From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 04 Oct 1998 06:25:37 EDT
Lately, with everything that has happened to me, both in and outside the ring, I feel that I have to make a few general statements on my personal beliefs, aims, and allegiances. These remarks are not meant to provoke attacks, though they will, or to spark debate, though they might. They are simply so I can express a few things that I have been feeling. Some of the things I will say are deep beliefs that I have
always held and always will hold. Others are the results of present circumstances. All are soly my own opinion, they do not reflect on the opinions of my dueling team, my former house, or the house I belong to now. They are mine and I am speaking for myself.
First and foremost, in the rings, I believe in sportsmanship. This means I believe that duelists should behave respectfully to each other in the ring, not gloat excessively if victorious or whine excessively if defeated. They should always try their best, and always follow the rules strictly. In regards to challenges, I think that the one challenged should face their challenger fairly and honourably. I believe a challenge is just that, a
challenge. It should be a one on one event. I do not approve of the Overlord's Intercession, though I understand the reasons that an Overlord would use it. I, for the most part, also oppose the Test of Worthiness, though sometimes I think, lately, that it may have its uses. I approve of those who champion challengers against Intercession or Test, because I see Intecession and the Test as unequal and championing the challenger as evening the odds. As
restoring the status quo, so to speak.
I also oppose Dalamar, as Overlord. This is for several reasons. Firstly, I disagree strongly with several of his policies. I tend to share the 'balance of power" idea of the Neutral alignment with Avery Shiv Blade, and not the fence sitter idea that Dal espouses. I am opposed to Dalamar's frequent, even excessive use of the Test. I believe that certain people have been Tested more because of either a.) how Dalamar felt about them or b.) the
opinion of the public than because whether or not they were "worthy" as the originators of the Test defined the word. I disapprove of the way that Dalamar has manipulated the Council. A desire to control the Council, whether through Renegade Barons opposed to the Overlord or Loyal Barons supporting him, is wrong however you wish to slice it. I am sure there are those who would disagree. This is just my opinion.
I think Dalamar has been Overlord too long. His long reign has, in some ways, sapped the strength, determination, and ambition of some of the worthier duelists of the realm. I think there are one or two people who would make excellent Overlords, who because of respect for Dalamar, a sense of apathy resulting from the prolonged status quo, or outright hoplessness of the situation, do not or will not challenge. I think that if someone, anyone,
removed Dalamar from power, that some of these worthy men and/or women would be moved to challenge.
At the same time, several things have recently caused me to look at my oppostion to Dalamar closely. I like and respect the man, personally, even if much of his political philosophy is repulsive to me. I have learned the politics of this place are very ugly, and that dal does what he believes he must to survive. I think he is wrong, but I understand his reasoning. His recent declaration of a change in policy regarding the Test, namely that
Barons would no longer be Tested, has shown that some progress might be possible. Opposition to Dalamar from parties whose motivations and methods are suspect gives me a reason to oppose some of Dal's enemies, even if I would not wish to support Dalamar.
I accepted an invitation from Evan Rynth to join a house that he was forming because of my convictions. However, there were problems from the start. There was a tendency on the part of all concerned to assume that we all agreed on certain points, and some things were said publicly and others privately without being discusses first. There were mistakes made in recruiting practices, accepting demands from members to keep their membership secret
until after challenges or Tourneys. There were frictions between Rising and the community, as people rushed to assume the worst without really taking stock of the situation. Later on, an agreement made between the leadership and another party would have proven many of the claims made by the house's opponents correct, and I found myself unable to remain a member because of that situation. I quit, and my resignation was followed by that of several
other members.
I, nonetheless, continued to stand up for what I believed. I decided against starting a new house, wishing to avoid many of the problems that plagued Rising. I received several offers from other groups, and considered them all. I finally chose House Dragoon-Talanador. Not for political reasons, but for very simple personal reasons. Many, though not all, of my friends here are or were members of HDT. There was a comfortable, relaxed feel that I
needed, being under stress from several directions. There was understanding of my own beliefs, and oppurtunity to go my own way, at the same time there were many points of agreement as well. I am glad I made the decision I did, I believe it to be the right one. I am not at all sorry.
Which brings me to a simple declaration of where I stand now. I am opposed to some of the Overlord's enemies, I am friendly with some of his friends, and personally like and respect him. I disagree with him on several, even many points of policy. I will oppose him if need be. I have been defeated in my first attempt to gain a ring, which I expected considering that it was my first challenge and my opponent has made a minor legend of himself here
at the least. I will seek a ring again, and perhaps I will even win it. I will support my house and my friends, but I will not compromise my principles.
I hope this is as helpful to everyone else as it was to me. Whether it or is not, however, I am glad I wrote it. It is helpful to see things in writing, to be able to sort things out. Those of you who wish to attack me for this post, I cannot stop you. Those of you who will see it as a subject for debate, I cannot stop you either. Those of you who have questions for me, I will try to answer them. In my actions if not here on the boards.
Thank you for reading this whole post if you are still paying attention.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Warlord of the Duel of Swords
Headmaster, Clermont Academy of Fencing
Captain of the Rising Stars (TDL)
Member of House Dragoon-Talanador
The White Duke
What I Believe
-
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: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 04 Oct 1998 07:57:31 EDT
> First and foremost, in the rings, I believe in sportsmanship. This means
>I believe that duelists should behave respectfully to each other in the ring,
>not gloat excessively if victorious or whine excessively if defeated.
I would like to add, to remind some duelers that the officials try their best, and they do darn well when officiating. I have witnessed some duelers be rude when the official makes a mistake, or the ruling is "slow" in their eyes. Respect the callers as well, please.
> I tend to share the 'balance of power" idea of the Neutral alignment with
>Avery Shiv Blade, and not the fence sitter idea that Dal espouses.
The alignment of barons is directed toward the overlord. Because it is an alignment towards the overlord, I feel that being "neutral" towards him means you neither raise your blade at him or lay your blade down for him.
The neutral idea, itself, is a maze. It's hard to find the ideal way through it because it is so controversial. I don't feel the barons should, if neutral, take part in the politics. Yet, would it be fair to ask him/her to give up any rights of intercession for or against the overlord? But, then again, if they do raise their blade, making use of their right, they should face the consequences. It's one of those circles that can make you dizzy
if you think about it too long.
>I disapprove of the way that Dalamar has manipulated the Council. A desire to
>control the Council, whether through Renegade Barons opposed to the Overlord
>or Loyal Barons supporting him, is wrong however you wish to slice it.
This is your opinion, Percival, but I see nothing upon how it's based. If he were power hungry for loyal barons, he would have accepted Evan's petition to be loyal, no?
While you're right, it's wrong to manipulate the council, I don't think Dalamar is doing such. Moreover, I feel that it would the the person's fault if they allowed themselves to be manipulated, when it comes down to these politics. It would be compromising their beliefs.
> I think Dalamar has been Overlord too long. His long reign has, in some
>ways, sapped the strength, determination, and ambition of some of the
>worthier duelists of the realm. I think there are one or two people who would
>make excellent Overlords, who because of respect for Dalamar, a sense of
>apathy resulting from the prolonged status quo, or outright hoplessness of
>the situation, do not or will not challenge. I think that if someone, anyone,
>removed Dalamar from power, that some of these worthy men and/or women would
>be moved to challenge.
Percival, we'll have to agree to disagree on some, if not all, of these aspects. I don't think it's fair to state that one person sets the whole attitude of the DoS as a whole. Some simple points:
-some people do not challenge certain barons because they are friends. Granted, they can challenge other barons, but the basic principle remains
-people challenge for their own reasons, and barons/overlord defends his/her title in their own way. People shouldn't (in my opinion, of course) be reluctant to challenge because of the overlord or other barons.
> There was understanding of my own beliefs, and oppurtunity to go my own way,
>at the same time there were many points of agreement as well.
Bah, just wait till the first month. You'll be hoarded with lectures about "No slashing" and how Plinkos are special. Every week at 4:00 in the morning you have to face south east, say "Hail G" followed by "No Slashing". Kidding.
Next week, Percival, we'll have to debate on something else. I'll start it this time! ::Hoping Percival understands it's a joke, except for the disagreements on the earlier subjects. Signs it then heads off::
Simply,
Var Medici-Giovanni
±
|¯Proud father, proud husband¯|
|¯Holder of the Tenth Ring¯|
|¯Soul dedicated to Noelle¯|
|¯Devoted to his children¯|
Date: 04 Oct 1998 07:57:31 EDT
> First and foremost, in the rings, I believe in sportsmanship. This means
>I believe that duelists should behave respectfully to each other in the ring,
>not gloat excessively if victorious or whine excessively if defeated.
I would like to add, to remind some duelers that the officials try their best, and they do darn well when officiating. I have witnessed some duelers be rude when the official makes a mistake, or the ruling is "slow" in their eyes. Respect the callers as well, please.
> I tend to share the 'balance of power" idea of the Neutral alignment with
>Avery Shiv Blade, and not the fence sitter idea that Dal espouses.
The alignment of barons is directed toward the overlord. Because it is an alignment towards the overlord, I feel that being "neutral" towards him means you neither raise your blade at him or lay your blade down for him.
The neutral idea, itself, is a maze. It's hard to find the ideal way through it because it is so controversial. I don't feel the barons should, if neutral, take part in the politics. Yet, would it be fair to ask him/her to give up any rights of intercession for or against the overlord? But, then again, if they do raise their blade, making use of their right, they should face the consequences. It's one of those circles that can make you dizzy
if you think about it too long.
>I disapprove of the way that Dalamar has manipulated the Council. A desire to
>control the Council, whether through Renegade Barons opposed to the Overlord
>or Loyal Barons supporting him, is wrong however you wish to slice it.
This is your opinion, Percival, but I see nothing upon how it's based. If he were power hungry for loyal barons, he would have accepted Evan's petition to be loyal, no?
While you're right, it's wrong to manipulate the council, I don't think Dalamar is doing such. Moreover, I feel that it would the the person's fault if they allowed themselves to be manipulated, when it comes down to these politics. It would be compromising their beliefs.
> I think Dalamar has been Overlord too long. His long reign has, in some
>ways, sapped the strength, determination, and ambition of some of the
>worthier duelists of the realm. I think there are one or two people who would
>make excellent Overlords, who because of respect for Dalamar, a sense of
>apathy resulting from the prolonged status quo, or outright hoplessness of
>the situation, do not or will not challenge. I think that if someone, anyone,
>removed Dalamar from power, that some of these worthy men and/or women would
>be moved to challenge.
Percival, we'll have to agree to disagree on some, if not all, of these aspects. I don't think it's fair to state that one person sets the whole attitude of the DoS as a whole. Some simple points:
-some people do not challenge certain barons because they are friends. Granted, they can challenge other barons, but the basic principle remains
-people challenge for their own reasons, and barons/overlord defends his/her title in their own way. People shouldn't (in my opinion, of course) be reluctant to challenge because of the overlord or other barons.
> There was understanding of my own beliefs, and oppurtunity to go my own way,
>at the same time there were many points of agreement as well.
Bah, just wait till the first month. You'll be hoarded with lectures about "No slashing" and how Plinkos are special. Every week at 4:00 in the morning you have to face south east, say "Hail G" followed by "No Slashing". Kidding.
Next week, Percival, we'll have to debate on something else. I'll start it this time! ::Hoping Percival understands it's a joke, except for the disagreements on the earlier subjects. Signs it then heads off::
Simply,
Var Medici-Giovanni
±
|¯Proud father, proud husband¯|
|¯Holder of the Tenth Ring¯|
|¯Soul dedicated to Noelle¯|
|¯Devoted to his children¯|
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 04 Oct 1998 07:57:31 EDT
> First and foremost, in the rings, I believe in sportsmanship. This means
>I believe that duelists should behave respectfully to each other in the ring,
>not gloat excessively if victorious or whine excessively if defeated.
I would like to add, to remind some duelers that the officials try their best, and they do darn well when officiating. I have witnessed some duelers be rude when the official makes a mistake, or the ruling is "slow" in their eyes. Respect the callers as well, please.
> I tend to share the 'balance of power" idea of the Neutral alignment with
>Avery Shiv Blade, and not the fence sitter idea that Dal espouses.
The alignment of barons is directed toward the overlord. Because it is an alignment towards the overlord, I feel that being "neutral" towards him means you neither raise your blade at him or lay your blade down for him.
The neutral idea, itself, is a maze. It's hard to find the ideal way through it because it is so controversial. I don't feel the barons should, if neutral, take part in the politics. Yet, would it be fair to ask him/her to give up any rights of intercession for or against the overlord? But, then again, if they do raise their blade, making use of their right, they should face the consequences. It's one of those circles that can make you dizzy
if you think about it too long.
>I disapprove of the way that Dalamar has manipulated the Council. A desire to
>control the Council, whether through Renegade Barons opposed to the Overlord
>or Loyal Barons supporting him, is wrong however you wish to slice it.
This is your opinion, Percival, but I see nothing upon how it's based. If he were power hungry for loyal barons, he would have accepted Evan's petition to be loyal, no?
While you're right, it's wrong to manipulate the council, I don't think Dalamar is doing such. Moreover, I feel that it would the the person's fault if they allowed themselves to be manipulated, when it comes down to these politics. It would be compromising their beliefs.
> I think Dalamar has been Overlord too long. His long reign has, in some
>ways, sapped the strength, determination, and ambition of some of the
>worthier duelists of the realm. I think there are one or two people who would
>make excellent Overlords, who because of respect for Dalamar, a sense of
>apathy resulting from the prolonged status quo, or outright hoplessness of
>the situation, do not or will not challenge. I think that if someone, anyone,
>removed Dalamar from power, that some of these worthy men and/or women would
>be moved to challenge.
Percival, we'll have to agree to disagree on some, if not all, of these aspects. I don't think it's fair to state that one person sets the whole attitude of the DoS as a whole. Some simple points:
-some people do not challenge certain barons because they are friends. Granted, they can challenge other barons, but the basic principle remains
-people challenge for their own reasons, and barons/overlord defends his/her title in their own way. People shouldn't (in my opinion, of course) be reluctant to challenge because of the overlord or other barons.
> There was understanding of my own beliefs, and oppurtunity to go my own way,
>at the same time there were many points of agreement as well.
Bah, just wait till the first month. You'll be hoarded with lectures about "No slashing" and how Plinkos are special. Every week at 4:00 in the morning you have to face south east, say "Hail G" followed by "No Slashing". Kidding.
Next week, Percival, we'll have to debate on something else. I'll start it this time! ::Hoping Percival understands it's a joke, except for the disagreements on the earlier subjects. Signs it then heads off::
Simply,
Var Medici-Giovanni
±
|¯Proud father, proud husband¯|
|¯Holder of the Tenth Ring¯|
|¯Soul dedicated to Noelle¯|
|¯Devoted to his children¯|
Date: 04 Oct 1998 07:57:31 EDT
> First and foremost, in the rings, I believe in sportsmanship. This means
>I believe that duelists should behave respectfully to each other in the ring,
>not gloat excessively if victorious or whine excessively if defeated.
I would like to add, to remind some duelers that the officials try their best, and they do darn well when officiating. I have witnessed some duelers be rude when the official makes a mistake, or the ruling is "slow" in their eyes. Respect the callers as well, please.
> I tend to share the 'balance of power" idea of the Neutral alignment with
>Avery Shiv Blade, and not the fence sitter idea that Dal espouses.
The alignment of barons is directed toward the overlord. Because it is an alignment towards the overlord, I feel that being "neutral" towards him means you neither raise your blade at him or lay your blade down for him.
The neutral idea, itself, is a maze. It's hard to find the ideal way through it because it is so controversial. I don't feel the barons should, if neutral, take part in the politics. Yet, would it be fair to ask him/her to give up any rights of intercession for or against the overlord? But, then again, if they do raise their blade, making use of their right, they should face the consequences. It's one of those circles that can make you dizzy
if you think about it too long.
>I disapprove of the way that Dalamar has manipulated the Council. A desire to
>control the Council, whether through Renegade Barons opposed to the Overlord
>or Loyal Barons supporting him, is wrong however you wish to slice it.
This is your opinion, Percival, but I see nothing upon how it's based. If he were power hungry for loyal barons, he would have accepted Evan's petition to be loyal, no?
While you're right, it's wrong to manipulate the council, I don't think Dalamar is doing such. Moreover, I feel that it would the the person's fault if they allowed themselves to be manipulated, when it comes down to these politics. It would be compromising their beliefs.
> I think Dalamar has been Overlord too long. His long reign has, in some
>ways, sapped the strength, determination, and ambition of some of the
>worthier duelists of the realm. I think there are one or two people who would
>make excellent Overlords, who because of respect for Dalamar, a sense of
>apathy resulting from the prolonged status quo, or outright hoplessness of
>the situation, do not or will not challenge. I think that if someone, anyone,
>removed Dalamar from power, that some of these worthy men and/or women would
>be moved to challenge.
Percival, we'll have to agree to disagree on some, if not all, of these aspects. I don't think it's fair to state that one person sets the whole attitude of the DoS as a whole. Some simple points:
-some people do not challenge certain barons because they are friends. Granted, they can challenge other barons, but the basic principle remains
-people challenge for their own reasons, and barons/overlord defends his/her title in their own way. People shouldn't (in my opinion, of course) be reluctant to challenge because of the overlord or other barons.
> There was understanding of my own beliefs, and oppurtunity to go my own way,
>at the same time there were many points of agreement as well.
Bah, just wait till the first month. You'll be hoarded with lectures about "No slashing" and how Plinkos are special. Every week at 4:00 in the morning you have to face south east, say "Hail G" followed by "No Slashing". Kidding.
Next week, Percival, we'll have to debate on something else. I'll start it this time! ::Hoping Percival understands it's a joke, except for the disagreements on the earlier subjects. Signs it then heads off::
Simply,
Var Medici-Giovanni
±
|¯Proud father, proud husband¯|
|¯Holder of the Tenth Ring¯|
|¯Soul dedicated to Noelle¯|
|¯Devoted to his children¯|
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: rolandsal@aol.com (Roland Sal)
Date: 04 Oct 1998 14:15:31 EDT
Perhaps one day we will all post our beliefs freely without public backlash.
Allow everyone else to see how you live your life, and observe the pro's and con's.
The only way I see that ever happening is by leaving insult and banter for the streets, as well as any self-indulgent lines of commentary.
Maybe go so far as leaving any names out of your posts and merely speak by rank.
That's just me and isn't really directed at the previous posts in this thread, but on the Duke's cue, I'd like to also state a few beliefs I now hold. Just to answer the questions that have arose lately by those who feel loyal Barons are 'blind'. Just a few ords:
I believe the greatest gift a being could possibly hold is loyality. And like a fine case of brandy, shouldn't be given away freely, or to just anyone. I also believe that that loyality is forever, or onto it is no longer respected and honored by its holder. A reason I remain loyal to our current Overlord.
I also believe that it isn't the Overlord's responsibility to show his loyality to a Baron. The Baron's rank is directed to the Overlord, and whether that Overlord feels the need to give that Baron, and community, the same loyalities is souly up to him/her. Personally, I trust my judge of character enough to know before-hand if the same loyality and respect will be returned, and at the moment; I'm pleased with our current Overlord's
active role in the community, helpful manner with the council, and feel my gift was in no way misused.
I would also hope one's loyalities wouldn't lie strictly on politics. Granted, it does make serving under that Overlord all the more enjoyable and self-full filling, but I wouldn't retrack the gift merely because we are at a dissagreement on neutrality and such.
In my opinion, loyality must be earned first before it is to be given as a gift. I've only given away such loyality twice during me stay in these rings. Our current Overlord has more than earned it, as did my Queen.
In the Duel of Swords, I don't think this gift is used nearly as much as it should. One must remember that no one can reign as Overlord forever. Regardless our current Overlord's skill he can not cheat fate, and with fate, everyone wins and loses.
I believe I've ranted enough, and feel more than embaressed by speaking only of myself.
Pardons and good fortunes.
Roland
Date: 04 Oct 1998 14:15:31 EDT
Perhaps one day we will all post our beliefs freely without public backlash.
Allow everyone else to see how you live your life, and observe the pro's and con's.
The only way I see that ever happening is by leaving insult and banter for the streets, as well as any self-indulgent lines of commentary.
Maybe go so far as leaving any names out of your posts and merely speak by rank.
That's just me and isn't really directed at the previous posts in this thread, but on the Duke's cue, I'd like to also state a few beliefs I now hold. Just to answer the questions that have arose lately by those who feel loyal Barons are 'blind'. Just a few ords:
I believe the greatest gift a being could possibly hold is loyality. And like a fine case of brandy, shouldn't be given away freely, or to just anyone. I also believe that that loyality is forever, or onto it is no longer respected and honored by its holder. A reason I remain loyal to our current Overlord.
I also believe that it isn't the Overlord's responsibility to show his loyality to a Baron. The Baron's rank is directed to the Overlord, and whether that Overlord feels the need to give that Baron, and community, the same loyalities is souly up to him/her. Personally, I trust my judge of character enough to know before-hand if the same loyality and respect will be returned, and at the moment; I'm pleased with our current Overlord's
active role in the community, helpful manner with the council, and feel my gift was in no way misused.
I would also hope one's loyalities wouldn't lie strictly on politics. Granted, it does make serving under that Overlord all the more enjoyable and self-full filling, but I wouldn't retrack the gift merely because we are at a dissagreement on neutrality and such.
In my opinion, loyality must be earned first before it is to be given as a gift. I've only given away such loyality twice during me stay in these rings. Our current Overlord has more than earned it, as did my Queen.
In the Duel of Swords, I don't think this gift is used nearly as much as it should. One must remember that no one can reign as Overlord forever. Regardless our current Overlord's skill he can not cheat fate, and with fate, everyone wins and loses.
I believe I've ranted enough, and feel more than embaressed by speaking only of myself.
Pardons and good fortunes.
Roland
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: carnage669@aol.com (Carnage669)
Date: 04 Oct 1998 14:35:11 EDT
Aye Roland, I agree with you that loyalty shouldn't be given away freely. It shouldn't be given away to just anyone. It should be earned, and that is one of the reasons I don't give my loyalty to Dalamar. He once did something to me, and I have not looked the same way at him since.
Cletus
Guardian of Polaris
Lowly Master @ Arms of DoS
Member of The Rising Stars (TDL)
"Please leave this latrine as tidy as you found it."
Date: 04 Oct 1998 14:35:11 EDT
Aye Roland, I agree with you that loyalty shouldn't be given away freely. It shouldn't be given away to just anyone. It should be earned, and that is one of the reasons I don't give my loyalty to Dalamar. He once did something to me, and I have not looked the same way at him since.
Cletus
Guardian of Polaris
Lowly Master @ Arms of DoS
Member of The Rising Stars (TDL)
"Please leave this latrine as tidy as you found it."
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: dukeuziei@aol.com (Duke UzieI)
Date: 04 Oct 1998 15:18:33 EDT
Perhaps one day we will all post our beliefs freely without public backlash.
Allow everyone else to see how you live your life, and observe the pro's and con's.
Fine words Baron Sal Roa.....mayhaps one day when people here learn that opposition is not treason and despite......some will adhere to it.
Just the facts,
~Adonai
Date: 04 Oct 1998 15:18:33 EDT
Perhaps one day we will all post our beliefs freely without public backlash.
Allow everyone else to see how you live your life, and observe the pro's and con's.
Fine words Baron Sal Roa.....mayhaps one day when people here learn that opposition is not treason and despite......some will adhere to it.
Just the facts,
~Adonai
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: xvevan@aol.com (XvEvan)
Date: 04 Oct 1998 16:29:31 EDT
People of this line of postings:
Loyalty is something earned. Yes, something that one has to work for in order to prove himself worthy of being loyal. Yet, on the same stance, the other must show loyalty. When this is accomplished, the two are truly loyal.
Coming from the changed,
-Evan Rush Rynth
Date: 04 Oct 1998 16:29:31 EDT
People of this line of postings:
Loyalty is something earned. Yes, something that one has to work for in order to prove himself worthy of being loyal. Yet, on the same stance, the other must show loyalty. When this is accomplished, the two are truly loyal.
Coming from the changed,
-Evan Rush Rynth