lost any honor. I am the same man that knelt before Dal such a long time ago. Other people can see that. They know that i only follow my heart and what i feel was right. Just beacuse i was Renegade doesn't mean i lost all honor... and that you should not respect me. Perhaps next time you will do some serious reading and thinking about what i have said, and look at my side. Then perhaps i would not have such a
big problem with this issue. But to insult me is wrong. I too was not angry until you did just this.
Avery Shiv Blade
Holder of Firestar the red opal
Date: 25 Sep 1998 12:45:31 EDT
Well i have satyed out of this for a while now, but now i must say this,
Sid, while you are not offended (or are), i must say i am. Really now, i did no serious thinking eh? Perhaps you have already forgoten that i didn't throw out my alignment on a whim. It took me a week to change to neutral, and then when i did so i gave my reasons in depth. I wrote a long memo on why it was.... a memo probably most people did not read beacuse it was very long and difficult to read. Difficult because I made a strong argument, bu tin
order to do so i had to put some in depth thinking in it. Well not many people comment against it, save for the ussually line.. well Neutral means to stay out of it.... thats why they should be banished. Well, believe it or not htat has no basis, for i too can give something that is my OWN opinion. Neutral should not stay out of it becasue they are more like the balances between good, and evil. There you go.. My own opinion. Yet my memo was thought
out long and hard. It contained within it a detailed explaination why Neutrals should be the way i see it. To this date i have seen no one challenge that memo really. There were ones that did make strong arguments, but failed to answer a couple of key questions, that basically go against their arguments. now the only reason i bring this up, is not to bring the debate back, god knows i am not getting involved in that again. Yet rather to show you that
i did seriously think abou tit. And then in my change to renegade i took another week to change. Yes i thought a lot about it. I would not have changed if i did not put thought into it.
As far as not doing reaserch... That to has been explained. I knew of Dal's policy on neutrals... slightly. Yet i did make a statement after getting my ring that i would stay loyal to Dal because i respected the man and never saw him ACT Aganist my views. After all one can be loyal but still have slightly different views. Plus those views had never been acted upon earlier. So i went loyal and DID say that i would remain loyal until Dal did something
i did not like. Well guess what.. it happened. I took some time to think about what i would do... to see if what was done is a big enough view difference to change. And i did. But i did think about it... i gave Dal the benifit of the doubt at first. Later i changed.
So Sid, i did think about it. I have not lost any honor. I am the same man that knelt before Dal such a long time ago. Other people can see that. They know that i only follow my heart and what i feel was right. Just beacuse i was Renegade doesn't mean i lost all honor... and that you should not respect me. Perhaps next time you will do some serious reading and thinking about what i have said, and look at my side. Then perhaps i would not have such a
big problem with this issue. But to insult me is wrong. I too was not angry until you did just this.
Avery Shiv Blade
Holder of Firestar the red opal
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sidarthae@aol.com (Sidartha E)
Date: 25 Sep 1998 14:53:19 EDT
>>Well i have satyed out of this for a while now, but now i must say this,
Sid, while you are not offended (or are), i must say i am. Really now, i did no serious thinking eh? Perhaps you have already forgoten that i didn't throw out my alignment on a whim. It took me a week to change to neutral, and then when i did so i gave my reasons in depth. I wrote a long memo on why it was.... a memo probably most people did not read beacuse it was very long and difficult to read. Difficult because I made a strong argument, bu tin
order to do so i had to put some in depth thinking in it. Well not many people comment against it, save for the ussually line.. well Neutral means to stay out of it.... thats why they should be banished. Well, believe it or not htat has no basis, for i too can give something that is my OWN opinion. Neutral should not stay out of it becasue they are more like the balances between good, and evil. There you go.. My own opinion. Yet my memo was thought
out long and hard. It contained within it a detailed explaination why Neutrals should be the way i see it. To this date i have seen no one challenge that memo really. There were ones that did make strong arguments, but failed to answer a couple of key questions, that basically go against their arguments. now the only reason i bring this up, is not to bring the debate back, god knows i am not getting involved in that again. Yet rather to show you that
i did seriously think abou tit. And then in my change to renegade i took another week to change. Yes i thought a lot about it. I would not have changed if i did not put thought into it.
As far as not doing reaserch... That to has been explained. I knew of Dal's policy on neutrals... slightly. Yet i did make a statement after getting my ring that i would stay loyal to Dal because i respected the man and never saw him ACT Aganist my views. After all one can be loyal but still have slightly different views. Plus those views had never been acted upon earlier. So i went loyal and DID say that i would remain loyal until Dal did something
i did not like. Well guess what.. it happened. I took some time to think about what i would do... to see if what was done is a big enough view difference to change. And i did. But i did think about it... i gave Dal the benifit of the doubt at first. Later i changed.
So Sid, i did think about it. I have not lost any honor. I am the same man that knelt before Dal such a long time ago. Other people can see that. They know that i only follow my heart and what i feel was right. Just beacuse i was Renegade doesn't mean i lost all honor... and that you should not respect me. Perhaps next time you will do some serious reading and thinking about what i have said, and look at my side. Then perhaps i would not have such a
big problem with this issue. But to insult me is wrong. I too was not angry until you did just this.<<
For the sake of everyone reading, I won't go back into my position on this again, ad nauseum. I will, however, ask you this question, just something to think over. It is more for the benefit for yourself than for me.
Do you think it is truly an honorable thing to be loyal to someone despite their policy (or beliefs, or whatever you want to call it) and then later change to renegade against them because of the same policy?
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
Date: 25 Sep 1998 14:53:19 EDT
>>Well i have satyed out of this for a while now, but now i must say this,
Sid, while you are not offended (or are), i must say i am. Really now, i did no serious thinking eh? Perhaps you have already forgoten that i didn't throw out my alignment on a whim. It took me a week to change to neutral, and then when i did so i gave my reasons in depth. I wrote a long memo on why it was.... a memo probably most people did not read beacuse it was very long and difficult to read. Difficult because I made a strong argument, bu tin
order to do so i had to put some in depth thinking in it. Well not many people comment against it, save for the ussually line.. well Neutral means to stay out of it.... thats why they should be banished. Well, believe it or not htat has no basis, for i too can give something that is my OWN opinion. Neutral should not stay out of it becasue they are more like the balances between good, and evil. There you go.. My own opinion. Yet my memo was thought
out long and hard. It contained within it a detailed explaination why Neutrals should be the way i see it. To this date i have seen no one challenge that memo really. There were ones that did make strong arguments, but failed to answer a couple of key questions, that basically go against their arguments. now the only reason i bring this up, is not to bring the debate back, god knows i am not getting involved in that again. Yet rather to show you that
i did seriously think abou tit. And then in my change to renegade i took another week to change. Yes i thought a lot about it. I would not have changed if i did not put thought into it.
As far as not doing reaserch... That to has been explained. I knew of Dal's policy on neutrals... slightly. Yet i did make a statement after getting my ring that i would stay loyal to Dal because i respected the man and never saw him ACT Aganist my views. After all one can be loyal but still have slightly different views. Plus those views had never been acted upon earlier. So i went loyal and DID say that i would remain loyal until Dal did something
i did not like. Well guess what.. it happened. I took some time to think about what i would do... to see if what was done is a big enough view difference to change. And i did. But i did think about it... i gave Dal the benifit of the doubt at first. Later i changed.
So Sid, i did think about it. I have not lost any honor. I am the same man that knelt before Dal such a long time ago. Other people can see that. They know that i only follow my heart and what i feel was right. Just beacuse i was Renegade doesn't mean i lost all honor... and that you should not respect me. Perhaps next time you will do some serious reading and thinking about what i have said, and look at my side. Then perhaps i would not have such a
big problem with this issue. But to insult me is wrong. I too was not angry until you did just this.<<
For the sake of everyone reading, I won't go back into my position on this again, ad nauseum. I will, however, ask you this question, just something to think over. It is more for the benefit for yourself than for me.
Do you think it is truly an honorable thing to be loyal to someone despite their policy (or beliefs, or whatever you want to call it) and then later change to renegade against them because of the same policy?
~Sidartha Elgarette~
Swordslady
All-Star, TDL
Captain, Dracoern Highlands
Duchess of the Eastern Duchy
New Mountainside
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: shivblade@aol.com (SHIV BLADE)
Date: 25 Sep 1998 19:17:23 EDT
Of course it is. At that time there was no way to see how any of this would turn out. So knowing that Dal is, and was a good man, i decided to be loyal to him. I knew very little about his policy. So why not give him my loyalty. After all i did state that i would change if i found fault with anything. For example. i am loyal to my friend. I would tell you now that if he wanted me too i would take a baseball
bat to anyones head for him. Yet there are some things that i dont exactly agree with. Now if for example he acted upon one of those things, and it caused a big conflict, i would then have to look at the friendship.
Now here is my question. Where do you get off call me unhonorable, and basically putting me down? Is there any honor in that? It is one thing to have your opinions but its another to throw them in my face!
Avery Shiv Blade
The same darn person he has always been
Date: 25 Sep 1998 19:17:23 EDT
Of course it is. At that time there was no way to see how any of this would turn out. So knowing that Dal is, and was a good man, i decided to be loyal to him. I knew very little about his policy. So why not give him my loyalty. After all i did state that i would change if i found fault with anything. For example. i am loyal to my friend. I would tell you now that if he wanted me too i would take a baseball
bat to anyones head for him. Yet there are some things that i dont exactly agree with. Now if for example he acted upon one of those things, and it caused a big conflict, i would then have to look at the friendship.
Now here is my question. Where do you get off call me unhonorable, and basically putting me down? Is there any honor in that? It is one thing to have your opinions but its another to throw them in my face!
Avery Shiv Blade
The same darn person he has always been