From: iainmacknz@aol.com (IainMacKnz)
Date: 25 Feb 1999 18:46:51 EST
Renegade Barons:
Greetings. I address you publicly so that the community will understand my intentions, and reasons.
As of this day, until the reign of the twenty-ninth Overlord has come to an end, my blade is available to any Renegade Baron who seeks the throne and is tested.
I will now outline for the public my reasons for this action.
On the first eve of the Warlord Tournament, William Ray, better known as Karnafexx, returned from a long absence. He did offer offense to the Overlord and his wife. The Overlord expressed indignance, but never did request satisfaction from William. However, among the MANY members of the audience who had laughed at insults which - regardless of the target - were humourous, the Overlord did select the ONE he could actually discomfit... that being
the Baron Adonai Uziel.
- Overlord, please explain to the community why the only soul in the room you threw a gauntlet at was the one you could actually punish?
After this, later in the evening, I did approach the Overlord in a calm, reasonable manner, and offer to him my opinion that he had overreacted. Again, before witnesses, for the absolute crime of daring to say such a thing, the Overlord did make comments calling my honor into question. Further, he made the insipid complaint that I had never introduced myself to him (false; I did so long ago when he first became active), and additionally made a
scene about me supposedly telling him what to do, when I hadn't even so much as offered a suggestion. This foolishness indirectly led to another Baron's alignment changing, and did cause yet a third to ponder his stance.
I took no action at the time. I understood that the Overlord was angry, and fully expected that, as a man of honor, he would indeed tender apology the following evening for his rash and ludicrous accusations and comments. He failed to do so; indeed, he did not even bother to speak to me.
At this point, I did agree to serve as second to Baron Uziel - not only because I felt the Overlord's action against HIM to have been unfair, but because I now considered the offense against me to be genuine. Still, this was merely acting as second to someone who had asked.
Last eve, in an incident I will not bother recounting in detail, the Overlord did maliciously provoke me in most a infantile manner. That has spurred this action.
I will state this clearly: If honor was so important that it demanded such a high price when this situation began, then I question just what definition of honor allows that, yet also allows a man to engage in deliberate, spiteful provocation of one who had supported him, and - until the penning of this message - had never even WRONGED him.
Yes, Eros Hunrai Marzanhe DeBurgo... I am now publicly questioning YOUR honor. You raised not a hand to the person who TRULY insulted your wife, you took your anger out on one person out of many, and then you extended that further to one who merely tried to offer you counsel. You knew you had wrongfully offended me, and refused to repair your - YOUR - error.
And now, let there be no doubt as to the position you have placed yourself in.
Ian Rex.
Statement.
-
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: waikrboh@aol.com (WaIkrBoh)
Date: 25 Feb 1999 21:33:22 EST
Patrons,
I am aware of the fact that the preceding statement was addressed to Renegade Barons. However, it is my belief that whatever is posted on this board is done so that community response may be gathered. As a Loyal Baron, I feel that this message was directed slightly at me, to get me to rethink my position. In that vein, I definitely feel that I must make some sort of response, not just for this statement, but for the entire situation at hand.
I was absent from the area during the time in which the scene involving William Ray and the Overlord did occur. I have no first-hand knowledge of the events that took place. Should I say that I beleive the Overlord to have made the correct decision just because he is a friend of mine who happened to becoem Overlord? I certainly do not wish to.
I highly respect Ian as a talented orator on the boards, and as a person who has a great sense of himself and of his surroundings. But should I automatically accept his account of the event? Should I assume that such an altercation between them happened exactly as Ian describes it, or is Ian just looking for a reason for his already determined actions? That second consideration I would examine more closely if I did not believe Ian to be such a
great and honest man that he seems to me. I have taken his word as nearly the word of the gods in the past, and this is the first time I have had reason to question what he is saying.
However, the only reason that I question what he is saying is that I don't want to believe it. I have seen the Overlord act with only dignity and honor since his challenge was introduced. He encourages the newer duelists, and has become, in my eyes, much more active an Overlord than Dalamar was. I find it very difficult to believe that the Overlord could make such a rash act in regards to Baron Uziel, unless it was truly warranted by his own sense
of honor.
The question of why the Overlord acted in such a way to the one person he could directly "punish" is of little concern to me. If law enforcement agents are only able to pin crimes on one suspect, they'll do it. The public won't complain that one is being picked on, unless the man is truly not guilty. It is a case of whether Baron Uziel showed a blatant disrespect for the Overlord and/or his wife, not who made the charge in the first place, or who
else may or may not be guilty.
What could the Overlord do to William Ray? From my knowledge of William, he has his own opinions that are not easily influenced by others, and I'm sure the Overlord feels the same way. Anything he tries to do to stand up in any way to William will be useless.
However, I am still cognizant of the charge made by Ian, that the Overlord has "maliciously provoked [Ian] in a childish manner", as well as using lies to justify some of his actions towards Ian. Were these charges to be true in the form presented, I certainly would quickly rethink the situation. However, due to my lack of first hand knowledge of the events, combined with my previous experience with the Overlord, I am not about to accept these
charges as they lay without proof.
Call me ultra-loyal, call me stubborn, go ahead. Until conclusively shown otherwise, I will have belief in our current Overlord to follow the correct path. That said, I welcome any proof for these accusations, for I am more interested in the truth than maintaining my current beliefs.
-Walker Boh
Baron of the 12th
Date: 25 Feb 1999 21:33:22 EST
Patrons,
I am aware of the fact that the preceding statement was addressed to Renegade Barons. However, it is my belief that whatever is posted on this board is done so that community response may be gathered. As a Loyal Baron, I feel that this message was directed slightly at me, to get me to rethink my position. In that vein, I definitely feel that I must make some sort of response, not just for this statement, but for the entire situation at hand.
I was absent from the area during the time in which the scene involving William Ray and the Overlord did occur. I have no first-hand knowledge of the events that took place. Should I say that I beleive the Overlord to have made the correct decision just because he is a friend of mine who happened to becoem Overlord? I certainly do not wish to.
I highly respect Ian as a talented orator on the boards, and as a person who has a great sense of himself and of his surroundings. But should I automatically accept his account of the event? Should I assume that such an altercation between them happened exactly as Ian describes it, or is Ian just looking for a reason for his already determined actions? That second consideration I would examine more closely if I did not believe Ian to be such a
great and honest man that he seems to me. I have taken his word as nearly the word of the gods in the past, and this is the first time I have had reason to question what he is saying.
However, the only reason that I question what he is saying is that I don't want to believe it. I have seen the Overlord act with only dignity and honor since his challenge was introduced. He encourages the newer duelists, and has become, in my eyes, much more active an Overlord than Dalamar was. I find it very difficult to believe that the Overlord could make such a rash act in regards to Baron Uziel, unless it was truly warranted by his own sense
of honor.
The question of why the Overlord acted in such a way to the one person he could directly "punish" is of little concern to me. If law enforcement agents are only able to pin crimes on one suspect, they'll do it. The public won't complain that one is being picked on, unless the man is truly not guilty. It is a case of whether Baron Uziel showed a blatant disrespect for the Overlord and/or his wife, not who made the charge in the first place, or who
else may or may not be guilty.
What could the Overlord do to William Ray? From my knowledge of William, he has his own opinions that are not easily influenced by others, and I'm sure the Overlord feels the same way. Anything he tries to do to stand up in any way to William will be useless.
However, I am still cognizant of the charge made by Ian, that the Overlord has "maliciously provoked [Ian] in a childish manner", as well as using lies to justify some of his actions towards Ian. Were these charges to be true in the form presented, I certainly would quickly rethink the situation. However, due to my lack of first hand knowledge of the events, combined with my previous experience with the Overlord, I am not about to accept these
charges as they lay without proof.
Call me ultra-loyal, call me stubborn, go ahead. Until conclusively shown otherwise, I will have belief in our current Overlord to follow the correct path. That said, I welcome any proof for these accusations, for I am more interested in the truth than maintaining my current beliefs.
-Walker Boh
Baron of the 12th
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: iainmacknz@aol.com (IainMacKnz)
Date: 25 Feb 1999 21:49:44 EST
Baron Walker:
Let me assure you that I have no intention of causing Loyals to rethink their position. Your loyalties are your business, and I would not lower myself to attempting to undermine them.
As you are aware, I can only have respect for someone who critically analyzes a situation, rather than acting on blind emotion.
As to my relating of the events, they are accurate within my perceptions of the events. When the Overlord had his encounter with William and Adonai, I was most assuredly well-disposed toward him, and my opinions on his behaviour are viewed in that light.
As to his provocation... suffice it to say that one does not - after having questioned another man's honor - conclude a duel, thank the opponent and official by saying "Thank you for the... honor!", pausing to look directly at me before uttering that final word, without intending to deliver a childish and petulant insult.
The Overlord could have had no intent but to provoke and anger me; it succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. Knowing he had delivered grave offense, he could, at any time, apologized for words his own confidants say he uttered rashly. "He was angry" was an acceptable excuse in the hours after his initial insult. It ceased to be so after he spent an entire evening in the same room and failed to address the issue of his slander.
Ian Rex.
Date: 25 Feb 1999 21:49:44 EST
Baron Walker:
Let me assure you that I have no intention of causing Loyals to rethink their position. Your loyalties are your business, and I would not lower myself to attempting to undermine them.
As you are aware, I can only have respect for someone who critically analyzes a situation, rather than acting on blind emotion.
As to my relating of the events, they are accurate within my perceptions of the events. When the Overlord had his encounter with William and Adonai, I was most assuredly well-disposed toward him, and my opinions on his behaviour are viewed in that light.
As to his provocation... suffice it to say that one does not - after having questioned another man's honor - conclude a duel, thank the opponent and official by saying "Thank you for the... honor!", pausing to look directly at me before uttering that final word, without intending to deliver a childish and petulant insult.
The Overlord could have had no intent but to provoke and anger me; it succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. Knowing he had delivered grave offense, he could, at any time, apologized for words his own confidants say he uttered rashly. "He was angry" was an acceptable excuse in the hours after his initial insult. It ceased to be so after he spent an entire evening in the same room and failed to address the issue of his slander.
Ian Rex.