From: rlupton@aol.com (RLupton)
Date: 30 Oct 1998 11:50:18 EST
"a) his father"
Dalamar did not lose his father because of the Council's ruling. Luckily, they are not that powerful yet. Currently, they just tell us how to act and live our lives.
"If I were Overlord, I would certainly want to do whatever I could to ensure a loyal majority of barons."
I have to disagree, Morgan. I know ye to be an amazing person fraught with more honor, warmth, and care than most in the basement. Ye would not lie or manipulate to sway the public. Ye would not break made promises to do what ye believed right because ye were afraid of losing support. I know ye, Morgan. Ye would not do "anything." Ye are better than that.
~Lupton
Change of Alignment
-
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: sartanz@aol.com (Sartan Z)
Date: 30 Oct 1998 15:26:11 EST
Adonai,
Once again, I ask you to think before you speak, or write, in this case. I asked Jeff and Huma, repeatedly, not to go through with the Duel of Honor, since it would only create more problems. If you'd actually pay attention and get your facts right, it would save people the trouble of pointing out your foolish mistakes.
I also ask you once more to practice what you preach, as you ask people not to insult others at one moment and then turn around and spew them out yourself. Until you start doing that which you want from others, you should take your sanctimonious ramblings elsewhere.
Sartan
Holder of the Sixth
Date: 30 Oct 1998 15:26:11 EST
Adonai,
Once again, I ask you to think before you speak, or write, in this case. I asked Jeff and Huma, repeatedly, not to go through with the Duel of Honor, since it would only create more problems. If you'd actually pay attention and get your facts right, it would save people the trouble of pointing out your foolish mistakes.
I also ask you once more to practice what you preach, as you ask people not to insult others at one moment and then turn around and spew them out yourself. Until you start doing that which you want from others, you should take your sanctimonious ramblings elsewhere.
Sartan
Holder of the Sixth
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: prlunicorn@aol.com (PrlUnicorn)
Date: 30 Oct 1998 15:44:59 EST
>>Once again, I ask you to think before you speak, or write, in this case. I asked Jeff and Huma, repeatedly, not to go through with the Duel of Honor, since it would only create more problems. If you'd actually pay attention and get your facts right, it would save people the trouble of pointing out your foolish mistakes. <<
::slaps up a note::
No offense, Sartan, but I think you pointed out quite clearly who was responsible for the foolish mistake that started this mess in the first place. Everything else snowballed from that. For once, it's not Phil's phault.
Collie
Date: 30 Oct 1998 15:44:59 EST
>>Once again, I ask you to think before you speak, or write, in this case. I asked Jeff and Huma, repeatedly, not to go through with the Duel of Honor, since it would only create more problems. If you'd actually pay attention and get your facts right, it would save people the trouble of pointing out your foolish mistakes. <<
::slaps up a note::
No offense, Sartan, but I think you pointed out quite clearly who was responsible for the foolish mistake that started this mess in the first place. Everything else snowballed from that. For once, it's not Phil's phault.
Collie
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: drakewyni@aol.com (Drakewyn I)
Date: 30 Oct 1998 19:15:13 EST
Patrons of the Duel of Swords.
I will likely never hold the Mantle and Crown of OverLord of the Duel of Swords, my ambitions do not lean that way. It also seems probable that I shall never hold a Baron's Ring, for my own code and personal promises seem to conspire against me.
But... should I ever, gods forfend, hold the Crown, I hope to keep my same sense of calm and understanding. I hope that I shall have Barons who are Loyal because they wish to be Barons first, and loyal to me second.
Remember... you do not have to be a Baron, to be Loyal to the OverLord.
I am Neutral, and continue to remain so.
This has nothing to do with my friendship with Dalamar, his has only to do with the political climate in the Duel of Swords.
I thank you for your time.
Lady Drake, aka the Gryphon
Date: 30 Oct 1998 19:15:13 EST
Patrons of the Duel of Swords.
I will likely never hold the Mantle and Crown of OverLord of the Duel of Swords, my ambitions do not lean that way. It also seems probable that I shall never hold a Baron's Ring, for my own code and personal promises seem to conspire against me.
But... should I ever, gods forfend, hold the Crown, I hope to keep my same sense of calm and understanding. I hope that I shall have Barons who are Loyal because they wish to be Barons first, and loyal to me second.
Remember... you do not have to be a Baron, to be Loyal to the OverLord.
I am Neutral, and continue to remain so.
This has nothing to do with my friendship with Dalamar, his has only to do with the political climate in the Duel of Swords.
I thank you for your time.
Lady Drake, aka the Gryphon
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: dukeuziei@aol.com (Duke UzieI)
Date: 31 Oct 1998 08:58:51 EST
Sartan, Respected Others,
What your failed to notice Sartan is that I wasn't insulting anyone. Bulldog in itself denotes loyalty, strength, tenacity and power. And last I checked....protege' was not an insulting term. You seek insult where there was none. As far as mistakes, I believe I will stand behind Colleen on that call. Have a fine day.
Baroness Morgan,
>>Dalamar lost:
a) his father
b) 10,000 gold crowns
c) an untarnished record
c) credibility toward a perfect attendance rate.<<
I will try to answer your query as best as possible. As far as Dalamar's father is concerned I hold the deepest regret for the passing of his family member, but will agree with Lupton that the decision of the Council had little to do with Dalamar's fathers' incipent mortality.
And as far as ten thousand gold crowns are concerned....thats mere balderdash. If I had been fined ten thousand gold crowns I most probably would have laughed and dug it out of a change drawer in my study.
An untarnished record? I believe that you, the loyal council voted to place censure in the histories of Dalamar's reign pertaining to this event. So thusly I believe that once we have all gone our seperate ways the Duels will know little of this event. As there will be no recording of it.
And his perfect attendance record? Like that matters to anyone, all of us know the virtues of our current Overlord and none would question his ability to defend his title nor his want to do so, so how, pray tell has he been diminished?
Let us look at what Huma has lost and weigh it against the fine of ten thousand crowns.
1> Friends
2> Respect
3> A Place he Loved
4> Belief of Self Worth
I assure you Morgan le Fay, there is not one of those I would trade ten thousand crowns for on any day. You will notice I did not mention the right to challenge or the peer wins, while illegally stripped of his rights, I care little for those kind of things.
You have my gravest assurance that peer wins and right of challenge weigh little in the face of what Huma truely lost, and many are losing. Their belief, their love for this place.
Others,
I am going to once again assert for the record that I am not trying to insult ANYONE, I am stating feelings and convictions. Not casting about and calling names. I hold no one but the Council in error here and I do not believe I am being overly harsh in my observations.
If you are insulted by my words then mayhaps your own guilt speaks for you.
Respectfully,
~Adonai Uziel
~DragonLord of RhyDin
Date: 31 Oct 1998 08:58:51 EST
Sartan, Respected Others,
What your failed to notice Sartan is that I wasn't insulting anyone. Bulldog in itself denotes loyalty, strength, tenacity and power. And last I checked....protege' was not an insulting term. You seek insult where there was none. As far as mistakes, I believe I will stand behind Colleen on that call. Have a fine day.
Baroness Morgan,
>>Dalamar lost:
a) his father
b) 10,000 gold crowns
c) an untarnished record
c) credibility toward a perfect attendance rate.<<
I will try to answer your query as best as possible. As far as Dalamar's father is concerned I hold the deepest regret for the passing of his family member, but will agree with Lupton that the decision of the Council had little to do with Dalamar's fathers' incipent mortality.
And as far as ten thousand gold crowns are concerned....thats mere balderdash. If I had been fined ten thousand gold crowns I most probably would have laughed and dug it out of a change drawer in my study.
An untarnished record? I believe that you, the loyal council voted to place censure in the histories of Dalamar's reign pertaining to this event. So thusly I believe that once we have all gone our seperate ways the Duels will know little of this event. As there will be no recording of it.
And his perfect attendance record? Like that matters to anyone, all of us know the virtues of our current Overlord and none would question his ability to defend his title nor his want to do so, so how, pray tell has he been diminished?
Let us look at what Huma has lost and weigh it against the fine of ten thousand crowns.
1> Friends
2> Respect
3> A Place he Loved
4> Belief of Self Worth
I assure you Morgan le Fay, there is not one of those I would trade ten thousand crowns for on any day. You will notice I did not mention the right to challenge or the peer wins, while illegally stripped of his rights, I care little for those kind of things.
You have my gravest assurance that peer wins and right of challenge weigh little in the face of what Huma truely lost, and many are losing. Their belief, their love for this place.
Others,
I am going to once again assert for the record that I am not trying to insult ANYONE, I am stating feelings and convictions. Not casting about and calling names. I hold no one but the Council in error here and I do not believe I am being overly harsh in my observations.
If you are insulted by my words then mayhaps your own guilt speaks for you.
Respectfully,
~Adonai Uziel
~DragonLord of RhyDin
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: leducblanc@aol.com (LeDucBlanc)
Date: 31 Oct 1998 11:34:21 EST
"You will notice I did not mention the right to challenge or the peer wins, while illegally stripped of his rights, I care little for those kind of things."
Adonai,
As much as I hate to disagree with such a well though post, I have to correct some facts. Huma was not stripped of his peer wins. The Council specifically voted to allow him to keep his peer wins. Nor was he stripped, completely, of his right to challenge for the cycle. He was stripped of his right to challenge the Overlord for a cycle. The Council's intention was, no doubt, that he would take the crumb he was being thrown and challenge a Baron.
The White Duke
Date: 31 Oct 1998 11:34:21 EST
"You will notice I did not mention the right to challenge or the peer wins, while illegally stripped of his rights, I care little for those kind of things."
Adonai,
As much as I hate to disagree with such a well though post, I have to correct some facts. Huma was not stripped of his peer wins. The Council specifically voted to allow him to keep his peer wins. Nor was he stripped, completely, of his right to challenge for the cycle. He was stripped of his right to challenge the Overlord for a cycle. The Council's intention was, no doubt, that he would take the crumb he was being thrown and challenge a Baron.
The White Duke
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: bendedkne@aol.com (Bended Kne)
Date: 31 Oct 1998 13:36:04 EST
::enters and reads over the post::
::smiling in agreeance with Adonai::
In fear of staging something "opinionated" and being stripped of my uniform I will merely remove it and state a few facts, As I am aware of them.
The overlord has failed to show for an accepted and agreed apon challenge
the overlord concocted or voiced (whatere the case may be) reasons for said absence.
The council comprised of a majority of the overlords loyal barons voted on what action should take place
(stop me if I am wrong)
The "loyals" most of whom seem to "graze" and follow each other hither and fro blindly.....or not......voted on behalf of their leader.
The few "loyalists" who have contact with their OWN thoughts and feelings and most assuredly their sences and propriety of right and wrong took a stand but were lost in it.
The vote came down and those who chose to vote by the rules and through the understanding and conviction of what is right and wrong then alligned themselves renegade. perhaps as a statement of the injustice done to the Duel of Swords community as a whole....perhaps not.
In light of this all the Overlord has a history of questionable actions. Not supporting his loyal barons, and showing favoritism to others wether they be loyal or not. (these are not MY opinions but things oft stated by many)
( and questions oft asked)
Rumors begun by the overlord himself of a take over of the DoS and of the rings so to speak in the past.
The ALLEGED recruitment of unknowns or outsiders who's job was to attack those that stood against him in the rings at every opportunity with the goal of beating them down and into submission so to speak.
NOW with all this in mind who do we support?
WHO is the "right" and who is the "wrong"
LOYALTIES aside the Duel of Swords as a whole.....and by NO MEANS is the overlord the only and all mighty example of it.....is the important thing. The betterment of the whole and not the individual is the goal.
Were there no rankings, were there no rings, were there no leader, twould be all pleasure and sport. Is that not the purpose?
Stating all this I must say that I am discouraged, even sickened by the state that all.....wether they be involved in it or not......have been pulled into. EVERYONE deserves to be treated the same and with the SAME rules. Were a renegade Baron to NOT show up to a challenge he WOULD NO DOUBT be dethroned, Were a challenger to NOT SHOW his challenge would be forfeited with his peer wins and his right to challenge.
The question I pose then is this.....
What makes the overlord or his followers......sheep?........any better or different than any other? surely not their records, for there are many that have better....accepting perhaps Jeffery.....and surely there are many that are better, more deserving just not "on" or as LUCKY as any other at any given time.
Ponder this as I have, struggle with this as I have and do. THEN and only THEN make your choice with your HEAD and your HEART and NOT with the ramblings or weak promises of others.
Heath Duncan Connor MacCormack
"The Quiet One"
Commoner,Swordsman, Master at Arms, Grand Master, Warlord and once Baron
Caller of the Duels
Friend to many
Date: 31 Oct 1998 13:36:04 EST
::enters and reads over the post::
::smiling in agreeance with Adonai::
In fear of staging something "opinionated" and being stripped of my uniform I will merely remove it and state a few facts, As I am aware of them.
The overlord has failed to show for an accepted and agreed apon challenge
the overlord concocted or voiced (whatere the case may be) reasons for said absence.
The council comprised of a majority of the overlords loyal barons voted on what action should take place
(stop me if I am wrong)
The "loyals" most of whom seem to "graze" and follow each other hither and fro blindly.....or not......voted on behalf of their leader.
The few "loyalists" who have contact with their OWN thoughts and feelings and most assuredly their sences and propriety of right and wrong took a stand but were lost in it.
The vote came down and those who chose to vote by the rules and through the understanding and conviction of what is right and wrong then alligned themselves renegade. perhaps as a statement of the injustice done to the Duel of Swords community as a whole....perhaps not.
In light of this all the Overlord has a history of questionable actions. Not supporting his loyal barons, and showing favoritism to others wether they be loyal or not. (these are not MY opinions but things oft stated by many)
( and questions oft asked)
Rumors begun by the overlord himself of a take over of the DoS and of the rings so to speak in the past.
The ALLEGED recruitment of unknowns or outsiders who's job was to attack those that stood against him in the rings at every opportunity with the goal of beating them down and into submission so to speak.
NOW with all this in mind who do we support?
WHO is the "right" and who is the "wrong"
LOYALTIES aside the Duel of Swords as a whole.....and by NO MEANS is the overlord the only and all mighty example of it.....is the important thing. The betterment of the whole and not the individual is the goal.
Were there no rankings, were there no rings, were there no leader, twould be all pleasure and sport. Is that not the purpose?
Stating all this I must say that I am discouraged, even sickened by the state that all.....wether they be involved in it or not......have been pulled into. EVERYONE deserves to be treated the same and with the SAME rules. Were a renegade Baron to NOT show up to a challenge he WOULD NO DOUBT be dethroned, Were a challenger to NOT SHOW his challenge would be forfeited with his peer wins and his right to challenge.
The question I pose then is this.....
What makes the overlord or his followers......sheep?........any better or different than any other? surely not their records, for there are many that have better....accepting perhaps Jeffery.....and surely there are many that are better, more deserving just not "on" or as LUCKY as any other at any given time.
Ponder this as I have, struggle with this as I have and do. THEN and only THEN make your choice with your HEAD and your HEART and NOT with the ramblings or weak promises of others.
Heath Duncan Connor MacCormack
"The Quiet One"
Commoner,Swordsman, Master at Arms, Grand Master, Warlord and once Baron
Caller of the Duels
Friend to many
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: bendedkne@aol.com (Bended Kne)
Date: 31 Oct 1998 13:36:04 EST
::enters and reads over the post::
::smiling in agreeance with Adonai::
In fear of staging something "opinionated" and being stripped of my uniform I will merely remove it and state a few facts, As I am aware of them.
The overlord has failed to show for an accepted and agreed apon challenge
the overlord concocted or voiced (whatere the case may be) reasons for said absence.
The council comprised of a majority of the overlords loyal barons voted on what action should take place
(stop me if I am wrong)
The "loyals" most of whom seem to "graze" and follow each other hither and fro blindly.....or not......voted on behalf of their leader.
The few "loyalists" who have contact with their OWN thoughts and feelings and most assuredly their sences and propriety of right and wrong took a stand but were lost in it.
The vote came down and those who chose to vote by the rules and through the understanding and conviction of what is right and wrong then alligned themselves renegade. perhaps as a statement of the injustice done to the Duel of Swords community as a whole....perhaps not.
In light of this all the Overlord has a history of questionable actions. Not supporting his loyal barons, and showing favoritism to others wether they be loyal or not. (these are not MY opinions but things oft stated by many)
( and questions oft asked)
Rumors begun by the overlord himself of a take over of the DoS and of the rings so to speak in the past.
The ALLEGED recruitment of unknowns or outsiders who's job was to attack those that stood against him in the rings at every opportunity with the goal of beating them down and into submission so to speak.
NOW with all this in mind who do we support?
WHO is the "right" and who is the "wrong"
LOYALTIES aside the Duel of Swords as a whole.....and by NO MEANS is the overlord the only and all mighty example of it.....is the important thing. The betterment of the whole and not the individual is the goal.
Were there no rankings, were there no rings, were there no leader, twould be all pleasure and sport. Is that not the purpose?
Stating all this I must say that I am discouraged, even sickened by the state that all.....wether they be involved in it or not......have been pulled into. EVERYONE deserves to be treated the same and with the SAME rules. Were a renegade Baron to NOT show up to a challenge he WOULD NO DOUBT be dethroned, Were a challenger to NOT SHOW his challenge would be forfeited with his peer wins and his right to challenge.
The question I pose then is this.....
What makes the overlord or his followers......sheep?........any better or different than any other? surely not their records, for there are many that have better....accepting perhaps Jeffery.....and surely there are many that are better, more deserving just not "on" or as LUCKY as any other at any given time.
Ponder this as I have, struggle with this as I have and do. THEN and only THEN make your choice with your HEAD and your HEART and NOT with the ramblings or weak promises of others.
Heath Duncan Connor MacCormack
"The Quiet One"
Commoner,Swordsman, Master at Arms, Grand Master, Warlord and once Baron
Caller of the Duels
Friend to many
Date: 31 Oct 1998 13:36:04 EST
::enters and reads over the post::
::smiling in agreeance with Adonai::
In fear of staging something "opinionated" and being stripped of my uniform I will merely remove it and state a few facts, As I am aware of them.
The overlord has failed to show for an accepted and agreed apon challenge
the overlord concocted or voiced (whatere the case may be) reasons for said absence.
The council comprised of a majority of the overlords loyal barons voted on what action should take place
(stop me if I am wrong)
The "loyals" most of whom seem to "graze" and follow each other hither and fro blindly.....or not......voted on behalf of their leader.
The few "loyalists" who have contact with their OWN thoughts and feelings and most assuredly their sences and propriety of right and wrong took a stand but were lost in it.
The vote came down and those who chose to vote by the rules and through the understanding and conviction of what is right and wrong then alligned themselves renegade. perhaps as a statement of the injustice done to the Duel of Swords community as a whole....perhaps not.
In light of this all the Overlord has a history of questionable actions. Not supporting his loyal barons, and showing favoritism to others wether they be loyal or not. (these are not MY opinions but things oft stated by many)
( and questions oft asked)
Rumors begun by the overlord himself of a take over of the DoS and of the rings so to speak in the past.
The ALLEGED recruitment of unknowns or outsiders who's job was to attack those that stood against him in the rings at every opportunity with the goal of beating them down and into submission so to speak.
NOW with all this in mind who do we support?
WHO is the "right" and who is the "wrong"
LOYALTIES aside the Duel of Swords as a whole.....and by NO MEANS is the overlord the only and all mighty example of it.....is the important thing. The betterment of the whole and not the individual is the goal.
Were there no rankings, were there no rings, were there no leader, twould be all pleasure and sport. Is that not the purpose?
Stating all this I must say that I am discouraged, even sickened by the state that all.....wether they be involved in it or not......have been pulled into. EVERYONE deserves to be treated the same and with the SAME rules. Were a renegade Baron to NOT show up to a challenge he WOULD NO DOUBT be dethroned, Were a challenger to NOT SHOW his challenge would be forfeited with his peer wins and his right to challenge.
The question I pose then is this.....
What makes the overlord or his followers......sheep?........any better or different than any other? surely not their records, for there are many that have better....accepting perhaps Jeffery.....and surely there are many that are better, more deserving just not "on" or as LUCKY as any other at any given time.
Ponder this as I have, struggle with this as I have and do. THEN and only THEN make your choice with your HEAD and your HEART and NOT with the ramblings or weak promises of others.
Heath Duncan Connor MacCormack
"The Quiet One"
Commoner,Swordsman, Master at Arms, Grand Master, Warlord and once Baron
Caller of the Duels
Friend to many
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: morganfay@aol.com (MorganFay)
Date: 31 Oct 1998 14:42:52 EST
> I will try to answer your query as best as possible.
Well then, try again. The only query I made was what was the precedent you say was set that regards honor duels. (Reference your words: "The ever loyal bulldog Oakenshield and his protege Sartan, in complete contrivance to destroy Huma at the Overlords whim turned the entire Council towards a vote which was totally unjust and without merit on the basis of an unofficial match between the Dwarf and Huma. Which as past
precedent has shown, means nothing. Unsanctioned matches are not
recognized by the sport.") The problem is, I am having a hard time remembering the particular incident that set the precedent you bring up.
>but will agree with Lupton that the decision of the Council had little to do
>with Dalamar's fathers' incipent mortality.
It had considerable importance to do with mine.
> And as far as ten thousand gold crowns are concerned....thats mere
>balderdash. If I had been fined ten thousand gold crowns I most probably
>would have laughed and dug it out of a change drawer in my study.
How wonderful for you to never worry about money and to be able to scoff at what many people consider a hefty sum.
> An untarnished record? I believe that you, the loyal council voted to
>place censure in the histories of Dalamar's reign pertaining to this event.
>So thusly I believe that once we have all gone our seperate ways the Duels
>will know little of this event. As there will be no recording of it.
This paragraph makes no sense. We voted that censures will be recorded in the histories regarding his reign so that no one will forget what happened and you say, "there will be no recording of it?" What?
>And his perfect attendance record? Like that matters to anyone, all of us
>know the virtues of our current Overlord and none would question his ability
>to defend his title nor his want to do so, so how, pray tell has he been
>diminished?
It would be like this, Adonai: until Huma's challenge, Dalamar has shown up for many intercessions and many challenges for his title. It was clear to me that he takes the title seriously and the responsibilities that come with it. A death in the family/pressing reasons works only once when missing an important engagement. If Dalamar were to miss another one, no matter the excuse, he would have set a pattern, and that is not acceptable. One time,
a pattern does not make, two times, it does.
>Let us look at what Huma has lost and weigh it against the fine of ten
>thousand crowns.
>
>1> Friends
>2> Respect
>3> A Place he Loved
>4> Belief of Self Worth
>
The things Huma lost that you listed have nothing to do with the council's decision. They have to do with either his breaking of an oath that happened before the council convened or his self-inflicted punishments after.
I reiterate, as a result of the council's decision, Huma lost one thing and that was his right to challenge the Overlord for the remainder of the cycle.
I will retract item number one on my list of things Dalamar lost because the death of his father was not a result of the council's decision as someone kindly pointed out to me.
>while illegally stripped of his rights
Prove your charge. Where in the rules does it say he was illegally stripped of his rights? Are you not really trying to impose what you THINK the rules should say rather than what they REALLY say? You have no basis whatsoever for your charge and for you to continuously disregard what is actually written is irresponsible and unreasonable. You are an exceptionally intelligent man, please do the intelligent thing of having a basis for your claims.
Only the uniformed and the ignorant cast charges that cannot be supported. We voted within the law and you have no right to point a finger at me and say I broke the law when you have NOTHING to back yourself up.
Prove your charges, I am tired of your slander.
Simply,
Morgan du Cornwall
Date: 31 Oct 1998 14:42:52 EST
> I will try to answer your query as best as possible.
Well then, try again. The only query I made was what was the precedent you say was set that regards honor duels. (Reference your words: "The ever loyal bulldog Oakenshield and his protege Sartan, in complete contrivance to destroy Huma at the Overlords whim turned the entire Council towards a vote which was totally unjust and without merit on the basis of an unofficial match between the Dwarf and Huma. Which as past
precedent has shown, means nothing. Unsanctioned matches are not
recognized by the sport.") The problem is, I am having a hard time remembering the particular incident that set the precedent you bring up.
>but will agree with Lupton that the decision of the Council had little to do
>with Dalamar's fathers' incipent mortality.
It had considerable importance to do with mine.
> And as far as ten thousand gold crowns are concerned....thats mere
>balderdash. If I had been fined ten thousand gold crowns I most probably
>would have laughed and dug it out of a change drawer in my study.
How wonderful for you to never worry about money and to be able to scoff at what many people consider a hefty sum.
> An untarnished record? I believe that you, the loyal council voted to
>place censure in the histories of Dalamar's reign pertaining to this event.
>So thusly I believe that once we have all gone our seperate ways the Duels
>will know little of this event. As there will be no recording of it.
This paragraph makes no sense. We voted that censures will be recorded in the histories regarding his reign so that no one will forget what happened and you say, "there will be no recording of it?" What?
>And his perfect attendance record? Like that matters to anyone, all of us
>know the virtues of our current Overlord and none would question his ability
>to defend his title nor his want to do so, so how, pray tell has he been
>diminished?
It would be like this, Adonai: until Huma's challenge, Dalamar has shown up for many intercessions and many challenges for his title. It was clear to me that he takes the title seriously and the responsibilities that come with it. A death in the family/pressing reasons works only once when missing an important engagement. If Dalamar were to miss another one, no matter the excuse, he would have set a pattern, and that is not acceptable. One time,
a pattern does not make, two times, it does.
>Let us look at what Huma has lost and weigh it against the fine of ten
>thousand crowns.
>
>1> Friends
>2> Respect
>3> A Place he Loved
>4> Belief of Self Worth
>
The things Huma lost that you listed have nothing to do with the council's decision. They have to do with either his breaking of an oath that happened before the council convened or his self-inflicted punishments after.
I reiterate, as a result of the council's decision, Huma lost one thing and that was his right to challenge the Overlord for the remainder of the cycle.
I will retract item number one on my list of things Dalamar lost because the death of his father was not a result of the council's decision as someone kindly pointed out to me.
>while illegally stripped of his rights
Prove your charge. Where in the rules does it say he was illegally stripped of his rights? Are you not really trying to impose what you THINK the rules should say rather than what they REALLY say? You have no basis whatsoever for your charge and for you to continuously disregard what is actually written is irresponsible and unreasonable. You are an exceptionally intelligent man, please do the intelligent thing of having a basis for your claims.
Only the uniformed and the ignorant cast charges that cannot be supported. We voted within the law and you have no right to point a finger at me and say I broke the law when you have NOTHING to back yourself up.
Prove your charges, I am tired of your slander.
Simply,
Morgan du Cornwall
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: joaknshld@aol.com (J Oaknshld)
Date: 31 Oct 1998 21:44:36 EST
<<In light of this all the Overlord has a history of questionable actions. Not supporting his loyal barons, and showing favoritism to others wether they be loyal or not. (these are not MY opinions but things oft stated by many)
( and questions oft asked)>>
What other Overlord has defended (successfully) so many of his loyal barons in need?
I believe ye still anger over Dalamar's support of Ulath Fici when he did best ye in da rings fer yer title and ring. If I am not wrong, ya didn't ask fer him ta intercede, and he did gladly accept Ulath as a baron. Why does Dal have ta be upset a friend, Ulath, won just cause yer a loyal baron whom did not ask his help?
Dalamar has never been questionable in his loyalty ta his loyalist barons. Period.
~J
Date: 31 Oct 1998 21:44:36 EST
<<In light of this all the Overlord has a history of questionable actions. Not supporting his loyal barons, and showing favoritism to others wether they be loyal or not. (these are not MY opinions but things oft stated by many)
( and questions oft asked)>>
What other Overlord has defended (successfully) so many of his loyal barons in need?
I believe ye still anger over Dalamar's support of Ulath Fici when he did best ye in da rings fer yer title and ring. If I am not wrong, ya didn't ask fer him ta intercede, and he did gladly accept Ulath as a baron. Why does Dal have ta be upset a friend, Ulath, won just cause yer a loyal baron whom did not ask his help?
Dalamar has never been questionable in his loyalty ta his loyalist barons. Period.
~J
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: drakewyni@aol.com (Drakewyn I)
Date: 01 Nov 1998 06:52:29 EST
In point of fact.
The histories, currently compiled and maintained by Turienal Firesinger, will show Dalamar's censure by the council... a mark that will last for as long as the Duel of Swords does.
Let us hope this will end one of the last remaining arguements.
Lady Drake, aka the Gryphon
Date: 01 Nov 1998 06:52:29 EST
In point of fact.
The histories, currently compiled and maintained by Turienal Firesinger, will show Dalamar's censure by the council... a mark that will last for as long as the Duel of Swords does.
Let us hope this will end one of the last remaining arguements.
Lady Drake, aka the Gryphon
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: dukeuziei@aol.com (Duke UzieI)
Date: 01 Nov 1998 23:29:28 EST
Baroness le Fay,
I slander no one. I will say this, there is one thing I have learned and learned well in 26 eons of existance and it is never to argue with a woman.
You are correct in notating that I did not mention the precedent I had mentioned in passing. I will now set that precedent in text for your own edification.
Baronial Challenge: Darkness vs Sartan Z, originally the Baron DID NOT show for his challenge match. In their eagerness to settle the challenge expiediently the Warlord Sartan and the Baron Darkness agreed to fight the match again without Council decision and even convinced an RDI observer to officiate the match. BUT...because the match WAS NOT the ACTUAL sanctioned challenge match it was voided and still sent to Council for decision. So
thusly, Huma and Oakenshields match falls into the same category.
Please attempt to understand that I do not persue this posting for furtherance of name calling and blame giving. The community is MORE than aware who is to blame in this menagerie of finger pointing and character assasination and is acting accordingly. I am merely voicing my opinion...which, last I checked...was not dishonorable, illegal or without merit. So please Baroness do me the respect of at least conceeding that it is my opinion and
refrain from attempting to throw it into the area of bitter propaganda....which it is far from. Baron G'nort....a man I have long respected made a statement that surprised me coming from him....and I decided it was worth a reply, you will notice....that other than a few responses I have stayed out of this mess. As I have ties with both sides of the argument, and a deeper tie to the sport itself. And I would not deign to attribute to its inherent
destruction myself.
Respectfuly,
~Adonai Uziel
~DragonLord of RhyDin
Date: 01 Nov 1998 23:29:28 EST
Baroness le Fay,
I slander no one. I will say this, there is one thing I have learned and learned well in 26 eons of existance and it is never to argue with a woman.
You are correct in notating that I did not mention the precedent I had mentioned in passing. I will now set that precedent in text for your own edification.
Baronial Challenge: Darkness vs Sartan Z, originally the Baron DID NOT show for his challenge match. In their eagerness to settle the challenge expiediently the Warlord Sartan and the Baron Darkness agreed to fight the match again without Council decision and even convinced an RDI observer to officiate the match. BUT...because the match WAS NOT the ACTUAL sanctioned challenge match it was voided and still sent to Council for decision. So
thusly, Huma and Oakenshields match falls into the same category.
Please attempt to understand that I do not persue this posting for furtherance of name calling and blame giving. The community is MORE than aware who is to blame in this menagerie of finger pointing and character assasination and is acting accordingly. I am merely voicing my opinion...which, last I checked...was not dishonorable, illegal or without merit. So please Baroness do me the respect of at least conceeding that it is my opinion and
refrain from attempting to throw it into the area of bitter propaganda....which it is far from. Baron G'nort....a man I have long respected made a statement that surprised me coming from him....and I decided it was worth a reply, you will notice....that other than a few responses I have stayed out of this mess. As I have ties with both sides of the argument, and a deeper tie to the sport itself. And I would not deign to attribute to its inherent
destruction myself.
Respectfuly,
~Adonai Uziel
~DragonLord of RhyDin
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: morganfay@aol.com (MorganFay)
Date: 02 Nov 1998 10:12:15 EST
Uziel,
You are entitled to your opinion until you lie. Nothing was done illegally. Lying does not fall under the heading of "having an opinion." Until you can point to the particular clause in the rules that proves the Council acted illegally, you are doing a great disservice to this community you claim to be speaking for. Repeating lies over and over again do not make them spontaneously become true. You may think what the council did SHOULD be
illegal and that would fall under the heading of opinion (and I would have no issue), but saying they DID something illegal is not an opinion, it is a claim of fact, and in this instance, is groundless. If it is not true, and you are accusing persons of illegality with no proof or basis, it is slander.
In closing, kindly keep your sexist remarks to yourself if you strive for credibility. Your ad hominem attacks are tasteless and crude and they have no place in discussions within this sport. If all you can do is insult my gender to rationalize not having to prove your claims of illegality, then perhaps it is understandable why you use lies to bolster your platform.
-Morgan
Date: 02 Nov 1998 10:12:15 EST
Uziel,
You are entitled to your opinion until you lie. Nothing was done illegally. Lying does not fall under the heading of "having an opinion." Until you can point to the particular clause in the rules that proves the Council acted illegally, you are doing a great disservice to this community you claim to be speaking for. Repeating lies over and over again do not make them spontaneously become true. You may think what the council did SHOULD be
illegal and that would fall under the heading of opinion (and I would have no issue), but saying they DID something illegal is not an opinion, it is a claim of fact, and in this instance, is groundless. If it is not true, and you are accusing persons of illegality with no proof or basis, it is slander.
In closing, kindly keep your sexist remarks to yourself if you strive for credibility. Your ad hominem attacks are tasteless and crude and they have no place in discussions within this sport. If all you can do is insult my gender to rationalize not having to prove your claims of illegality, then perhaps it is understandable why you use lies to bolster your platform.
-Morgan
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: morganfay@aol.com (MorganFay)
Date: 02 Nov 1998 11:07:33 EST
A parenthetical post, of sorts.
I will research the incident of Darkness and Sartan. From what you have said, it is troubling, in my opinion, that the duel was not allowed. However, forgive me for not taking you at simply your word at this time.
In the meantime, as I was told when I tried to use precendent to support my position in two councils past, precendent does not immediately and without question carry more weight in the decision-making process 100% of the time. Precedent may be applied to justify a ruling, it does not mean it must be used to justify a ruling. If it had to be used, it would not be called precedent but rather law.
-Morgan
Date: 02 Nov 1998 11:07:33 EST
A parenthetical post, of sorts.
I will research the incident of Darkness and Sartan. From what you have said, it is troubling, in my opinion, that the duel was not allowed. However, forgive me for not taking you at simply your word at this time.
In the meantime, as I was told when I tried to use precendent to support my position in two councils past, precendent does not immediately and without question carry more weight in the decision-making process 100% of the time. Precedent may be applied to justify a ruling, it does not mean it must be used to justify a ruling. If it had to be used, it would not be called precedent but rather law.
-Morgan
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 02 Nov 1998 14:25:17 EST
Morgan, lass
With regard to the matter concerning Sartan and the then Baron Darkness, the Council was in session considering the question of a rematch between the two. The Baron 'assumed' the Council would rule in favor of a rematch. The Baron, without waiting for an official announcement from the Council, didst schedule the match, didst obtain an official caller, without informing said caller that the match was under discussion by the council, and the two,
Sartan and Darkness didst meet in the ring.
That match was declared forfeit, and the matter returned unto the Council.
Those circumstances dinna e'en remotely resemble the circumstances surrounding Huma Dragonbane and Dalamar, let alone with regard to the duel betwixt Jeffrey Oakenshield and Huma.
The Baron Darkness acted with utter and complete disregard for the Council.
Jona.
Date: 02 Nov 1998 14:25:17 EST
Morgan, lass
With regard to the matter concerning Sartan and the then Baron Darkness, the Council was in session considering the question of a rematch between the two. The Baron 'assumed' the Council would rule in favor of a rematch. The Baron, without waiting for an official announcement from the Council, didst schedule the match, didst obtain an official caller, without informing said caller that the match was under discussion by the council, and the two,
Sartan and Darkness didst meet in the ring.
That match was declared forfeit, and the matter returned unto the Council.
Those circumstances dinna e'en remotely resemble the circumstances surrounding Huma Dragonbane and Dalamar, let alone with regard to the duel betwixt Jeffrey Oakenshield and Huma.
The Baron Darkness acted with utter and complete disregard for the Council.
Jona.