From: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 02 Jun 2000 18:03:25 EDT
Actually, I didn't vote during this matter. I will admit that I would have voted that Avery be stripped of his title, but I refrained from voting unless it was a tie-breaker, as I feel I should have done as the Overseer of this matter.
But yes, I do lose faith in an Overlord who misses a challenge match and doesn't give anyone word. I cannot in good conscience lay my sword down for a man whom I don't have faith in.
I do realize that something bad could have happened to Avery, however, he did have time to have a letter sent, which I feel he should have at least had the courtesy to include why he didn't show up.
And then he gets what I feel is special treatment from Valentine. So no, I don't have faith in Avery as an Overlord.
Just decided to toss in my two cents since I was brought up with "selling Avery out." Oh well, just saying my perspective.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Open Call
-
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: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:25:29 EDT
Baron Galin,
Thee dinna e'en hae ta courage ta set yuirself ast renegade. Wh' meant yuir pledge 'o loyalty unta Avery, sir, bu' a means ta shield yuirself behind 'is staff.
Loyalty cast aside so cavalierly, sir, speaks 'o yuir true 'eart. Fie on thee, Baron, for wi' such ast thine waverin' pledge 'o loyalty, Avery hae nae need ta search fer ta snakes slitherin' toward 'im.
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:25:29 EDT
Baron Galin,
Thee dinna e'en hae ta courage ta set yuirself ast renegade. Wh' meant yuir pledge 'o loyalty unta Avery, sir, bu' a means ta shield yuirself behind 'is staff.
Loyalty cast aside so cavalierly, sir, speaks 'o yuir true 'eart. Fie on thee, Baron, for wi' such ast thine waverin' pledge 'o loyalty, Avery hae nae need ta search fer ta snakes slitherin' toward 'im.
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:30:35 EDT
Baron Dragonsblade,
Perhaps thee shouldst peruse mine missive more carefully, sir. Indeed, I didst query Valentine Evermeadow. Ye, sir, apparently kept thine silence, for ta mine knowledge, only ta Baron Gandarfald sent anna inquiry atall unto Master Evermeadow.
Tis plain th' a pledge 'o loyalty given by thee hast nae meanin', sir, an' yuir words 'o protest ring 'ollow, Baron.
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:30:35 EDT
Baron Dragonsblade,
Perhaps thee shouldst peruse mine missive more carefully, sir. Indeed, I didst query Valentine Evermeadow. Ye, sir, apparently kept thine silence, for ta mine knowledge, only ta Baron Gandarfald sent anna inquiry atall unto Master Evermeadow.
Tis plain th' a pledge 'o loyalty given by thee hast nae meanin', sir, an' yuir words 'o protest ring 'ollow, Baron.
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:36:15 EDT
Baron Var Medici Giovanni,
I shall remind thee, sir, that thee hae bu' ta word 'o th' Renegade Master Starke, ta word 'o th one wh' didst seek ta unseat Avery, th' anna missive atall wast sent.
Indeed, Baron, thou art relyin' 'pon ta word 'o a man wh' hae proven 'imself false time an' time agin.
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:36:15 EDT
Baron Var Medici Giovanni,
I shall remind thee, sir, that thee hae bu' ta word 'o th' Renegade Master Starke, ta word 'o th one wh' didst seek ta unseat Avery, th' anna missive atall wast sent.
Indeed, Baron, thou art relyin' 'pon ta word 'o a man wh' hae proven 'imself false time an' time agin.
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: oortael5@aol.com (OorTael5)
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:37:39 EDT
Lady Starfare,
Ye claim that I declared loyalty to hide behind Avery's staff, eh? Odd, that thought, seeing as how I am directly opposed to intercession and would never allow the Overlord to step in for me in a challenge. I did not declare loyalty to Avery for protection. I declared loyalty because I believed that Avery was, and is, a good man. Howver, I will not break the rules for any person, no matter if they are friend or not, because I would lose respect for
myself. In no way did I betray Avery by my vote, which I believed was following the spirit of the rules and was the just thing to do, no matter what alignment ye would hold.
-Galin
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:37:39 EDT
Lady Starfare,
Ye claim that I declared loyalty to hide behind Avery's staff, eh? Odd, that thought, seeing as how I am directly opposed to intercession and would never allow the Overlord to step in for me in a challenge. I did not declare loyalty to Avery for protection. I declared loyalty because I believed that Avery was, and is, a good man. Howver, I will not break the rules for any person, no matter if they are friend or not, because I would lose respect for
myself. In no way did I betray Avery by my vote, which I believed was following the spirit of the rules and was the just thing to do, no matter what alignment ye would hold.
-Galin
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:44:37 EDT
M'lord Ian,
Then shall it be presumed th' ta Council 'o Barons be dull witted ignorant louts wh' mayest be lead by ta nose? Perhaps some few spoke wi' thee, Ian, bu' certes thee canna hae missed noticin' 'ow swiftly ta Council moved ta strip ta title from Avery.
It wouldst appear nae only be they dullards, bu' ast well cowards nae ta stand wi' th' man wh' they hae pledged themselves unta. Such be ta measure 'o a man, Ian. His word ta 'is leige or 'is own fears 'o perhaps facin' down anna wh' wouldst pillory 'im for 'oldin' ta 'is word.
Regards,
Jonalyn, Regina
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:44:37 EDT
M'lord Ian,
Then shall it be presumed th' ta Council 'o Barons be dull witted ignorant louts wh' mayest be lead by ta nose? Perhaps some few spoke wi' thee, Ian, bu' certes thee canna hae missed noticin' 'ow swiftly ta Council moved ta strip ta title from Avery.
It wouldst appear nae only be they dullards, bu' ast well cowards nae ta stand wi' th' man wh' they hae pledged themselves unta. Such be ta measure 'o a man, Ian. His word ta 'is leige or 'is own fears 'o perhaps facin' down anna wh' wouldst pillory 'im for 'oldin' ta 'is word.
Regards,
Jonalyn, Regina
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:55:04 EDT
Baron Galin,
Sir, then thee hae mine pity for th' shallowness 'o yuir 'eart an' soul ast well ast for ta act wi' which thee didst cast aside anna semblance 'o 'onor an' ta falsity 'o yuir claim ta loyalty ta Avery.
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 02 Jun 2000 19:55:04 EDT
Baron Galin,
Sir, then thee hae mine pity for th' shallowness 'o yuir 'eart an' soul ast well ast for ta act wi' which thee didst cast aside anna semblance 'o 'onor an' ta falsity 'o yuir claim ta loyalty ta Avery.
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 02 Jun 2000 20:57:43 EDT
"I cannot in good conscience lay my sword down for a man whom I don't have faith in."
"So no, I don't have faith in Avery as an Overlord."
I do wonder, Baron, exactly how you'd feel if it turned out that the former Overlord were imprisoned, gravely wounded, otherwise incapacitated - or, God forbid, dead.
Frankly, if there's shame to be had here, it's that the lot of you sat around here arguing about what to do about his TITLE, without even expending any effort to find out what happened to the MAN. While I find that to be irksome in regard to the Barons who still professed loyalty, from you, Baron Medici-Giovanni, it is cold, vile betrayal of the very worst sort.
Think about it, Baron. He didn't show up, and instead of trying to find out why, you say you've lost faith in him. If something has happened to him, I submit that any future Overlord should have absolutely zero faith in you. Period.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 02 Jun 2000 20:57:43 EDT
"I cannot in good conscience lay my sword down for a man whom I don't have faith in."
"So no, I don't have faith in Avery as an Overlord."
I do wonder, Baron, exactly how you'd feel if it turned out that the former Overlord were imprisoned, gravely wounded, otherwise incapacitated - or, God forbid, dead.
Frankly, if there's shame to be had here, it's that the lot of you sat around here arguing about what to do about his TITLE, without even expending any effort to find out what happened to the MAN. While I find that to be irksome in regard to the Barons who still professed loyalty, from you, Baron Medici-Giovanni, it is cold, vile betrayal of the very worst sort.
Think about it, Baron. He didn't show up, and instead of trying to find out why, you say you've lost faith in him. If something has happened to him, I submit that any future Overlord should have absolutely zero faith in you. Period.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 02 Jun 2000 21:03:55 EDT
"Thee dinna e'en hae ta courage ta set yuirself ast renegade."
Lady Starfare, as you will see in my response to Baron Medici-Giovanni, if this is your concept of "courage," then perhaps we should re-evaluate our opinion of one another. As far as I'm concerned, Var has shown himself - in the very act of reversing his alignment without regard to the Overlord's potential fate as a man - to be a backstabbing opportunist. One need not take advantage of the opportunity one creates to be an opportunist; one can
merely be over-impressed with their ability to do so.
After all, since when is arguing over the rules of this supposed sport more important than someone's life?
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 02 Jun 2000 21:03:55 EDT
"Thee dinna e'en hae ta courage ta set yuirself ast renegade."
Lady Starfare, as you will see in my response to Baron Medici-Giovanni, if this is your concept of "courage," then perhaps we should re-evaluate our opinion of one another. As far as I'm concerned, Var has shown himself - in the very act of reversing his alignment without regard to the Overlord's potential fate as a man - to be a backstabbing opportunist. One need not take advantage of the opportunity one creates to be an opportunist; one can
merely be over-impressed with their ability to do so.
After all, since when is arguing over the rules of this supposed sport more important than someone's life?
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sidarthax@aol.com (Sidartha x)
Date: 03 Jun 2000 00:27:42 EDT
Jonalyn~
I'm curious as to what being a eledged bimbo has anything to do with this subject, unless you are enough of a pervert to think that there's some sexual connotation in this.
~Sidartha Elgarette
Date: 03 Jun 2000 00:27:42 EDT
Jonalyn~
I'm curious as to what being a eledged bimbo has anything to do with this subject, unless you are enough of a pervert to think that there's some sexual connotation in this.
~Sidartha Elgarette
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: sidarthax@aol.com (Sidartha x)
Date: 03 Jun 2000 00:30:19 EDT
"Then shall it be presumed th' ta Council 'o Barons be dull witted ignorant louts wh' mayest be lead by ta nose? Perhaps some few spoke wi' thee, Ian, bu' certes thee canna hae missed noticin' 'ow swiftly ta Council moved ta strip ta title from Avery."
Wasn't it you who called Valentine a tyrant for not allowing them to do just what you now decry? How very fickle of you.
~Sidartha Elgarette
Date: 03 Jun 2000 00:30:19 EDT
"Then shall it be presumed th' ta Council 'o Barons be dull witted ignorant louts wh' mayest be lead by ta nose? Perhaps some few spoke wi' thee, Ian, bu' certes thee canna hae missed noticin' 'ow swiftly ta Council moved ta strip ta title from Avery."
Wasn't it you who called Valentine a tyrant for not allowing them to do just what you now decry? How very fickle of you.
~Sidartha Elgarette
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 03 Jun 2000 02:49:37 EDT
Sidie Poo,
Perhaps thee shall take yuir own advice an' peruse mine missive 'pon th' subject, though knowin' yuir penchant fer ta ludicrous, Ah expect th' e'en shouldst thee do so, thee shall continue in yuir ignorance ast blithely ast ye always hae. When thee canst manage some intelligent comment, Sidie Poo, res' assured, I shall apprise thee, though in all likely 'ood, an' takin' inta consideration th' intelligence ist nae yuir long suit, tis likely it shall
be a wee long while.
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 03 Jun 2000 02:49:37 EDT
Sidie Poo,
Perhaps thee shall take yuir own advice an' peruse mine missive 'pon th' subject, though knowin' yuir penchant fer ta ludicrous, Ah expect th' e'en shouldst thee do so, thee shall continue in yuir ignorance ast blithely ast ye always hae. When thee canst manage some intelligent comment, Sidie Poo, res' assured, I shall apprise thee, though in all likely 'ood, an' takin' inta consideration th' intelligence ist nae yuir long suit, tis likely it shall
be a wee long while.
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 03 Jun 2000 03:06:17 EDT
Ian,
Quite simply, if'n a man hast nae intention 'o standin' by 'is pledge 'o loyalty, tis bu' a cowardly act ta claim loyalty. Certes it canna hae escaped thine notice th' nae a single one wh' pledged their loyalty unta Avery, and Ah repeat, unta Avery, hae ta courage ta stand by their pledge. Ta paucity 'o 'onor an' ta dearth 'o courage displayed by ta so called Loyals 'o Avery Shiv Blade shows all ta be bu' backstabbin' opportunists.
Further, Ian, ast far ast Ah am concerned, ALL ta loyals choose ta disregard ta potential fate 'o th' man, Avery, an' didst so wi' utter callousness an' certes wi' nae true interest in ta fate 'o th' man.
ALL ta loyals placed a bi' 'o parchment, a parchment mind thee th' dost permit ta Council a vast amount 'o latitude an which nae sets down anna law wi' respect ta their decision, afore th' consideration 'o th' man they hae pledged blade an' loyalty ta.
Ah believe tis nae need fer either 'o us ta re-evaluate our opinions 'o th' other, Ian, for certes after th' eve, thee well know mine.
Cordially,
Jonalyn, Regina.
Date: 03 Jun 2000 03:06:17 EDT
Ian,
Quite simply, if'n a man hast nae intention 'o standin' by 'is pledge 'o loyalty, tis bu' a cowardly act ta claim loyalty. Certes it canna hae escaped thine notice th' nae a single one wh' pledged their loyalty unta Avery, and Ah repeat, unta Avery, hae ta courage ta stand by their pledge. Ta paucity 'o 'onor an' ta dearth 'o courage displayed by ta so called Loyals 'o Avery Shiv Blade shows all ta be bu' backstabbin' opportunists.
Further, Ian, ast far ast Ah am concerned, ALL ta loyals choose ta disregard ta potential fate 'o th' man, Avery, an' didst so wi' utter callousness an' certes wi' nae true interest in ta fate 'o th' man.
ALL ta loyals placed a bi' 'o parchment, a parchment mind thee th' dost permit ta Council a vast amount 'o latitude an which nae sets down anna law wi' respect ta their decision, afore th' consideration 'o th' man they hae pledged blade an' loyalty ta.
Ah believe tis nae need fer either 'o us ta re-evaluate our opinions 'o th' other, Ian, for certes after th' eve, thee well know mine.
Cordially,
Jonalyn, Regina.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: kalamere@aol.com (Kalamere)
Date: 03 Jun 2000 08:17:51 EDT
Var,
How is it you can lose faith in a man based on the actions of a third party? I fail to understand how Val granting "special treatment" to Avery says *anything* about Avery's character rather than Val's. Where is your logic here?
We do not know that Avery requested this extension nor do we know whether he might have refused or otherwise attempted to make up for it, had he returned. How shallow of you to turn the scenario around against Avery and claim to have lost faith in him.
I must ask, if a man Noelle knew only casually, began to send her exquisite gifts, would you blame his attentions on her? Would you lose faith and divorce her?
~Kal...
Date: 03 Jun 2000 08:17:51 EDT
Var,
How is it you can lose faith in a man based on the actions of a third party? I fail to understand how Val granting "special treatment" to Avery says *anything* about Avery's character rather than Val's. Where is your logic here?
We do not know that Avery requested this extension nor do we know whether he might have refused or otherwise attempted to make up for it, had he returned. How shallow of you to turn the scenario around against Avery and claim to have lost faith in him.
I must ask, if a man Noelle knew only casually, began to send her exquisite gifts, would you blame his attentions on her? Would you lose faith and divorce her?
~Kal...
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: kalamere@aol.com (Kalamere)
Date: 03 Jun 2000 09:41:20 EDT
Loyalty...
A Baron may declare loyalty to an Overlord, yet is never asked to declare himself (or herself) to the sport nor the community.
In comparison, a Knight declares himself loyal to King AND Country, yet it is too presumptuous to say these duties always lie together. It is not unheard of to be met with conflict between the pledge to King and that to Country. Perhaps more commonly (when there is conflict), a knight must choose between the two, but on occasion I believe that both pledges may still be upheld.
The more common situation would be a direct conflict between sovereign and state. The Knight may choose to support his King without regard to what effect the King's actions might have upon the lands. A tyrant King will still have loyal Knights. On the other hand, the Knight may choose his pledge to country to take priority, declaring himself Renegade to the tyrant.
But what if the King vanishes or is taken prisoner in time of war? Duty to the King demands that some attempt at recovery be made.. yet, duty to Country demands that some form of rulership be established in absence of the sovereign. Thus an indirect conflict.
I do not claim this to be the State of DoS, yet the case is not wholly dissimilar. Avery is gone. Yes, all efforts need be made to discover his whereabouts and to insure his well being. Yet, I would propose that those Barons loyal to the community and the sport, have a perceived duty to see a leader put on the proverbial throne.
I will also not claim that they acted in the manner best suited to accomplish their task. I would think a better way to solve this would have been for them to select a regent to defend the Overlordship and hold the mantle until Avery's fate is discovered. I cannot say that the Loyal's are shallow for failing to act in this way, however.
Perhaps more accurately, I believe them under educated and over impressionable. Some of them suffer ignorance as a general matter of course, but more specifically I believe them unaware of the vast power the council holds. Futhermore, Var led the council as senior baron and put a list of options before them. Judging from his missives thus far and the options drawn out, the senior baron appears to have an agenda of his own. This misguidence, more
than anything, is likely the larger cause for the perceived violation of loyalty.
To summarize the above, I do not believe the loyal barons to have purposefully violated their vow to Avery. Moreover, it's my belief that they wished to do right by the community. Ignorance, rather than cowardice, is more what I think to be the cause.
~Kalamere Ar'Din...
Date: 03 Jun 2000 09:41:20 EDT
Loyalty...
A Baron may declare loyalty to an Overlord, yet is never asked to declare himself (or herself) to the sport nor the community.
In comparison, a Knight declares himself loyal to King AND Country, yet it is too presumptuous to say these duties always lie together. It is not unheard of to be met with conflict between the pledge to King and that to Country. Perhaps more commonly (when there is conflict), a knight must choose between the two, but on occasion I believe that both pledges may still be upheld.
The more common situation would be a direct conflict between sovereign and state. The Knight may choose to support his King without regard to what effect the King's actions might have upon the lands. A tyrant King will still have loyal Knights. On the other hand, the Knight may choose his pledge to country to take priority, declaring himself Renegade to the tyrant.
But what if the King vanishes or is taken prisoner in time of war? Duty to the King demands that some attempt at recovery be made.. yet, duty to Country demands that some form of rulership be established in absence of the sovereign. Thus an indirect conflict.
I do not claim this to be the State of DoS, yet the case is not wholly dissimilar. Avery is gone. Yes, all efforts need be made to discover his whereabouts and to insure his well being. Yet, I would propose that those Barons loyal to the community and the sport, have a perceived duty to see a leader put on the proverbial throne.
I will also not claim that they acted in the manner best suited to accomplish their task. I would think a better way to solve this would have been for them to select a regent to defend the Overlordship and hold the mantle until Avery's fate is discovered. I cannot say that the Loyal's are shallow for failing to act in this way, however.
Perhaps more accurately, I believe them under educated and over impressionable. Some of them suffer ignorance as a general matter of course, but more specifically I believe them unaware of the vast power the council holds. Futhermore, Var led the council as senior baron and put a list of options before them. Judging from his missives thus far and the options drawn out, the senior baron appears to have an agenda of his own. This misguidence, more
than anything, is likely the larger cause for the perceived violation of loyalty.
To summarize the above, I do not believe the loyal barons to have purposefully violated their vow to Avery. Moreover, it's my belief that they wished to do right by the community. Ignorance, rather than cowardice, is more what I think to be the cause.
~Kalamere Ar'Din...