From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 17 Nov 1999 01:42:30 EST
Ian,
Your excercises in sophistry have very little actual application to the sport or the community. They seem to apply at first, but closer scrutiny reveals the fallacies in each.
>Is a community aided if a corrupt peace officer is removed from his post
>without a new one being hired?
A corrupt police officer should be replaced. If he is not replaced, merely removed, things will actually get worse, not better. Even a corrupt official usually does a better job than none at all.
>If you have a guard at your gate who opens the gate for your enemies, are you
>not better off with no gatekeeper at all, so that your enemies at least have
>to go to the effort of opening the gate themselves?
No, I would be far better off with a real guard. No guard doesn't make the extra difference. Of course, I would remove the traitor. However, I would replace him with someone loyal. Period.
>If you have a rowboat, with six crewmen, are you better off if only five are
>rowing while six bodies weigh down the vessel, or are you better off throwing
>the dead weight overboard?
>
It depends? Is the sixth man the coxswain? If so, I wouldn't get rid of him at all.
>If you have a deadly rotting disease in your finger, is it worth it to cut
>off said finger without having a functioning replacement ready?
I have yet to encounter any titleholder so vile as to even consider this particular analogy discussionable, let alone valid.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
Honor
-
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: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 17 Nov 1999 13:54:35 EST
" 'Is a community aided if a corrupt peace officer is removed from his post without a new one being hired?'
No, it's not. In fact, that's what Percy and I were referring to. While it spares us having someone unworthy to possess the title, it doesn't truly 'aid' us."
You can't truly believe this, Var? You'd rather have a corrupt constable than not have one at all? That makes no sense.
As for your response to the gatekeeper analogy, you rather missed the point; no gatekeeper at all is better than one who betrays you and opens the gate for the enemy, allowing them to attack you by surprise...
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 17 Nov 1999 13:54:35 EST
" 'Is a community aided if a corrupt peace officer is removed from his post without a new one being hired?'
No, it's not. In fact, that's what Percy and I were referring to. While it spares us having someone unworthy to possess the title, it doesn't truly 'aid' us."
You can't truly believe this, Var? You'd rather have a corrupt constable than not have one at all? That makes no sense.
As for your response to the gatekeeper analogy, you rather missed the point; no gatekeeper at all is better than one who betrays you and opens the gate for the enemy, allowing them to attack you by surprise...
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 17 Nov 1999 14:07:02 EST
" 'If you have a deadly rotting disease in your finger, is it worth it to cut off said finger without having a functioning replacement ready?'
I have yet to encounter any titleholder so vile as to even consider this particular analogy discussionable, let alone valid."
Except, of course, if one believes youor own attitude and words, Morgan le Fay du Cornwall.
As far as sophistry goes, Percival, at least it's an attempt at analyzing the situation rather than just taking on some nebulous "There has to be someone there, even if they reek" attitude. The ONLY negative effect a vacant barony has is that there's one fewer voice on the council. Do I agree that Jesse should have spurned the ring? No - because I personally think Jesse would be a servicable Baron who stands up for what he thinks rather than
pandering to the masses, while at the same time not being an unrelenting, unrepentant idiot. However, I also feel that a vacant Barony is better than one held by someone who has absolutely nothing whatsoever to recommend them for the responsibility. An absent voice in council is better than a present voice who is virtually always guaranteed to express an insipid and weak opinion.
If the opinion of you, and those like you, is that the Baronies must be occupied, no matter what, then I question whether your loyalty to the system is for the system itself, or for our own ability to work within it. The only people "harmed" by Jesse's challenge of Huma were those who might have challenged for that Barony between Jesse's victory and the next tournament; had the community itself been in any position to be harmed, again, I would
suggest that someone worthy of holding the Barony and willing to accept the responsibility would have challenged. Nobody bothered, yet the person who stood up to do something about the situation is somehow wrong because you don't like the way he went about it?
As to you, Drakewyn... as always, what was wrong with Huma is, as always, a matter for the eye of the beholder. It's relatively unimportant now, and I choose not to discuss it. Suffice it to say that I felt, and continue to feel, that at the time, he was unsuitable.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 17 Nov 1999 14:07:02 EST
" 'If you have a deadly rotting disease in your finger, is it worth it to cut off said finger without having a functioning replacement ready?'
I have yet to encounter any titleholder so vile as to even consider this particular analogy discussionable, let alone valid."
Except, of course, if one believes youor own attitude and words, Morgan le Fay du Cornwall.
As far as sophistry goes, Percival, at least it's an attempt at analyzing the situation rather than just taking on some nebulous "There has to be someone there, even if they reek" attitude. The ONLY negative effect a vacant barony has is that there's one fewer voice on the council. Do I agree that Jesse should have spurned the ring? No - because I personally think Jesse would be a servicable Baron who stands up for what he thinks rather than
pandering to the masses, while at the same time not being an unrelenting, unrepentant idiot. However, I also feel that a vacant Barony is better than one held by someone who has absolutely nothing whatsoever to recommend them for the responsibility. An absent voice in council is better than a present voice who is virtually always guaranteed to express an insipid and weak opinion.
If the opinion of you, and those like you, is that the Baronies must be occupied, no matter what, then I question whether your loyalty to the system is for the system itself, or for our own ability to work within it. The only people "harmed" by Jesse's challenge of Huma were those who might have challenged for that Barony between Jesse's victory and the next tournament; had the community itself been in any position to be harmed, again, I would
suggest that someone worthy of holding the Barony and willing to accept the responsibility would have challenged. Nobody bothered, yet the person who stood up to do something about the situation is somehow wrong because you don't like the way he went about it?
As to you, Drakewyn... as always, what was wrong with Huma is, as always, a matter for the eye of the beholder. It's relatively unimportant now, and I choose not to discuss it. Suffice it to say that I felt, and continue to feel, that at the time, he was unsuitable.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: quickvarmg@aol.com (QuickVarMG)
Date: 17 Nov 1999 16:18:33 EST
"You can't truly believe this, Var? You'd rather have a corrupt constable than not have one at all? That makes no sense."
I didn't say I preferred one over the other, Ian. I said that for all practical purposes, removing someone who's bad at what they do won't help the people anymore than someone who is not there at all. All it does is give people a while to say, "Whew, thank God THAT jerk's gone." But what then? We'd then have a place held up by even less structure, and the only way to replace it would be if someone more worthy takes up the job to uphold the
law.
"As for your response to the gatekeeper analogy, you rather missed the point; no gatekeeper at all is better than one who betrays you and opens the gate for the enemy, allowing them to attack you by surprise..."
I understood the point you were trying to convey exactly. However, if you were to consider some elements of battle, an enemy would not leave a gate alone if they have the opportunity to control it and manipulate it. When considered in that light, you are in a bad position either way, unless you immediately replace the gatekeeper with someone more worthy. With the example above, we'd be equally screwed up with a bad gatekeeper or no
gatekeeper at all.
However, Walker's right... There is no good example to illustrate the situation with Huma holding the title. Most analogies would be flimsy, at best. None of the analogies will lie parallel with the situation we are actually trying to discuss; similarities, yes, but there are also circumstances that make it very different.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
Date: 17 Nov 1999 16:18:33 EST
"You can't truly believe this, Var? You'd rather have a corrupt constable than not have one at all? That makes no sense."
I didn't say I preferred one over the other, Ian. I said that for all practical purposes, removing someone who's bad at what they do won't help the people anymore than someone who is not there at all. All it does is give people a while to say, "Whew, thank God THAT jerk's gone." But what then? We'd then have a place held up by even less structure, and the only way to replace it would be if someone more worthy takes up the job to uphold the
law.
"As for your response to the gatekeeper analogy, you rather missed the point; no gatekeeper at all is better than one who betrays you and opens the gate for the enemy, allowing them to attack you by surprise..."
I understood the point you were trying to convey exactly. However, if you were to consider some elements of battle, an enemy would not leave a gate alone if they have the opportunity to control it and manipulate it. When considered in that light, you are in a bad position either way, unless you immediately replace the gatekeeper with someone more worthy. With the example above, we'd be equally screwed up with a bad gatekeeper or no
gatekeeper at all.
However, Walker's right... There is no good example to illustrate the situation with Huma holding the title. Most analogies would be flimsy, at best. None of the analogies will lie parallel with the situation we are actually trying to discuss; similarities, yes, but there are also circumstances that make it very different.
Var Medici-Giovanni
Proud Father, Proud Husband
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 17 Nov 1999 16:46:23 EST
>If the opinion of you, and those like you, is that the Baronies must be
>occupied, no matter what, then I question whether your loyalty to the system
>is for the system itself, or for our own ability to work within it.
My opinion is not that 'the baronies be held no matter what', it is that no one should challenge unless they desire to make an effort to do the job they are challenging to earn. That was my only statement. It is a matter of responsibility, and if one is not willing to be responsible for his actions, why act? It is the responsibility of the challenger who dethrones a title holder to assume the title and do his best to defend it well. The evasion of
responsibility is an act of laziness, apathy, malice, or cowardice depending on how you choose to look at it. In Agrenish's case, it was probably malice and possibly cowardice. In Jesse's case it was obviously apathy. While he disliked Huma, he didn't care enough for the title to try and do a better job.
To sum up, someone who challenges should do his duty as Baron should he win. He should not betray his duty and abandon the title.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
Date: 17 Nov 1999 16:46:23 EST
>If the opinion of you, and those like you, is that the Baronies must be
>occupied, no matter what, then I question whether your loyalty to the system
>is for the system itself, or for our own ability to work within it.
My opinion is not that 'the baronies be held no matter what', it is that no one should challenge unless they desire to make an effort to do the job they are challenging to earn. That was my only statement. It is a matter of responsibility, and if one is not willing to be responsible for his actions, why act? It is the responsibility of the challenger who dethrones a title holder to assume the title and do his best to defend it well. The evasion of
responsibility is an act of laziness, apathy, malice, or cowardice depending on how you choose to look at it. In Agrenish's case, it was probably malice and possibly cowardice. In Jesse's case it was obviously apathy. While he disliked Huma, he didn't care enough for the title to try and do a better job.
To sum up, someone who challenges should do his duty as Baron should he win. He should not betray his duty and abandon the title.
Duc Percival Marchand de Clermont
Captain, Rising Stars
The White Duke
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: bodebojangles@aol.com (Bode BoJangles)
Date: 17 Nov 1999 18:37:27 EST
I think you're in over your head here, Ian.
Dummies carry pedestals round here, don't ya know?
Bode - for hire
Date: 17 Nov 1999 18:37:27 EST
I think you're in over your head here, Ian.
Dummies carry pedestals round here, don't ya know?
Bode - for hire
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 17 Nov 1999 20:13:47 EST
Percy,
Interestin', Percy, that thee make claim th' nae annaone shouldst challenge lest they desire ta make an effort ta do th' job their be challengin' ta earn. Wh' job be ye meanin', Percy? Wast it nae thee wh' so oft didst declaim agin Dalamar an' 'old wi' anna wh' laid challenge unta 'im? Thee one th' one 'and state th' a title 'older shouldst do 'is bes' ta defend title, yet thee were among th' wildly yappin' curs wh' sought Dalamar's downfall
If indeed thee 'old tis a matter 'o responsibilty an' acceptin' responsibilty fer one's actions, tis odd th' thee 'eld wi' an' supported th' lyin', cheatin', perfidious, Baroness, wi' th' same insipid, fallacious argument.
Tis it then seemin'ly be yuir position th' nae matter 'ow pitiful nor 'ow much 'o a blight a personage be, nor th' ta deeds done by a personage shouldst be looked 'pon save th' said personage remains ast a baron or shouldst challenge simply because they may.
Tis right amusin', Percy, fer in wi' th' logic, then such ast Methous shouldst be 'eld in ta 'ighest esteem ast shouldst such ast Jaycynda fer seekin' title, utterly an' completely disregardin' their behavior.
Tis so like thee, Percy, ta 'old wi' ta 'might makes right' simplistic view. Tis also right amusin' that ye claim ta know ta reasons fer Agrenish's retirin' ta crown an' fer Jesse's retirin' ta Ring. Accordin' ta yuir logic, Percy, thee aire castin' insult 'pon th' former Baron, Ajaybird, for dinna 'e retire 'is ring, an' by thine definition, abandon 'is title? Dost thine logic then extend unta Ajay? For thee hae writ th' th' evasion 'o
responsibilty be an act 'o laziness, apathy, malice or cowardice. Wouldst thine logic extend unta th' former Baron, Torquillan Aspendale who didst retire? An' wh' 'o th' Lady Blue or ta former Baron, Wicked Deth or ta former Baron, Jonathan Ringo, or ta former Baron, Moralitor th' Black?
An' wh' 'o th' former Overlord, Gnimish? Wi' yuir logic, Percy, tis thee be seemin' ta assert they be cowards all.
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 17 Nov 1999 20:13:47 EST
Percy,
Interestin', Percy, that thee make claim th' nae annaone shouldst challenge lest they desire ta make an effort ta do th' job their be challengin' ta earn. Wh' job be ye meanin', Percy? Wast it nae thee wh' so oft didst declaim agin Dalamar an' 'old wi' anna wh' laid challenge unta 'im? Thee one th' one 'and state th' a title 'older shouldst do 'is bes' ta defend title, yet thee were among th' wildly yappin' curs wh' sought Dalamar's downfall
If indeed thee 'old tis a matter 'o responsibilty an' acceptin' responsibilty fer one's actions, tis odd th' thee 'eld wi' an' supported th' lyin', cheatin', perfidious, Baroness, wi' th' same insipid, fallacious argument.
Tis it then seemin'ly be yuir position th' nae matter 'ow pitiful nor 'ow much 'o a blight a personage be, nor th' ta deeds done by a personage shouldst be looked 'pon save th' said personage remains ast a baron or shouldst challenge simply because they may.
Tis right amusin', Percy, fer in wi' th' logic, then such ast Methous shouldst be 'eld in ta 'ighest esteem ast shouldst such ast Jaycynda fer seekin' title, utterly an' completely disregardin' their behavior.
Tis so like thee, Percy, ta 'old wi' ta 'might makes right' simplistic view. Tis also right amusin' that ye claim ta know ta reasons fer Agrenish's retirin' ta crown an' fer Jesse's retirin' ta Ring. Accordin' ta yuir logic, Percy, thee aire castin' insult 'pon th' former Baron, Ajaybird, for dinna 'e retire 'is ring, an' by thine definition, abandon 'is title? Dost thine logic then extend unta Ajay? For thee hae writ th' th' evasion 'o
responsibilty be an act 'o laziness, apathy, malice or cowardice. Wouldst thine logic extend unta th' former Baron, Torquillan Aspendale who didst retire? An' wh' 'o th' Lady Blue or ta former Baron, Wicked Deth or ta former Baron, Jonathan Ringo, or ta former Baron, Moralitor th' Black?
An' wh' 'o th' former Overlord, Gnimish? Wi' yuir logic, Percy, tis thee be seemin' ta assert they be cowards all.
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 17 Nov 1999 20:15:25 EST
Bode,
Indeed, an' Percy be standin' 'pon one verra precariously.
Jonalyn Starfare
Jonalyn Nenshen Starfare
Commoner, Duel of Swords
Regent of Auravia
Co-Chancellor of Starhaven
Queen of Westridge, and the Provinces.
Regent for the heirs to Auravia and Westridge.
Date: 17 Nov 1999 20:15:25 EST
Bode,
Indeed, an' Percy be standin' 'pon one verra precariously.
Jonalyn Starfare
Jonalyn Nenshen Starfare
Commoner, Duel of Swords
Regent of Auravia
Co-Chancellor of Starhaven
Queen of Westridge, and the Provinces.
Regent for the heirs to Auravia and Westridge.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: casmaxim@aol.com (Cas Maxim)
Date: 18 Nov 1999 01:50:16 EST
So Bode, how large is your pedestal?
Cas-Warlord,Centurion,Loving husband,Former Baron of the Sixth and Eighth
Date: 18 Nov 1999 01:50:16 EST
So Bode, how large is your pedestal?
Cas-Warlord,Centurion,Loving husband,Former Baron of the Sixth and Eighth
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 18 Nov 1999 06:41:18 EST
"I think you're in over your head here, Ian.
Dummies carry pedestals round here, don't ya know?"
While I'm quite familiar with the fiscal success of the local marble merchants, who do a brisk business selling exquisitely carved elevation devices...
...one thing I -never- am around is in over my head. On occasion, I may be wrong, but in certain instances, simply noting who's arguing with me disabuses me of the fear that I might be in such a situation.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 18 Nov 1999 06:41:18 EST
"I think you're in over your head here, Ian.
Dummies carry pedestals round here, don't ya know?"
While I'm quite familiar with the fiscal success of the local marble merchants, who do a brisk business selling exquisitely carved elevation devices...
...one thing I -never- am around is in over my head. On occasion, I may be wrong, but in certain instances, simply noting who's arguing with me disabuses me of the fear that I might be in such a situation.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: bodebojangles@aol.com (Bode BoJangles)
Date: 18 Nov 1999 15:00:16 EST
Stop right there, Cas. 'Fore I die of a laughing seizure.
Hey, someone let me know when y'all evolve into a sense of humor. How 'bout it?
Bode - for hire
Date: 18 Nov 1999 15:00:16 EST
Stop right there, Cas. 'Fore I die of a laughing seizure.
Hey, someone let me know when y'all evolve into a sense of humor. How 'bout it?
Bode - for hire