From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 16:52:19 EDT
>I may be wrong, but Zaf broke a rule by not responding to Marius' challenge.
Errr, I believe he responded to the challenge. I remember seeing his accceptance of said challenge and his defending of Marius's right to make it in a discussion with those who were slinging mud at Marius.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
Official Protest
-
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: 15 Sep 1999 16:53:40 EDT
"I don't believe that's the point, Var, and making personal attacks on Marius is unfair when he hasn't done a single thing to warrant it. As far as I've seen, Marius has not *once* said "I deserve both rings""
It was not a personal attack to Marius, Sid. I'm just saying that if it were how Marius felt, or anyone else, then that's how I would feel about them.
"Did I miss something? What rule did Zafiroo break?"
I misunderstood a comment last evening when I was told that Zaf "blew off the challenge for a week." It was my fault for misunderstanding what the meaning was. I apologize to Zafiroo for my assumption.
" I am very proud of Sid for actually seeing the point of the argument."
I admit I have a hard time seeing a point to an argument when common sense tells me that no baron may challenge another baron, except in a test of worthiness which is determined by the council.
But tell me this... wasn't there a commotion when Lupton entered the Warlord's tourney after he won the baron's ring? He did register in the tourney as a warlord, then won the ring the night before the tourney. It goes both ways. You want to stick with that way of thinking, Ian, think of how Lupton was denied the chance to hold two rings for the same principle, just the other way around.
Even though this may offend those who believe that Marius should get to challenge, the whole concept is completely illogical to me.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Phantom Scots Captain
Baron of the Tenth
Sorcerer of DoM
Date: 15 Sep 1999 16:53:40 EDT
"I don't believe that's the point, Var, and making personal attacks on Marius is unfair when he hasn't done a single thing to warrant it. As far as I've seen, Marius has not *once* said "I deserve both rings""
It was not a personal attack to Marius, Sid. I'm just saying that if it were how Marius felt, or anyone else, then that's how I would feel about them.
"Did I miss something? What rule did Zafiroo break?"
I misunderstood a comment last evening when I was told that Zaf "blew off the challenge for a week." It was my fault for misunderstanding what the meaning was. I apologize to Zafiroo for my assumption.
" I am very proud of Sid for actually seeing the point of the argument."
I admit I have a hard time seeing a point to an argument when common sense tells me that no baron may challenge another baron, except in a test of worthiness which is determined by the council.
But tell me this... wasn't there a commotion when Lupton entered the Warlord's tourney after he won the baron's ring? He did register in the tourney as a warlord, then won the ring the night before the tourney. It goes both ways. You want to stick with that way of thinking, Ian, think of how Lupton was denied the chance to hold two rings for the same principle, just the other way around.
Even though this may offend those who believe that Marius should get to challenge, the whole concept is completely illogical to me.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Phantom Scots Captain
Baron of the Tenth
Sorcerer of DoM
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: khrystawlf@aol.com (KhrystaWlf)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 16:56:19 EDT
>>Personally, I don't see how someone could *not* see the point.
>>
>
> I don't know, Sid. Ask Var.
Quit picking on Var, for Heaven's sake. he's made valid points here. Granted, the rules, as written, ~need~ much work to clarify, but then we are supposed to have some common sense after all. If the Supervisor were to try to cover every possible situation under the sun the rules would be longer than the combined histories of the Overlords and the Barons.
Khrys
Date: 15 Sep 1999 16:56:19 EDT
>>Personally, I don't see how someone could *not* see the point.
>>
>
> I don't know, Sid. Ask Var.
Quit picking on Var, for Heaven's sake. he's made valid points here. Granted, the rules, as written, ~need~ much work to clarify, but then we are supposed to have some common sense after all. If the Supervisor were to try to cover every possible situation under the sun the rules would be longer than the combined histories of the Overlords and the Barons.
Khrys
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sidarthax@aol.com (Sidartha x)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 16:56:37 EDT
"Errr, I believe he responded to the challenge. I remember seeing his accceptance of said challenge and his defending of Marius's right to make it in a discussion with those who were slinging mud at Marius."
Hmm...then, I *am* wrong. Not sure what rule was broken then.
~Sid
Date: 15 Sep 1999 16:56:37 EDT
"Errr, I believe he responded to the challenge. I remember seeing his accceptance of said challenge and his defending of Marius's right to make it in a discussion with those who were slinging mud at Marius."
Hmm...then, I *am* wrong. Not sure what rule was broken then.
~Sid
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:00:21 EDT
>I admit I have a hard time seeing a point to an argument when common sense
>tells me that no baron may challenge another baron, except in a test of
>worthiness which is determined by the council.
Var,
The point is that the rules and 'common sense' are not the same thing. If one wishes to follow the rules, literally, one must either ignore common sense at times or rewrite the rules so that they make sense. I strongly doubt anyone really wants to see two Barons fight a challenge match. What we are doing is pointing out that there is no rule preventing it from occuring under the existing circumstances.
Perhaps someone is suggesting the necessary rule be made but, that until it is made, there is no excuse for denying Marius's right for his match to proceed as scheduled. Just perhaps.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:00:21 EDT
>I admit I have a hard time seeing a point to an argument when common sense
>tells me that no baron may challenge another baron, except in a test of
>worthiness which is determined by the council.
Var,
The point is that the rules and 'common sense' are not the same thing. If one wishes to follow the rules, literally, one must either ignore common sense at times or rewrite the rules so that they make sense. I strongly doubt anyone really wants to see two Barons fight a challenge match. What we are doing is pointing out that there is no rule preventing it from occuring under the existing circumstances.
Perhaps someone is suggesting the necessary rule be made but, that until it is made, there is no excuse for denying Marius's right for his match to proceed as scheduled. Just perhaps.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:00:22 EDT
">Personally, I don't see how someone could *not* see the point.
>
I don't know, Sid. Ask Var."
Lupton was denied entering the warlord's tourney when he registered as a warlord and won the ring as a baron. Now we have it the other way around, when Marius issues challenge and wins a baron's ring.
A Baron's responsibility, it's titles and benefits, come as soon as they earn the title, whether through tournament or challenge. No baron may fight a challenge against another baron. I don't see how THAT point can't be seen.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Phantom Scots Captain
Baron of the Tenth
Sorcerer of DoM
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:00:22 EDT
">Personally, I don't see how someone could *not* see the point.
>
I don't know, Sid. Ask Var."
Lupton was denied entering the warlord's tourney when he registered as a warlord and won the ring as a baron. Now we have it the other way around, when Marius issues challenge and wins a baron's ring.
A Baron's responsibility, it's titles and benefits, come as soon as they earn the title, whether through tournament or challenge. No baron may fight a challenge against another baron. I don't see how THAT point can't be seen.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Phantom Scots Captain
Baron of the Tenth
Sorcerer of DoM
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:05:50 EDT
> A Baron's responsibility, it's titles and benefits, come as soon as they
>earn the title, whether through tournament or challenge. No baron may fight
>a challenge against another baron. I don't see how THAT point can't be seen.
Show me this in the rules. That is the point. Either an absurdity needs to be allowed or the rules need to be changed to disallow the absurdity. Simply calling it absurd doesn't make it any more or less legal or illegal.
The point is that many of the interperetations of the rules made by the supervisors have not been entered into the rules after being made. Leaving a very messy situation. I can't speak for Ian, but I am trying to illustrate the absurdity so that people will notice it.
I do have to say, however, that if the rules are not correctly edited to prevent such absurdities, then no one has any business trying to stop them without fixing the problem in the rules.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:05:50 EDT
> A Baron's responsibility, it's titles and benefits, come as soon as they
>earn the title, whether through tournament or challenge. No baron may fight
>a challenge against another baron. I don't see how THAT point can't be seen.
Show me this in the rules. That is the point. Either an absurdity needs to be allowed or the rules need to be changed to disallow the absurdity. Simply calling it absurd doesn't make it any more or less legal or illegal.
The point is that many of the interperetations of the rules made by the supervisors have not been entered into the rules after being made. Leaving a very messy situation. I can't speak for Ian, but I am trying to illustrate the absurdity so that people will notice it.
I do have to say, however, that if the rules are not correctly edited to prevent such absurdities, then no one has any business trying to stop them without fixing the problem in the rules.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:08:27 EDT
" Perhaps someone is suggesting the necessary rule be made but, that until it is made, there is no excuse for denying Marius's right for his match to proceed as scheduled. Just perhaps."
Yes, there is an excuse. Marius is a baron. Baron's do not challenge barons. Warlords (and lower ranks in the cases where they succeed in an intercession) may challenge for the baronial title and overlord title. Barons (something Marius became the moment he accepted the title) may only fight a challenge to the overlord or intercede.
There is nothing that says "in the case that someone reaches barony between registration and the time of the warlord's tourney, they are disqualified from the tourney." But, using common sense as justification, Lupton was denied the right to fight in the tourney. I still stand by that conviction, and now that we're looking at the other side of the coin, I still feel that way.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Phantom Scots Captain
Baron of the Tenth
Sorcerer of DoM
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:08:27 EDT
" Perhaps someone is suggesting the necessary rule be made but, that until it is made, there is no excuse for denying Marius's right for his match to proceed as scheduled. Just perhaps."
Yes, there is an excuse. Marius is a baron. Baron's do not challenge barons. Warlords (and lower ranks in the cases where they succeed in an intercession) may challenge for the baronial title and overlord title. Barons (something Marius became the moment he accepted the title) may only fight a challenge to the overlord or intercede.
There is nothing that says "in the case that someone reaches barony between registration and the time of the warlord's tourney, they are disqualified from the tourney." But, using common sense as justification, Lupton was denied the right to fight in the tourney. I still stand by that conviction, and now that we're looking at the other side of the coin, I still feel that way.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Phantom Scots Captain
Baron of the Tenth
Sorcerer of DoM
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:08:31 EDT
"I admit I have a hard time seeing a point to an argument when common sense tells me that no baron may challenge another baron, except in a test of worthiness which is determined by the council."
Again, Var... A Baron DID NOT CHALLENGE a Baron. The rules do NOT stipulate the rules on who may FIGHT a challenge match. They state who may ISSUE challenge. There is a distinct difference.
"But tell me this... wasn't there a commotion when Lupton entered the
Warlord's tourney after he won the baron's ring?"
I don't recall this, but it's apples and oranges. The tournament field has alternates for the very reason that people may withdraw; and the tournament itself is, after all, for Warlords. Had Lupton won his ring in the -middle- of the Tournament, I'd say he had a right to finish, and claim a prize should he have won one.
Registering for a tournament - a clerical function which is not covered in the rules at all - is vastly different than issuing challenge - a subject upon which we have rules upon rules upon rules.
I don't "believe that Marius should get to challenge," Var. I believe that he has already challenged, legally, properly, and under the rules, and should he opt to press the challenge, there is nothing within those rules whatsoever to lend the slightest credibility to an attempt to deny him.
Furthermore...
We have precedent, in a way. If you'll recall, Ulath ni Fici, a Grandmaster, challenged Dalamar for the Overlordship. Why? Because at the time he earned and claimed that right, he was of the appropriate rank. Period.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:08:31 EDT
"I admit I have a hard time seeing a point to an argument when common sense tells me that no baron may challenge another baron, except in a test of worthiness which is determined by the council."
Again, Var... A Baron DID NOT CHALLENGE a Baron. The rules do NOT stipulate the rules on who may FIGHT a challenge match. They state who may ISSUE challenge. There is a distinct difference.
"But tell me this... wasn't there a commotion when Lupton entered the
Warlord's tourney after he won the baron's ring?"
I don't recall this, but it's apples and oranges. The tournament field has alternates for the very reason that people may withdraw; and the tournament itself is, after all, for Warlords. Had Lupton won his ring in the -middle- of the Tournament, I'd say he had a right to finish, and claim a prize should he have won one.
Registering for a tournament - a clerical function which is not covered in the rules at all - is vastly different than issuing challenge - a subject upon which we have rules upon rules upon rules.
I don't "believe that Marius should get to challenge," Var. I believe that he has already challenged, legally, properly, and under the rules, and should he opt to press the challenge, there is nothing within those rules whatsoever to lend the slightest credibility to an attempt to deny him.
Furthermore...
We have precedent, in a way. If you'll recall, Ulath ni Fici, a Grandmaster, challenged Dalamar for the Overlordship. Why? Because at the time he earned and claimed that right, he was of the appropriate rank. Period.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: shivblade@aol.com (SHIV BLADE)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:28:36 EDT
Var, I think most will agree with your points. Yet, the other side is just as valid. All one has to do is step back and we could see that. It is true, the rules needs to be redone. They have for some time. The one thing I can say is to agree with Var. Just because a rule does not state something one way or another can you do it. There is no rule for, or against this. Think of this. There is no rule that says a Baron
can't destroy his ring. Yet, we have excepted that we shouldn't do that. I think most around here have excepted that the situation we have now, shouldn't proceed. The example is loose, I know, but it serves well enough.
The thing we all must remember is this. The ancient rules to start the challenge. Doesn't the caller always ask if the challenger wishes to proceed? yes, they do. And if at this point they say yes, they are issuing the challenge. If they are a baron, then they may not do that. Just as if a Warlord were to challenge and slip in rank. Should they be able to carry forth? Again, no. For once they are asked the question at the match, they must answer yes
to proceed. A yes that there rank does not hold to. So, if Marius can continue challenge, so be it. But, when he is asked at the match if he wishes the challenge to go forth, he will be a baron. And he will not be able to issue the challenge properly then.
As written by Christopher
Avery Shiv Blade
Baron of the 12th
Diamond
Date: 15 Sep 1999 17:28:36 EDT
Var, I think most will agree with your points. Yet, the other side is just as valid. All one has to do is step back and we could see that. It is true, the rules needs to be redone. They have for some time. The one thing I can say is to agree with Var. Just because a rule does not state something one way or another can you do it. There is no rule for, or against this. Think of this. There is no rule that says a Baron
can't destroy his ring. Yet, we have excepted that we shouldn't do that. I think most around here have excepted that the situation we have now, shouldn't proceed. The example is loose, I know, but it serves well enough.
The thing we all must remember is this. The ancient rules to start the challenge. Doesn't the caller always ask if the challenger wishes to proceed? yes, they do. And if at this point they say yes, they are issuing the challenge. If they are a baron, then they may not do that. Just as if a Warlord were to challenge and slip in rank. Should they be able to carry forth? Again, no. For once they are asked the question at the match, they must answer yes
to proceed. A yes that there rank does not hold to. So, if Marius can continue challenge, so be it. But, when he is asked at the match if he wishes the challenge to go forth, he will be a baron. And he will not be able to issue the challenge properly then.
As written by Christopher
Avery Shiv Blade
Baron of the 12th
Diamond
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 18:04:03 EDT
Avery:
Your thoughts are not without merit, yet they do not have the weight of rule to them.
Indeed, the traditional query of the challenger regarding their desire to press forward is not the issuance of challenge, but a last chance to withdraw... a chance, I would note that I have never yet seen a dueler take.
Yet, we still argue semantics. Only two people - one of whom has the misfortune of sharing my bedroom - have understood just -what- I am protesting here.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 15 Sep 1999 18:04:03 EDT
Avery:
Your thoughts are not without merit, yet they do not have the weight of rule to them.
Indeed, the traditional query of the challenger regarding their desire to press forward is not the issuance of challenge, but a last chance to withdraw... a chance, I would note that I have never yet seen a dueler take.
Yet, we still argue semantics. Only two people - one of whom has the misfortune of sharing my bedroom - have understood just -what- I am protesting here.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sidarthax@aol.com (Sidartha x)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 18:07:18 EDT
"Yet, we still argue semantics. Only two people - one of whom has the misfortune of sharing my bedroom - have understood just -what- I am protesting here."
Percy's been sharing your bedroom, love? Sheesh..
In jest and with much love,
~Sid
Date: 15 Sep 1999 18:07:18 EDT
"Yet, we still argue semantics. Only two people - one of whom has the misfortune of sharing my bedroom - have understood just -what- I am protesting here."
Percy's been sharing your bedroom, love? Sheesh..
In jest and with much love,
~Sid
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 18:15:24 EDT
I admit, that I do agree that rules need to be clarified. It appears that I sound like I'm saying otherwise.
What I am saying is that while the rules need to be clarified, I don't think situations like the one with Marius requires clarification, just common sense. Yes, it will help to keep things clear in the future, but unless I'm misunderstanding, we're assuming things are allowed as long as they're not in the rules.
Personally, I feel there are more important things to be clarified. Unfortunately, if not ironically, I forget what those issues are.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Phantom Scots Captain
Baron of the Tenth
Sorcerer of DoM
Date: 15 Sep 1999 18:15:24 EDT
I admit, that I do agree that rules need to be clarified. It appears that I sound like I'm saying otherwise.
What I am saying is that while the rules need to be clarified, I don't think situations like the one with Marius requires clarification, just common sense. Yes, it will help to keep things clear in the future, but unless I'm misunderstanding, we're assuming things are allowed as long as they're not in the rules.
Personally, I feel there are more important things to be clarified. Unfortunately, if not ironically, I forget what those issues are.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Phantom Scots Captain
Baron of the Tenth
Sorcerer of DoM
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 18:55:55 EDT
>Percy's been sharing your bedroom, love? Sheesh..
>
Of course I have, Sid. I need to move out of the GIT soon anyway, it smells you know, and my master bedroom in the new castle isn't quite done yet. Where was I supposed to sleep?
Of course, I suppose it is possible that Ian was referring to you..... nahh.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
Date: 15 Sep 1999 18:55:55 EDT
>Percy's been sharing your bedroom, love? Sheesh..
>
Of course I have, Sid. I need to move out of the GIT soon anyway, it smells you know, and my master bedroom in the new castle isn't quite done yet. Where was I supposed to sleep?
Of course, I suppose it is possible that Ian was referring to you..... nahh.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: xxzenrisingxx@aol.com (Xx Zen Rising xX)
Date: 15 Sep 1999 19:01:30 EDT
"Lupton was denied entering the warlord's tourney when he registered as a warlord and won the ring as a baron. Now we have it the other way around, when Marius issues challenge and wins a baron's ring."
The difference is, it's a *Warlord's* tournament, NOT a tournament for "Anyone who registers while a Warlord." I registered for this tournament when I was Overlord, just in case, because I knew slots would be filling up fast and I might not last in that capacity.
Nothing in the rules prevents Marius from pressing his challenge at this time, and this is something that needs to be amended.
Date: 15 Sep 1999 19:01:30 EDT
"Lupton was denied entering the warlord's tourney when he registered as a warlord and won the ring as a baron. Now we have it the other way around, when Marius issues challenge and wins a baron's ring."
The difference is, it's a *Warlord's* tournament, NOT a tournament for "Anyone who registers while a Warlord." I registered for this tournament when I was Overlord, just in case, because I knew slots would be filling up fast and I might not last in that capacity.
Nothing in the rules prevents Marius from pressing his challenge at this time, and this is something that needs to be amended.