Concerning the Warlord Rankings

[DoS Archive]

From: rdigirvin@aol.com (RDI Girvin)
Date: 12 Mar 1998 19:55:14 EST

Greetings and salutations,

Several errors in the Warlord rankings got me investigating to ensure the accuracy of these records as this is the first full cycle I have been responsible for this particular portion of our collective community. In conferring with the guidelines used to govern these Ranks and the guidance of past custodians of the calculations of these Ranks, as well as the Standings Keeper for the entire Duel of Swords, I have corrected all the current Warlord
Ranks. Listed below are some of the Reasons that the Warlord Ranks are now completely different from where they were.

1) The Ranks were never zeroed out for the end of the Warlord cycle. The ranks of 2/12 now reflect this change. It should be known that all Warlords begin each cycle tied for 1st place. This will always be a part of the Ranks unless the guidelines and/or rules are altered to reflect such a change.

2) There were several errors in reporting Names correctly to the Standings Keeper and therefore they were passed on to me incorrectly. These should be now corrected and the ranks have been figured accordingly.

3) Some Warlords were inexplicably missing from the current ranks despite the fact that they were Warlords. This should be corrected now.

4) Again, certain duels from 2/26 failed to fall into the qualifying duels. This again should be corrected.

If there are further errors, please direct such letters to RDI Golden and RDI Girvin so that we may confer, investigate and correct as quickly as possible. The more detail provided us the faster we will be able to find the answers to the question.

Thank you.

Honor and skill to you all.

Brian Girvin

[DoS Archive]

From: xyclone@aol.com (Xyclone)
Date: 13 Mar 1998 04:33:20 EST

Methanks ta ya Brian fer keepin everthin up ta date
an may th Pride be as gran' as its capable of...

Xy