From: jakvaltrds@aol.com (Jakvaltrds)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 01:17:52 EDT
Duc de Clermont
I qoute so as not to err in my own interpretation of thy words.
"Dalamar's post made his personal stance clear, and it was my guess that the Loyal Barons backed him and the Renegade Barons opposed him. That simple"
I ,for one, have yet to read anything on these boards concerning Dalamar's stance on this issue. I have been scarcely available this past few weeks tending the business of the Duely Noted. In fact, I was hardly able to respond to Laird Dragonsblade's challenge.
I ha'e a mind of my own, and ha'e been known to speak it when I find a difference I cannae tolerate. Be it with Dalamar, or the general populace. I ha'e been known as well to speak before I ha'e all the facts. This time sir, I do know what I speak and why. I did not hear a single complaint when Rand * Darkness2 )failed to arrive at his defense of the ring. I did not see one iota of concern from the members of your admittedly, yet to be formed house,
nor did one complain at the outcome of the councils decision. At the time, I believe there were only 9 rings and 7 of those were loyal to the Overlord. Me thinks there is something afoot here and you can mark my words when I say that I will stand loyal in the Overlords defense when aspersions are cast that he nodded his wishes and we ( the loyals) mindlessly obeyed. You know nothing of my reasoning,nor that of the others who voted in the way they
did. If you, as a triumverate of the House Rising, are expecting me to believe, you were not privy to the goings on within the council, you are sadly mistaken. I ha'e been here long enough to know your associates. I ha'e had dealings with a few of them myself. I will sit back and continue to observe the goings on here in Rhy Din. I do not always voice my opinion on matters here abouts, as I know them to work themselves out in time. This however is
one I feel the need to respond to. This publicly voiced discussion, if left one sided. will do nothing more the promote a dislike for the those who acted according to the rules of the community
The challenge was made, the warlord missed the match , for whatever reason, and he now will deal with the error. It may make him bitter, it may make him stronger, but I can assure you of one thing, he will not make the same mistake again.
I do not see Clutch venting his frustrations on this board, I do however see a forum for those with openly spoken goals to speak out without reprisal.
My apologies for the long winded rant.
With repsect to all concerned
Seamus Mac Donnaugh
Baron of the First RIng
Final Decision on The Twelfth Ring
-
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: xvevan@aol.com (XvEvan)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 05:16:53 EDT
A few of you out there:
There is a reason why the Baron's don't have to go public. A simple reason, too. DoS pressures people (some) into making snap decisions and other thoughts such as that. Not well planned and thought about. And when the Baron's are deciding someone's fate, maybe even yours, would you want the Baron's to rush into a decision and not it much thought?
Next, I must say. All of you out there who are complaining about the Loyal/Rens. Don't. I first voted Clutch to be stripped of his peers myself. But, after looking closer, I went to a withdraw from voting. Then, days away from the deadline, I found an interesting piece and sent it off. That tied the voting. I say, it went rather well and clicked. Dal made a good decision when he had to break it so. That is all just part of DoS. Every one just
remember what Rhydin time is. (EDT)
-Evan Rush Rynth
Date: 08 Sep 1998 05:16:53 EDT
A few of you out there:
There is a reason why the Baron's don't have to go public. A simple reason, too. DoS pressures people (some) into making snap decisions and other thoughts such as that. Not well planned and thought about. And when the Baron's are deciding someone's fate, maybe even yours, would you want the Baron's to rush into a decision and not it much thought?
Next, I must say. All of you out there who are complaining about the Loyal/Rens. Don't. I first voted Clutch to be stripped of his peers myself. But, after looking closer, I went to a withdraw from voting. Then, days away from the deadline, I found an interesting piece and sent it off. That tied the voting. I say, it went rather well and clicked. Dal made a good decision when he had to break it so. That is all just part of DoS. Every one just
remember what Rhydin time is. (EDT)
-Evan Rush Rynth
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: kalamere@aol.com (Kalamere)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 10:35:43 EDT
I would address this to Seamus and Evan, but in truth perhaps these comments should be directed to the whole of the Council.
Firstly, to Seamus; Perhaps Percival does have an inside track to how each of the Barons voted, that does not make the issue any less valid, however. There are several others without such connections that would also like to see how the decision was made. I've yet to see an accusation from the White Duke saying that the voting was mindless, or that Dalamar directed the loyals how to vote. Perhaps you have grown overly sensitive to such accusations
and now see them where only the slightest of hints exist.
It might also be interesting to note that, while the few Barons who have shared their views in this thread claim it was not split down the line between loyal and renegade, the votes that have been shared thus far, did fall along those lines.
The greater point of this missive is not about your commentary, however. Rather, I would look to the reasons for making the council proceedings a public matter...
~ The first half dozen, or so, times that a Barons council was assembled, those proceedings were made available on this message board. Since most discussion among the Barons is conducted by means of written letter, it takes little effort to share those writings with the public. Early Barons were aware of that and showed the courtesy to the public. It is only within, perhaps the last year to year and a half, that the council has become secretive.
~ In essence, the council is a Judicial body. As a rule, in most civilizations that have such judicial bodies, the proceedings are open to the public. The reason for this is two fold.
(a) Even though most who hold judicial power are not publicly elected, they do hold responsibility to the public and a duty to do right by the standards and traditions of the realm. The same can be said for the Baron's council. They gain a place on the council through force of arms rather than public election, but that by no way lessens their responsibility to the Duel of Swords.
(b) The public can learn from such a public display. Seamus mentioned that this is something Clutch will not do again. That is well and good, but none but Clutch have learned anything from these proceedings. As a matter of fact, it would now appear that those who do not show on time for a challenge match are one Baron away from being able to fight the match again without repercussion for their tardiness.
The duty of the council is not merely to asses the merits of the case before them, but also to educate the public. That Clutch will never make this mistake is one thing, but would it not be better to show all of DoS why a given mistake should not be made? Let those who would challenge in the future know what will be expected of them.
~ The original intent of those who created the council, was that it be held in public. The founders debated whether or not they should have the council convene in the GreatHall to discuss it openly in a forum where duelists could attend and hear the discussion for themselves. Finally concluding that the differing schedules among the Barons would make that impossible, it was decided that decision by missive would have to be allowed. Had they known
that the Barons would eventually take it upon themselves to move the proceedings into secrecy, there would likely be no council today.
Original intent, past practice and practical duty. All of these things demand that the council proceedings be shared with the public. It is with sadness and a bit of shame that I have watched the last couple councils act in secret.
~Kalamere Ar'Din...
Date: 08 Sep 1998 10:35:43 EDT
I would address this to Seamus and Evan, but in truth perhaps these comments should be directed to the whole of the Council.
Firstly, to Seamus; Perhaps Percival does have an inside track to how each of the Barons voted, that does not make the issue any less valid, however. There are several others without such connections that would also like to see how the decision was made. I've yet to see an accusation from the White Duke saying that the voting was mindless, or that Dalamar directed the loyals how to vote. Perhaps you have grown overly sensitive to such accusations
and now see them where only the slightest of hints exist.
It might also be interesting to note that, while the few Barons who have shared their views in this thread claim it was not split down the line between loyal and renegade, the votes that have been shared thus far, did fall along those lines.
The greater point of this missive is not about your commentary, however. Rather, I would look to the reasons for making the council proceedings a public matter...
~ The first half dozen, or so, times that a Barons council was assembled, those proceedings were made available on this message board. Since most discussion among the Barons is conducted by means of written letter, it takes little effort to share those writings with the public. Early Barons were aware of that and showed the courtesy to the public. It is only within, perhaps the last year to year and a half, that the council has become secretive.
~ In essence, the council is a Judicial body. As a rule, in most civilizations that have such judicial bodies, the proceedings are open to the public. The reason for this is two fold.
(a) Even though most who hold judicial power are not publicly elected, they do hold responsibility to the public and a duty to do right by the standards and traditions of the realm. The same can be said for the Baron's council. They gain a place on the council through force of arms rather than public election, but that by no way lessens their responsibility to the Duel of Swords.
(b) The public can learn from such a public display. Seamus mentioned that this is something Clutch will not do again. That is well and good, but none but Clutch have learned anything from these proceedings. As a matter of fact, it would now appear that those who do not show on time for a challenge match are one Baron away from being able to fight the match again without repercussion for their tardiness.
The duty of the council is not merely to asses the merits of the case before them, but also to educate the public. That Clutch will never make this mistake is one thing, but would it not be better to show all of DoS why a given mistake should not be made? Let those who would challenge in the future know what will be expected of them.
~ The original intent of those who created the council, was that it be held in public. The founders debated whether or not they should have the council convene in the GreatHall to discuss it openly in a forum where duelists could attend and hear the discussion for themselves. Finally concluding that the differing schedules among the Barons would make that impossible, it was decided that decision by missive would have to be allowed. Had they known
that the Barons would eventually take it upon themselves to move the proceedings into secrecy, there would likely be no council today.
Original intent, past practice and practical duty. All of these things demand that the council proceedings be shared with the public. It is with sadness and a bit of shame that I have watched the last couple councils act in secret.
~Kalamere Ar'Din...
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jakvaltrds@aol.com (Jakvaltrds)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 13:26:33 EDT
Frien' Kalamere
As you say, perhaps I have grown sensitive in my old age but perhaps not!
You state, and I qoute, "I've yet to see an accusation from the White Duke saying that the voting was mindless, or that Dalamar directed the loyals how to vote. Perhaps you have grown overly sensitive to such accusations and now see them where only the slightest of hints exist."
If you read the following lines from the message put upon these boards and directed to me, mayhaps you will see where I find the *hint*
<< Just to clarify something that was mentioned by one or two when I made my original post: I was by no means lauding or castigating one faction or the other for their vote, nor any individuals. Dalamar's post made his personal stance clear, and it was my guess that the Loyal Barons backed him and the Renegade Barons opposed him>>
Perhaps the mindless inference isn't there and was merely my own addition due to a bit o' ire but you see with yer own eyes that the good duke infers we loyals backed the overlord and the others opposed him. Mayhaps I have read more into this than I should but I no more made a decision according to the Overlords wishes than did each Renegade oppose strictly for the sake of opposition.
You are correct in saying the point should be adressed to the council as a whole.
The DoS should be made aware of these proceedings without a doubt. Perhaps then, the community would see the workings and know why each voted as he or she did.
I for one, have only held this title for bit over a quarter now and am not the senior member of the council. In my addmited ignorance I had no idea these decisions were carried on in the public eye, in the past. When I recieved the missive some months ago in the Rand ,Tom, Gnort duel, no mention was made concerning the public observation of the goings on. I personally would be happy to debate the issues brought to the council on these boards or
merely post the events as they unfold.
Seamus
Date: 08 Sep 1998 13:26:33 EDT
Frien' Kalamere
As you say, perhaps I have grown sensitive in my old age but perhaps not!
You state, and I qoute, "I've yet to see an accusation from the White Duke saying that the voting was mindless, or that Dalamar directed the loyals how to vote. Perhaps you have grown overly sensitive to such accusations and now see them where only the slightest of hints exist."
If you read the following lines from the message put upon these boards and directed to me, mayhaps you will see where I find the *hint*
<< Just to clarify something that was mentioned by one or two when I made my original post: I was by no means lauding or castigating one faction or the other for their vote, nor any individuals. Dalamar's post made his personal stance clear, and it was my guess that the Loyal Barons backed him and the Renegade Barons opposed him>>
Perhaps the mindless inference isn't there and was merely my own addition due to a bit o' ire but you see with yer own eyes that the good duke infers we loyals backed the overlord and the others opposed him. Mayhaps I have read more into this than I should but I no more made a decision according to the Overlords wishes than did each Renegade oppose strictly for the sake of opposition.
You are correct in saying the point should be adressed to the council as a whole.
The DoS should be made aware of these proceedings without a doubt. Perhaps then, the community would see the workings and know why each voted as he or she did.
I for one, have only held this title for bit over a quarter now and am not the senior member of the council. In my addmited ignorance I had no idea these decisions were carried on in the public eye, in the past. When I recieved the missive some months ago in the Rand ,Tom, Gnort duel, no mention was made concerning the public observation of the goings on. I personally would be happy to debate the issues brought to the council on these boards or
merely post the events as they unfold.
Seamus
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: rlupton@aol.com (RLupton)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 16:04:13 EDT
If anyone desires to have a copy of my letters to the council, feel free to request. It was my wish to post them all along.
~Lupton
Date: 08 Sep 1998 16:04:13 EDT
If anyone desires to have a copy of my letters to the council, feel free to request. It was my wish to post them all along.
~Lupton
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: morganfay@aol.com (MorganFay)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 16:45:47 EDT
On 9/5/98, Percival wrote in response to Lyon's comment:
"Come now, Lyon. I can tell you how everyone voted just from the results of the voting. I am pretty sure I am right too.
My guess is that all the Loyals but Roland voted. So they all voted to strip Clutch. 6 to strip. All the Renegades voted against them. 5 for a rematch. Really isn't hard to figure out. Is it?"
This would be an incorrect guess at justifying the means to get to the end, in my opinion. I do not think, and I would be hard-pressed to be convinced, that the renegades voted in a certain way merely to oppose the loyals. From all conversations that took place, not one person that I can recall made a decision based on loyalty to the Overlord. Yes, it may have ended up being Renegades voting one way, Loyals another, but do not jump to faulty
premises to account for the conclusion. Mayhap the renegades you have in your house may have told you they would oppose loyals no matter what, but that certainly was not the face they showed during the discussion. Otherwise, I can think of no other reason why you would make such an assumption.
I did not make my decision based on my loyalty, the other barons' loyalties, or the challenged baron's loyalty. I was in the discussion because a Baron was involved.
Sartan wrote replying to Percival: "If your comment means that your House simply voted in favor of the Challenger because he was challenging a Baron loyal to Dalamar, perhaps your house members need to reevaluate how they come to their decisions as Barons, eh?"
This was similar to what I was thinking when I read Percival's supposition, however, having some "inside track," if this was their motivation to begin with, it did not come across that way in the discussions. I firmly believe that everyone voted for what they thought to be right and fair.
Avery wrote: "I will say this also. The reason it took us a while to get this done is that some people swayed back and forth on their votes. For some points were brought up that made the decision difficult."
I think this is a very accurate summary. We all voted outright, had a discussion, and re-voted based on the discussion. Some people stood by their original vote, others did not.
Percival writes on 9/7/98: "I am convinced my guess is accurate, and your post and that of Avery would seem to confirm my hypothesis."
You may have "guessed correctly" on your hypothesis (that loyals voted one way, renegades voted another way), but your motives (First: "My guess is that all the Loyals but Roland voted. So they all voted to strip Clutch. 6 to strip. All the Renegades voted against them." then "Dalamar's post made his personal stance clear, and it was my guess that the Loyal Barons backed him and the Renegade Barons opposed him.") for such is incorrect, therefore,
the proof of your hypothesis is faulty. Dalamar's post was to the community showing the final possible (Helix has final say) outcome of our decision. He did not vote until the end when it became clear that a tie was quite possible.
Percival continues: "So I simply answered the question asked regarding how people voted, to the best of my ability."
Unfortunately, and though I applaud your right to opine until the end of time on issues in DoS, you imply that somehow you are a qualified person to answer the question with any sort of authority. It wasn't really your question to answer, was it? Surely, you have every right to give your thoughts, guesses, opinions, but it was never in your purview to answer the question definitively for the rest of the community.
However, it was within my purview (and every other Baron involved) to answer that question for you all. I did not do that. I apologize for my shortsightedness. I can only offer my thoughts at the time in that I felt since I was a new Baron, unused to such matters concerning DoS, I acquiesced to the others, following their leads.
Avery wrote: "It is funny how you bring up that issue of making the vote public. For I did try to make that happen while the voting process was going on. I told everyone that i would make it public if no one had any faults with it. My reasoning being pretty much what yours was. Unfortunately some people had objections to it and so i was not able to do so. "
I think what I had issue with was that if anyone was to be the liaison between the council and the rest of the community, it should have been our Overlord, or our most senior Baron, AJ.
I am all for openness in these matters, though I would like the council to reserve the right to convene privately to organize evidence and witnesses and to also review the rules before proceeding publicly with the discussions, because as Evan says, we really want to make a well-informed and well-thought decision in the end.
Again, and I feel I cannot say this enough, I regret my unintentional (un-thinking?) part in all the wondering and those feeling left in the dark and the spiraling conjectures that resulted. I take very seriously the honor granted to me and I want very much to serve the title to the best of my ability, and I am chagrined to find that, while I am still learning what my role entails, I should not have contributed to the feeling that we were secretive.
Humbly,
Morgan du Cornwall
Date: 08 Sep 1998 16:45:47 EDT
On 9/5/98, Percival wrote in response to Lyon's comment:
"Come now, Lyon. I can tell you how everyone voted just from the results of the voting. I am pretty sure I am right too.
My guess is that all the Loyals but Roland voted. So they all voted to strip Clutch. 6 to strip. All the Renegades voted against them. 5 for a rematch. Really isn't hard to figure out. Is it?"
This would be an incorrect guess at justifying the means to get to the end, in my opinion. I do not think, and I would be hard-pressed to be convinced, that the renegades voted in a certain way merely to oppose the loyals. From all conversations that took place, not one person that I can recall made a decision based on loyalty to the Overlord. Yes, it may have ended up being Renegades voting one way, Loyals another, but do not jump to faulty
premises to account for the conclusion. Mayhap the renegades you have in your house may have told you they would oppose loyals no matter what, but that certainly was not the face they showed during the discussion. Otherwise, I can think of no other reason why you would make such an assumption.
I did not make my decision based on my loyalty, the other barons' loyalties, or the challenged baron's loyalty. I was in the discussion because a Baron was involved.
Sartan wrote replying to Percival: "If your comment means that your House simply voted in favor of the Challenger because he was challenging a Baron loyal to Dalamar, perhaps your house members need to reevaluate how they come to their decisions as Barons, eh?"
This was similar to what I was thinking when I read Percival's supposition, however, having some "inside track," if this was their motivation to begin with, it did not come across that way in the discussions. I firmly believe that everyone voted for what they thought to be right and fair.
Avery wrote: "I will say this also. The reason it took us a while to get this done is that some people swayed back and forth on their votes. For some points were brought up that made the decision difficult."
I think this is a very accurate summary. We all voted outright, had a discussion, and re-voted based on the discussion. Some people stood by their original vote, others did not.
Percival writes on 9/7/98: "I am convinced my guess is accurate, and your post and that of Avery would seem to confirm my hypothesis."
You may have "guessed correctly" on your hypothesis (that loyals voted one way, renegades voted another way), but your motives (First: "My guess is that all the Loyals but Roland voted. So they all voted to strip Clutch. 6 to strip. All the Renegades voted against them." then "Dalamar's post made his personal stance clear, and it was my guess that the Loyal Barons backed him and the Renegade Barons opposed him.") for such is incorrect, therefore,
the proof of your hypothesis is faulty. Dalamar's post was to the community showing the final possible (Helix has final say) outcome of our decision. He did not vote until the end when it became clear that a tie was quite possible.
Percival continues: "So I simply answered the question asked regarding how people voted, to the best of my ability."
Unfortunately, and though I applaud your right to opine until the end of time on issues in DoS, you imply that somehow you are a qualified person to answer the question with any sort of authority. It wasn't really your question to answer, was it? Surely, you have every right to give your thoughts, guesses, opinions, but it was never in your purview to answer the question definitively for the rest of the community.
However, it was within my purview (and every other Baron involved) to answer that question for you all. I did not do that. I apologize for my shortsightedness. I can only offer my thoughts at the time in that I felt since I was a new Baron, unused to such matters concerning DoS, I acquiesced to the others, following their leads.
Avery wrote: "It is funny how you bring up that issue of making the vote public. For I did try to make that happen while the voting process was going on. I told everyone that i would make it public if no one had any faults with it. My reasoning being pretty much what yours was. Unfortunately some people had objections to it and so i was not able to do so. "
I think what I had issue with was that if anyone was to be the liaison between the council and the rest of the community, it should have been our Overlord, or our most senior Baron, AJ.
I am all for openness in these matters, though I would like the council to reserve the right to convene privately to organize evidence and witnesses and to also review the rules before proceeding publicly with the discussions, because as Evan says, we really want to make a well-informed and well-thought decision in the end.
Again, and I feel I cannot say this enough, I regret my unintentional (un-thinking?) part in all the wondering and those feeling left in the dark and the spiraling conjectures that resulted. I take very seriously the honor granted to me and I want very much to serve the title to the best of my ability, and I am chagrined to find that, while I am still learning what my role entails, I should not have contributed to the feeling that we were secretive.
Humbly,
Morgan du Cornwall
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: xgnortx@aol.com (X Gnort X)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 16:55:13 EDT
Guess what.
This bickering is just stupid. Nothing new of course. Here's my view.
A time was set for the challenge. Roland was there, Clutch was Not.
Clutch was late. If you were late for dinner when you were a child, were you punished? If you were late after curfew, were you punished? If you were late for class, did you get detention?
Clutch was Late, Clutch was Punished, what's the big deal?
'Nuff said.
*G*
Warlord of the DoS
Twice Baron
"When I left you, I was but the learner, now I am the master"
Date: 08 Sep 1998 16:55:13 EDT
Guess what.
This bickering is just stupid. Nothing new of course. Here's my view.
A time was set for the challenge. Roland was there, Clutch was Not.
Clutch was late. If you were late for dinner when you were a child, were you punished? If you were late after curfew, were you punished? If you were late for class, did you get detention?
Clutch was Late, Clutch was Punished, what's the big deal?
'Nuff said.
*G*
Warlord of the DoS
Twice Baron
"When I left you, I was but the learner, now I am the master"
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: morganfay@aol.com (MorganFay)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 16:57:23 EDT
Kalamere,
You are quite correct on all of your points in your post regarding the council specifically.
I do have a responsibilty to the DoS community. I did not hold to that responsibility.
Not only should Clutch be made to pay the penalties, but all should be able to learn from the incident. This is what precedent is all about.
I wholeheartedly agree that the formal discussions should be held publicly, though with the caveat I mentioned in my previous post.
I am also filled with sadness and shame, firstly, because of my thoughtlessness to everyone, secondly, because it so shamed you, who I hold in very high esteem. I hope you, and all the others, will accept my apology for not acting in your best interests as a whole community. I will do my best to rectify my error.
Sincerely,
Morgan du Cornwall
Date: 08 Sep 1998 16:57:23 EDT
Kalamere,
You are quite correct on all of your points in your post regarding the council specifically.
I do have a responsibilty to the DoS community. I did not hold to that responsibility.
Not only should Clutch be made to pay the penalties, but all should be able to learn from the incident. This is what precedent is all about.
I wholeheartedly agree that the formal discussions should be held publicly, though with the caveat I mentioned in my previous post.
I am also filled with sadness and shame, firstly, because of my thoughtlessness to everyone, secondly, because it so shamed you, who I hold in very high esteem. I hope you, and all the others, will accept my apology for not acting in your best interests as a whole community. I will do my best to rectify my error.
Sincerely,
Morgan du Cornwall
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 17:11:51 EDT
Baroness Morgan Le Fay du Cornwall,
I have a very hard time believing that a split so evenly along lines of alignment had nothing to do at all with alignment. Forgive me if I seem cynical, and I am in no way accusing you personally, but it would seem too far fetched a coincedence. All the Loyal Barons just happened to vote the same way, and the rest of the Barons just happened to vote the opposite way? I would be willing to bet that a few Barons on one side or the other voted the
way they did for political reasons. If I am wrong, so be it. But I find it hard to shake that opinion off.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Date: 08 Sep 1998 17:11:51 EDT
Baroness Morgan Le Fay du Cornwall,
I have a very hard time believing that a split so evenly along lines of alignment had nothing to do at all with alignment. Forgive me if I seem cynical, and I am in no way accusing you personally, but it would seem too far fetched a coincedence. All the Loyal Barons just happened to vote the same way, and the rest of the Barons just happened to vote the opposite way? I would be willing to bet that a few Barons on one side or the other voted the
way they did for political reasons. If I am wrong, so be it. But I find it hard to shake that opinion off.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: xvevan@aol.com (XvEvan)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 18:59:28 EDT
People:
This line of posts is a clear reason why the vote is nae public.
-Evan Rush Rynth
::chuckles and wanders off::
Date: 08 Sep 1998 18:59:28 EDT
People:
This line of posts is a clear reason why the vote is nae public.
-Evan Rush Rynth
::chuckles and wanders off::
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: maxim128@aol.com (Maxim128)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 19:18:55 EDT
I for one know that I did not vote for political reasons, but I do not know about the other Barons, but I do not think they would do such a thing either. Perhaps Percy is wrong, and that is all needed to be said. We should stop all of the bickering over someone's "guess" of what happened. He never said it did, it was only a guess. I can see how it does
get some angry, but we should stop the argueing.
~Magnus~
Baron of the 13th
House Rising
Date: 08 Sep 1998 19:18:55 EDT
I for one know that I did not vote for political reasons, but I do not know about the other Barons, but I do not think they would do such a thing either. Perhaps Percy is wrong, and that is all needed to be said. We should stop all of the bickering over someone's "guess" of what happened. He never said it did, it was only a guess. I can see how it does
get some angry, but we should stop the argueing.
~Magnus~
Baron of the 13th
House Rising
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: waikrboh@aol.com (WaIkrBoh)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 20:25:20 EDT
Here's my take on this:
There are currently equal number of Loyal and non-Loyal Barons. Each have their own reasons for being so (saving Agrenish..but I'll ignore that), these corresponding to what ever their political views in the DoS are. Whether they are generally rigid or flexible. Whether they are the revoutionary sort or not. I could list a few more, but I think my point is well taken there. That means when it comes time to vote about something, it would seem to
me that each person would vote based on their political convictions outside of allegiance to the Overlord. In this case it appears that the reasons people had for being Loyal correspond to feelings that a challenger who misinterprets a written message and shows up at the wrong time should be severely punished, even taking away a challenge that he didn't even use. Those that are Neutral/Renegade have feelings that is a venial offense, one rather
easy to make, and that the least should be done is a rematch (I wouldn't have been surprised for some to have wanted to strip Roland of the ring for showing up and the wrong time, and to likewise reprimand the caller (Although I do think that is a bit extreme).).
So what I see here is a two-party system, each side sharing beliefs that make them think ina similar direction on a number of topics. That does not mean that they did it just to "vote with their party", as they were voting with their heart, which just so happened to be with the party.
But no matter how I see it, I come to this conclusion: The Loyals are so petty and rigid, that they'll take nearly any excuse they can get to get rid of a challenge to one of them. The Renegades actually have some sense, and at least a tiny amount of pity in them.
Thank you. Your turn.
-Walker Boh
Date: 08 Sep 1998 20:25:20 EDT
Here's my take on this:
There are currently equal number of Loyal and non-Loyal Barons. Each have their own reasons for being so (saving Agrenish..but I'll ignore that), these corresponding to what ever their political views in the DoS are. Whether they are generally rigid or flexible. Whether they are the revoutionary sort or not. I could list a few more, but I think my point is well taken there. That means when it comes time to vote about something, it would seem to
me that each person would vote based on their political convictions outside of allegiance to the Overlord. In this case it appears that the reasons people had for being Loyal correspond to feelings that a challenger who misinterprets a written message and shows up at the wrong time should be severely punished, even taking away a challenge that he didn't even use. Those that are Neutral/Renegade have feelings that is a venial offense, one rather
easy to make, and that the least should be done is a rematch (I wouldn't have been surprised for some to have wanted to strip Roland of the ring for showing up and the wrong time, and to likewise reprimand the caller (Although I do think that is a bit extreme).).
So what I see here is a two-party system, each side sharing beliefs that make them think ina similar direction on a number of topics. That does not mean that they did it just to "vote with their party", as they were voting with their heart, which just so happened to be with the party.
But no matter how I see it, I come to this conclusion: The Loyals are so petty and rigid, that they'll take nearly any excuse they can get to get rid of a challenge to one of them. The Renegades actually have some sense, and at least a tiny amount of pity in them.
Thank you. Your turn.
-Walker Boh
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: shivblade@aol.com (SHIV BLADE)
Date: 08 Sep 1998 21:00:10 EDT
Morgan,
I was the one to take the initative in the voting process.... i got htings going. As such i stated that i would indeed post our results to the community if that is what they wanted. But i also stated i would let someone else do it too. So if you wanted AJay or Dal to do ityou could have said so. ((goto Historical Documentation of the Baronial Council's Latest to see that post and others i made))
Avery
Date: 08 Sep 1998 21:00:10 EDT
Morgan,
I was the one to take the initative in the voting process.... i got htings going. As such i stated that i would indeed post our results to the community if that is what they wanted. But i also stated i would let someone else do it too. So if you wanted AJay or Dal to do ityou could have said so. ((goto Historical Documentation of the Baronial Council's Latest to see that post and others i made))
Avery
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: gimmzak@aol.com (Gimmzak)
Date: 09 Sep 1998 11:11:17 EDT
I'm Pretty new to this whole thing. I guess I'm still pretty wet behind the ears when it comes to all this voting and stuff, as far as this communtiy goes. Being the head of my caln, I am no stranger to contriversy and taking sides. Believe me I know this all too well. As far as this matter is concerned I made my vote, not based on my alignment to Dalamar, but on the fact of the events that took place.
Simply, Clutch was supposed to be somewhere at a certain time, he was not.
That is what I based my vote on. It had nothing to do with my loyalties or lack thereof. I am not one to generally get into political debates, I am not as skillied as Kalamere, or Morgan or Perci, or half of the others that I see debating. Perhaps in time I can learn and take a more active role in these discussions, but as for now the matter has been solved.
Gimzak Stonecutter of clan Irongate
King of Dragon mt, ruler of Clan Irongate
Baron of the 11th
Date: 09 Sep 1998 11:11:17 EDT
I'm Pretty new to this whole thing. I guess I'm still pretty wet behind the ears when it comes to all this voting and stuff, as far as this communtiy goes. Being the head of my caln, I am no stranger to contriversy and taking sides. Believe me I know this all too well. As far as this matter is concerned I made my vote, not based on my alignment to Dalamar, but on the fact of the events that took place.
Simply, Clutch was supposed to be somewhere at a certain time, he was not.
That is what I based my vote on. It had nothing to do with my loyalties or lack thereof. I am not one to generally get into political debates, I am not as skillied as Kalamere, or Morgan or Perci, or half of the others that I see debating. Perhaps in time I can learn and take a more active role in these discussions, but as for now the matter has been solved.
Gimzak Stonecutter of clan Irongate
King of Dragon mt, ruler of Clan Irongate
Baron of the 11th