From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 25 May 2000 03:42:59 EDT
Ahh, how interesting life has become.
Thanks to the good graces of an involved party, I have now seen first-hand the discussions flung about regarding this issue by the Barons, and I am absolutely aghast.
Threats to harass the Supervisor with daily diatribes? Suggestions that power be taken away from the Supervisor and granted to the Council, where it "belongs?" A statement that Lord Evermeadow had no business playiing any role at all, by a Baron who fails to understand that the COUNCIL has no business being involved until the Supervisor turns the matter over TO them?
I know understand why Lord Evermeadow's attitude toward the lot of you was so foul in his message which he at least had the courage to present to the public. Although there are individuals among you I still view with respect, as a unified whole, the Council is a disgrace. Only a lack of available time on my part prevents me from solving one-thirteenth of the problem on my own.
Sickened,
Ian Rex.
A call unto the Barons and the Community.
-
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: kalamere@aol.com (Kalamere)
Date: 25 May 2000 10:37:33 EDT
> You are now saying that the Council does not have
> the right to hold an opinion on a matter? I am stating
> my opinion, I think Val should call us to task.
Var,
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and even to entitled to speaking that opinion. That does not mean, however, that people may force their opinions on others. There is a line there and it is a line that you have crossed by making "demands." You are attempting now to force that opinion on Val.. a practice that in the past I'd have thought you'd be opposed to.
~Kal
Date: 25 May 2000 10:37:33 EDT
> You are now saying that the Council does not have
> the right to hold an opinion on a matter? I am stating
> my opinion, I think Val should call us to task.
Var,
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and even to entitled to speaking that opinion. That does not mean, however, that people may force their opinions on others. There is a line there and it is a line that you have crossed by making "demands." You are attempting now to force that opinion on Val.. a practice that in the past I'd have thought you'd be opposed to.
~Kal
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 25 May 2000 15:40:19 EDT
"Thanks to the good graces of an involved party, I have now seen first-hand the discussions flung about regarding this issue by the Barons, and I am absolutely aghast."
I believe I had posted my intentions beforehand, unless you mean someone else, I'm the only one who has made it known public that I plan to keep writing.
"Threats to harass the Supervisor with daily diatribes? Suggestions that power be taken away from the Supervisor and granted to the Council, where it "belongs?" A statement that Lord Evermeadow had no business playiing any role at all, by a Baron who fails to understand that the COUNCIL has no business being involved until the Supervisor turns the matter over TO them?"
Not threats, Ian. Letters demanding we be given a chance to resolve the situation. To treat it as a threat is like saying, "I'm going to speak up if I don't agree with you, and consider this a threat!" To try and bring pity unto Valentine seems like a cheap tactic. It's his job to handle complaints anyhow, is it not? Or does he get the power without having to worry about anything?
"I know understand why Lord Evermeadow's attitude toward the lot of you was so foul in his message which he at least had the courage to present to the public. Although there are individuals among you I still view with respect, as a unified whole, the Council is a disgrace. Only a lack of available time on my part prevents me from solving one-thirteenth of the problem on my own."
Oh my, is this a threat? Pity the council, because someone is wanting to do something about what they consider wrong, and is "threatening" to do something about it, but only can't because he doesn't have available time. Boo hoo. Someone, please cry in indignation at how pathetic Ian is for making the "threat" of doing something.
I'll tell you what, Ian. I have the available time to write a letter, just as you have available time to write posts. I'm doing something because I want to, and have the time.
You seem to be threatening to do something (I read it as a challenge), but only won't because of available time. Since I have the time to write every day, I am doing such, that makes it a threat. Is that not hypocrisy?
To Kal,
To put it simply, Kal, I am not going to play to Val's game of "this is my place, and even though I haven't received word from Avery, I'm going to grant him an extension because I can," or "this is my place, and even though I got word from Avery, I'm not going to ease the people's minds with proof and let them see I can grant extensions because I can anyway."
I admit, Kal, I do respect your logic, but I fear Valentine taking away the power of the Council and let him treat this place like a personal play pen and flexing his proverbial muscle.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Date: 25 May 2000 15:40:19 EDT
"Thanks to the good graces of an involved party, I have now seen first-hand the discussions flung about regarding this issue by the Barons, and I am absolutely aghast."
I believe I had posted my intentions beforehand, unless you mean someone else, I'm the only one who has made it known public that I plan to keep writing.
"Threats to harass the Supervisor with daily diatribes? Suggestions that power be taken away from the Supervisor and granted to the Council, where it "belongs?" A statement that Lord Evermeadow had no business playiing any role at all, by a Baron who fails to understand that the COUNCIL has no business being involved until the Supervisor turns the matter over TO them?"
Not threats, Ian. Letters demanding we be given a chance to resolve the situation. To treat it as a threat is like saying, "I'm going to speak up if I don't agree with you, and consider this a threat!" To try and bring pity unto Valentine seems like a cheap tactic. It's his job to handle complaints anyhow, is it not? Or does he get the power without having to worry about anything?
"I know understand why Lord Evermeadow's attitude toward the lot of you was so foul in his message which he at least had the courage to present to the public. Although there are individuals among you I still view with respect, as a unified whole, the Council is a disgrace. Only a lack of available time on my part prevents me from solving one-thirteenth of the problem on my own."
Oh my, is this a threat? Pity the council, because someone is wanting to do something about what they consider wrong, and is "threatening" to do something about it, but only can't because he doesn't have available time. Boo hoo. Someone, please cry in indignation at how pathetic Ian is for making the "threat" of doing something.
I'll tell you what, Ian. I have the available time to write a letter, just as you have available time to write posts. I'm doing something because I want to, and have the time.
You seem to be threatening to do something (I read it as a challenge), but only won't because of available time. Since I have the time to write every day, I am doing such, that makes it a threat. Is that not hypocrisy?
To Kal,
To put it simply, Kal, I am not going to play to Val's game of "this is my place, and even though I haven't received word from Avery, I'm going to grant him an extension because I can," or "this is my place, and even though I got word from Avery, I'm not going to ease the people's minds with proof and let them see I can grant extensions because I can anyway."
I admit, Kal, I do respect your logic, but I fear Valentine taking away the power of the Council and let him treat this place like a personal play pen and flexing his proverbial muscle.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 25 May 2000 16:04:13 EDT
"Not threats, Ian. Letters demanding we be given a chance to resolve the situation."
Demanding. Pay close attention to that word, Var. Maybe then you'll understand why not everyone wants to put you on a pedestal as savior of the masses.
"To try and bring pity unto Valentine seems like a cheap tactic."
To demand that you be allowed to determine when and where a forfeit is ruled is a cheap tactic, Var. Pointing out your error, and the sheer arrogance of the Council as a general whole in this process, isn't cheap at all. It's accurate.
"Someone, please cry in indignation at how pathetic Ian is for making the 'threat' of doing something."
There's a difference, Var; whereas "the Council" has no "right" to attempt to "take power from" the Supervisor, as more than one of your number has suggested, anyone has the absolute right to gather their qualifications and challenge.
One might actually think you're almost afraid I'll do it.
"I'll tell you what, Ian. I have the available time to write a letter, just as you have available time to write posts. I'm doing something because I want to, and have the time.
You seem to be threatening to do something (I read it as a challenge), but only won't because of available time. Since I have the time to write every day, I am doing such, that makes it a threat. Is that not hypocrisy?"
Get over yourself, Medici. Your attempt to paint your stated intention to harass the Supervisor daily because you're not getting your way as anything else is pathetic. It's harassment, pure and simple. Valentine has ruled. Incessantly repeating your wishes to him is not only harassment, it's stupid - because, frankly, if Lord Evermeadow were to cave in solely because you bombarded him repeatedly, he wouldn't be WORTHY of anyone's respect.
This is not a case where you're producing more evidence for your position, Var. It's a case where you're whining continually in hopes that Lord Evermeadow will suddenly change his mind just to shut you up.
Shall we discuss how pathetic and cheap THAT tactic is?
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 25 May 2000 16:04:13 EDT
"Not threats, Ian. Letters demanding we be given a chance to resolve the situation."
Demanding. Pay close attention to that word, Var. Maybe then you'll understand why not everyone wants to put you on a pedestal as savior of the masses.
"To try and bring pity unto Valentine seems like a cheap tactic."
To demand that you be allowed to determine when and where a forfeit is ruled is a cheap tactic, Var. Pointing out your error, and the sheer arrogance of the Council as a general whole in this process, isn't cheap at all. It's accurate.
"Someone, please cry in indignation at how pathetic Ian is for making the 'threat' of doing something."
There's a difference, Var; whereas "the Council" has no "right" to attempt to "take power from" the Supervisor, as more than one of your number has suggested, anyone has the absolute right to gather their qualifications and challenge.
One might actually think you're almost afraid I'll do it.
"I'll tell you what, Ian. I have the available time to write a letter, just as you have available time to write posts. I'm doing something because I want to, and have the time.
You seem to be threatening to do something (I read it as a challenge), but only won't because of available time. Since I have the time to write every day, I am doing such, that makes it a threat. Is that not hypocrisy?"
Get over yourself, Medici. Your attempt to paint your stated intention to harass the Supervisor daily because you're not getting your way as anything else is pathetic. It's harassment, pure and simple. Valentine has ruled. Incessantly repeating your wishes to him is not only harassment, it's stupid - because, frankly, if Lord Evermeadow were to cave in solely because you bombarded him repeatedly, he wouldn't be WORTHY of anyone's respect.
This is not a case where you're producing more evidence for your position, Var. It's a case where you're whining continually in hopes that Lord Evermeadow will suddenly change his mind just to shut you up.
Shall we discuss how pathetic and cheap THAT tactic is?
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 25 May 2000 16:07:12 EDT
And one other point, which I must bring up solely because Baron Medici-Giovanni is obviously too stupid to understand the common tongue:
"I admit, Kal, I do respect your logic, but I fear Valentine taking away the power of the Council and let him treat this place like a personal play pen and flexing his proverbial muscle."
He hasn't taken one iota of your power away. You continually fail to understand that the Council HAS NO POWER AT ALL until a forfeit HAS BEEN ruled.
Indeed, the "bully" here is you, Var. You're in effect demanding that YOUR determination that a forfeit has occurred be placed into effect, when Lord Evermeadow is the SOLE ARBITER of that situation.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 25 May 2000 16:07:12 EDT
And one other point, which I must bring up solely because Baron Medici-Giovanni is obviously too stupid to understand the common tongue:
"I admit, Kal, I do respect your logic, but I fear Valentine taking away the power of the Council and let him treat this place like a personal play pen and flexing his proverbial muscle."
He hasn't taken one iota of your power away. You continually fail to understand that the Council HAS NO POWER AT ALL until a forfeit HAS BEEN ruled.
Indeed, the "bully" here is you, Var. You're in effect demanding that YOUR determination that a forfeit has occurred be placed into effect, when Lord Evermeadow is the SOLE ARBITER of that situation.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: cletusgandrfald@aol.com (Cletus Gandrfald)
Date: 25 May 2000 16:44:11 EDT
>Thanks to the good graces of an involved party, I have now seen first-hand
>the discussions flung about regarding this issue by the Barons, and I am
>absolutely aghast.
I have shown everything I have written to the council to the community. I have detested in protesting this any further because, though I disagree with Val not declaring a forfiet, the council does not have any rights in this matter until it is declared in forfiet. I still however, do not agree with the extension he has granted.
Since Val seemed to have ignore that last time I ask this, I'll ask it again: How much longer are you giving Avery before you declare him in forfiet of this match? The Warlord tournament is a weekend away and this matter should be resolved by the time a winner is declared.
Cletus
Date: 25 May 2000 16:44:11 EDT
>Thanks to the good graces of an involved party, I have now seen first-hand
>the discussions flung about regarding this issue by the Barons, and I am
>absolutely aghast.
I have shown everything I have written to the council to the community. I have detested in protesting this any further because, though I disagree with Val not declaring a forfiet, the council does not have any rights in this matter until it is declared in forfiet. I still however, do not agree with the extension he has granted.
Since Val seemed to have ignore that last time I ask this, I'll ask it again: How much longer are you giving Avery before you declare him in forfiet of this match? The Warlord tournament is a weekend away and this matter should be resolved by the time a winner is declared.
Cletus
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: carnage669@aol.com (Carnage669)
Date: 25 May 2000 16:51:06 EDT
::A little boy runs up and changed detested to desisted, scampering away, the boy giggles::
What a dork!
Date: 25 May 2000 16:51:06 EDT
::A little boy runs up and changed detested to desisted, scampering away, the boy giggles::
What a dork!
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 25 May 2000 18:26:55 EDT
M'lord Ian,
Tis yet to be anna proof offered by either Master Valentine Evermeadow or by Master Drey D'erest Sanchez Starke that Avery Shiv Blade, Overlord, didst in fact make petition unto Master Evermeadow with respect to this matter.
Further, M'lord, in the matter of thine challenge, the Baronial Council hae nae been made a legal entity. Therefore, thee and all parties involved were subject to the rule of law ast interpreted unilaterally by the dwarf, Gloin.
Upon the making of the law granting official status and legal rights unto the Baronial Council, certain of those rights and privileges, devolved solely unto the Council, among those privileges, that being the adjudication of such matters ast be involved shouldst one or both of those personages what hae contracted to meet in combat do fail to appear.
Let if be noted, M'lord, that those privileges and rights were and are specific unto the Council and its members. Let is also be noted, that the Supervisor ist charged with reviewing the decision of the Council after the fact, nae before.
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 25 May 2000 18:26:55 EDT
M'lord Ian,
Tis yet to be anna proof offered by either Master Valentine Evermeadow or by Master Drey D'erest Sanchez Starke that Avery Shiv Blade, Overlord, didst in fact make petition unto Master Evermeadow with respect to this matter.
Further, M'lord, in the matter of thine challenge, the Baronial Council hae nae been made a legal entity. Therefore, thee and all parties involved were subject to the rule of law ast interpreted unilaterally by the dwarf, Gloin.
Upon the making of the law granting official status and legal rights unto the Baronial Council, certain of those rights and privileges, devolved solely unto the Council, among those privileges, that being the adjudication of such matters ast be involved shouldst one or both of those personages what hae contracted to meet in combat do fail to appear.
Let if be noted, M'lord, that those privileges and rights were and are specific unto the Council and its members. Let is also be noted, that the Supervisor ist charged with reviewing the decision of the Council after the fact, nae before.
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 25 May 2000 19:21:08 EDT
Turi,
In th' matter to which thee make reference, t'was indeed nae a challenge match, therefore, th' circumstances canna be likened unto a challenge. Tis nae relevant ta thi' matter.
Tis indeed, only an' official may call anna duel a forfeiture, yet, lass, in ta matter ta which thee make reference ta question wast whether ta official couldst disregard ta duelists' preference ast ta th' acceptance 'o acceptin' ta victory or acceptin' a tie after ta match hae been declared forfeit. Indeed, I didst comment unto Master Evermeadow th' certain 'o th' officials seem nae ta hae been made cognizant 'o th' rulin'.
In th' matter, nae duel didst take place ast prescribed by ta rules 'o engagement, nor, I shall note, wast Master Starke present upon th' eve 'o th' eighteenth, ta las' eve upon which, by ta rules 'o engagement, th' trial by combat wast ta hae been met. It wouldst be right interestin' ta learn whether Master Starke hae made some arrangement privily wi' Master Evermeadow afore th' date. For, hae he nae done so, tis it mayest be pondered whether
Master Starke ast well ast Avery Shiv Blade both be in violation 'o th' rules 'o engagement, fore in neither didst appear upon th' eve.
It shouldst ast well be noted th' Master Evermeadow, unilaterally an' seemingly wi' out petition by either Avery Shiv Blade, Overlord, or by Master Drey' D'erest Sanchez Starke, Renegade Baron, didst take it upon himself ta declare an' extension 'o th' time where in th' combatants mus' meet.
Whyfore didst nae Master Starke choose ta seemin'ly an' unilaterally cancel ta challenge which wast set ta be met upon ta fourteenth? Master Starke hae stated th' cause 'o Avery's non appearance be unknown ta 'im an' hae indicated th' he wast nae approached by Master Evermeadow afore Master Evermeadow didst make 'is decison.
Tis Master Starke hae indeed nae made protest agin ta decision, certes, fore in th' 'e hast made it known 'e wishes nae ta face anna bu' Avery in combat. Perhaps Master Starke fears wh' decision th' Baronial Council may come to, shouldst th' matter be given unta them ta adjudicate?
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 25 May 2000 19:21:08 EDT
Turi,
In th' matter to which thee make reference, t'was indeed nae a challenge match, therefore, th' circumstances canna be likened unto a challenge. Tis nae relevant ta thi' matter.
Tis indeed, only an' official may call anna duel a forfeiture, yet, lass, in ta matter ta which thee make reference ta question wast whether ta official couldst disregard ta duelists' preference ast ta th' acceptance 'o acceptin' ta victory or acceptin' a tie after ta match hae been declared forfeit. Indeed, I didst comment unto Master Evermeadow th' certain 'o th' officials seem nae ta hae been made cognizant 'o th' rulin'.
In th' matter, nae duel didst take place ast prescribed by ta rules 'o engagement, nor, I shall note, wast Master Starke present upon th' eve 'o th' eighteenth, ta las' eve upon which, by ta rules 'o engagement, th' trial by combat wast ta hae been met. It wouldst be right interestin' ta learn whether Master Starke hae made some arrangement privily wi' Master Evermeadow afore th' date. For, hae he nae done so, tis it mayest be pondered whether
Master Starke ast well ast Avery Shiv Blade both be in violation 'o th' rules 'o engagement, fore in neither didst appear upon th' eve.
It shouldst ast well be noted th' Master Evermeadow, unilaterally an' seemingly wi' out petition by either Avery Shiv Blade, Overlord, or by Master Drey' D'erest Sanchez Starke, Renegade Baron, didst take it upon himself ta declare an' extension 'o th' time where in th' combatants mus' meet.
Whyfore didst nae Master Starke choose ta seemin'ly an' unilaterally cancel ta challenge which wast set ta be met upon ta fourteenth? Master Starke hae stated th' cause 'o Avery's non appearance be unknown ta 'im an' hae indicated th' he wast nae approached by Master Evermeadow afore Master Evermeadow didst make 'is decison.
Tis Master Starke hae indeed nae made protest agin ta decision, certes, fore in th' 'e hast made it known 'e wishes nae ta face anna bu' Avery in combat. Perhaps Master Starke fears wh' decision th' Baronial Council may come to, shouldst th' matter be given unta them ta adjudicate?
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 25 May 2000 19:47:06 EDT
"And one other point, which I must bring up solely because Baron Medici-Giovanni is obviously too stupid to understand the common tongue:
"I admit, Kal, I do respect your logic, but I fear Valentine taking away the power of the Council and let him treat this place like a personal play pen and flexing his proverbial muscle."
He hasn't taken one iota of your power away. You continually fail to understand that the Council HAS NO POWER AT ALL until a forfeit HAS BEEN ruled"
And another point I must bring up because you're too stupid to understand the common tongue is that this is not Valentine's personal play ground. There is no proof he has received word from Avery, and is therefore giving Avery the right just because he feels like it.
You seem to fail to grasp the simple idea of duty. It is Val's duty, in the case of a forfeit, that the matter be turned over to the council. A forfeit is to be declared when the Universal Terms of Challenge have been passed, and because Avery has gone past the three week period without getting a word from Avery, it is Val's duty to declare it a forfeit. Just as it is the Council's duty to come to a just decision when we are called to task. In
the case the council doesn't make a just decision, I'd hope the community of DoS, even though they hold NO POWER over the council, would say whether or not the council is wrong, and, if some wish, DEMAND the council do something.
"A challenge is not considered complete until the results are posted in the Standings. And where not specifically addressed all challenges must be answered within one week of validation and dueled within two weeks of the response. Any challenge not responded to within one week, setting a time and place, shall be considered an abdication."
" 1. A Baron's Council shall be convened in the occurrence of a Baron or the Overlord retiring while a challenge is pending or in the case of a forfeit."
Unless Val has proof that Avery has contacted him or Drey, requesting an extension, Val has no reason to not call the council to forfeit. He is simply breaking the rules, and I will believe this until he proves that he received word.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
((OOC Note: I removed the date/time stamp from copying the post, since to my knowledge, there is no place the time is placed upon the letter, and thus, is considered OOC. I also removed the Dueling Forum clause at the end because I wasn't sure if that, too, was OOC.))
Date: 25 May 2000 19:47:06 EDT
"And one other point, which I must bring up solely because Baron Medici-Giovanni is obviously too stupid to understand the common tongue:
"I admit, Kal, I do respect your logic, but I fear Valentine taking away the power of the Council and let him treat this place like a personal play pen and flexing his proverbial muscle."
He hasn't taken one iota of your power away. You continually fail to understand that the Council HAS NO POWER AT ALL until a forfeit HAS BEEN ruled"
And another point I must bring up because you're too stupid to understand the common tongue is that this is not Valentine's personal play ground. There is no proof he has received word from Avery, and is therefore giving Avery the right just because he feels like it.
You seem to fail to grasp the simple idea of duty. It is Val's duty, in the case of a forfeit, that the matter be turned over to the council. A forfeit is to be declared when the Universal Terms of Challenge have been passed, and because Avery has gone past the three week period without getting a word from Avery, it is Val's duty to declare it a forfeit. Just as it is the Council's duty to come to a just decision when we are called to task. In
the case the council doesn't make a just decision, I'd hope the community of DoS, even though they hold NO POWER over the council, would say whether or not the council is wrong, and, if some wish, DEMAND the council do something.
"A challenge is not considered complete until the results are posted in the Standings. And where not specifically addressed all challenges must be answered within one week of validation and dueled within two weeks of the response. Any challenge not responded to within one week, setting a time and place, shall be considered an abdication."
" 1. A Baron's Council shall be convened in the occurrence of a Baron or the Overlord retiring while a challenge is pending or in the case of a forfeit."
Unless Val has proof that Avery has contacted him or Drey, requesting an extension, Val has no reason to not call the council to forfeit. He is simply breaking the rules, and I will believe this until he proves that he received word.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
((OOC Note: I removed the date/time stamp from copying the post, since to my knowledge, there is no place the time is placed upon the letter, and thus, is considered OOC. I also removed the Dueling Forum clause at the end because I wasn't sure if that, too, was OOC.))
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sartanz@aol.com (Sartan Z)
Date: 25 May 2000 21:36:31 EDT
Before I make any further posts, I have one question, for Drey, if he'd be kind enough to answer: Were you involved in the granting of the extension, or were you informed of it after it was already given to the Overlord?
Sartan
Date: 25 May 2000 21:36:31 EDT
Before I make any further posts, I have one question, for Drey, if he'd be kind enough to answer: Were you involved in the granting of the extension, or were you informed of it after it was already given to the Overlord?
Sartan
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: rlupton@aol.com (RLupton)
Date: 25 May 2000 22:16:14 EDT
The ruling of a forfeiture by the Supervisor is a technicality. The Supervisor is ruled by the rules. The rules state when a challenge to the Overlord is forfeit. Valentine has disobeyed the rules. That is the heart of the problem, in my eyes. We have rules disregarded. There are no "extensions" in the rules this sport holds. All else, be it power taken from the Council or otherwise, is insignificant.
Rules have been ignored. Do not let your focus waver from this due to injured ego.
~ Lupton
Date: 25 May 2000 22:16:14 EDT
The ruling of a forfeiture by the Supervisor is a technicality. The Supervisor is ruled by the rules. The rules state when a challenge to the Overlord is forfeit. Valentine has disobeyed the rules. That is the heart of the problem, in my eyes. We have rules disregarded. There are no "extensions" in the rules this sport holds. All else, be it power taken from the Council or otherwise, is insignificant.
Rules have been ignored. Do not let your focus waver from this due to injured ego.
~ Lupton
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: dreystarke@aol.com (DreyStarke)
Date: 25 May 2000 22:19:15 EDT
>Were you involved in the granting of the extension, or were you informed of
>it after it was already given to the Overlord?
>
The extension was granted without my involvement. Then Val consulted me with another extention, which I agreed to.
- Drey D'erest Sanchez SIZE=5 PTSIZE=16>Starke
Date: 25 May 2000 22:19:15 EDT
>Were you involved in the granting of the extension, or were you informed of
>it after it was already given to the Overlord?
>
The extension was granted without my involvement. Then Val consulted me with another extention, which I agreed to.
- Drey D'erest Sanchez SIZE=5 PTSIZE=16>Starke
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 25 May 2000 23:40:47 EDT
"I have shown everything I have written to the council to the community. I have detested in protesting this any further because, though I disagree with Val not declaring a forfiet, the council does not have any rights in this matter until it is declared in forfiet. I still however, do not agree with the extension he has granted."
I appreciate your understanding of my argument, Lord Ganderfald.
"Since Val seemed to have ignore that last time I ask this, I'll ask it again: How much longer are you giving Avery before you declare him in forfiet of this match? The Warlord tournament is a weekend away and this matter should be resolved by the time a winner is declared."
I now must shift gears somewhat, Lord Evermeadow, and state that this is a fair question, and one which must be answered.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 25 May 2000 23:40:47 EDT
"I have shown everything I have written to the council to the community. I have detested in protesting this any further because, though I disagree with Val not declaring a forfiet, the council does not have any rights in this matter until it is declared in forfiet. I still however, do not agree with the extension he has granted."
I appreciate your understanding of my argument, Lord Ganderfald.
"Since Val seemed to have ignore that last time I ask this, I'll ask it again: How much longer are you giving Avery before you declare him in forfiet of this match? The Warlord tournament is a weekend away and this matter should be resolved by the time a winner is declared."
I now must shift gears somewhat, Lord Evermeadow, and state that this is a fair question, and one which must be answered.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 25 May 2000 23:42:23 EDT
"The ruling of a forfeiture by the Supervisor is a technicality. The Supervisor is ruled by the rules. The rules state when a challenge to the Overlord is forfeit. Valentine has disobeyed the rules. That is the heart of the problem, in my eyes. We have rules disregarded. There are no "extensions" in the rules this sport holds. All else, be it power taken from the
Council or otherwise, is insignificant."
You raise valid points, Lord Dracoern. Indeed, had this been the sole argument, rather than complaints of the rights of a currently non-existent entity being trampled, the community would have been spared my prose...
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 25 May 2000 23:42:23 EDT
"The ruling of a forfeiture by the Supervisor is a technicality. The Supervisor is ruled by the rules. The rules state when a challenge to the Overlord is forfeit. Valentine has disobeyed the rules. That is the heart of the problem, in my eyes. We have rules disregarded. There are no "extensions" in the rules this sport holds. All else, be it power taken from the
Council or otherwise, is insignificant."
You raise valid points, Lord Dracoern. Indeed, had this been the sole argument, rather than complaints of the rights of a currently non-existent entity being trampled, the community would have been spared my prose...
Regards,
Ian Rex.