Messages

5566

Dwilight / Re: Dwilight IC and OOC updates and news!

« on: May 20, 2011, 02:32:48 PM »

OOC It's pretty simple, Keannji was a very weak ruler, I tried to play him as a kind of nice-guy. He was nothing like Shin, Shin is a true politician and a conservative hardass. Kaennji had no politician in him and didn't really lie about anything. Alanna on the other hand was very politically savvy and Kaennji was no match.

Though Alanna became Queen when Kaennji stepped down voluntarily—I think you were pretty inactive at the time, and just not able to attend to rulership much.

To be fair, though, he stepped down when Alanna was halfway from Askileon to Poryatown (which was still the capital then) to lead a rebellion against him, which would have included a number of other prominent early Lurians, and had almost no chance of failing, as I recall

5567

Dwilight / Re: Dwilight IC and OOC updates and news!

« on: May 20, 2011, 01:10:10 AM »

I must say that sounds disturbing. Could someone break it down once more for me?

I stated that stating that commoners had rights, as such, was incorrect, but that giving them protections under law was fine.

Nerukou (player of Rauffe) quoted only the first part of that, out of context, as far as I can tell to support his position that everyone should be able to abuse commoners in any way they want any time.

I called him out on it, and he snidely said that he didn't care what I thought, the clear implication being that he feels there is nothing wrong with quoting me out of context to support a position nearly opposite to that which my words actually said.

I don't know what I've done to earn such open contempt from him OOC.

5568

Dwilight / Re: Dwilight IC and OOC updates and news!

« on: May 19, 2011, 08:15:25 PM »

Obviously, somebody told him.

And Tim, what you do or do not appreciate doesn't concern me.

Well, so long as at least the players of Skyndarbau and Shin, here, know that you're being deliberately and unapologetically dishonest OOC about this, I'm satisfied with that.

5569

Dwilight / Re: Dwilight IC and OOC updates and news!

« on: May 19, 2011, 06:14:34 PM »

So Anaris, when Skyndarbau proposes 'property rights', being a law that protects commoners from being 'robbed' or fined without reason, but still allows for confiscating of property if whatever consensus has been reached, that is not violating SMA? Or is it?

I see no reason that would violate SMA as long as it was clear that it was the nobles agreeing to allow the commoners to keep their stuff (because it's stupid to antagonize them for no reason), and not that it's fundamentally wrong to take stuff from commoners.

And I have friends in Fissoa.

5570

Dwilight / Re: Dwilight IC and OOC updates and news!

« on: May 19, 2011, 05:51:35 PM »

Y'know, Nerukou, if you're going to quote me in-game to support your positions OOC, I'd appreciate it if you'd not quote selectively so as to destroy the meaning of what I said.

I reiterate here: it is at best putting you on very shaky SMA ground to suggest that commoners, of any stripe, have any rights.  However, that does not mean that one should attack them wantonly, nor that it is wrong to codify protections for them into law.  One of the other Fissoans, I believe, mentioned something about the difference between "that which is inalienable and that which is granted."  She's on the right track. 

When I say that commoners do not have rights under SMA, I mean those that are inalienable.  Anyone may have rights granted them by law; I just find that it is simpler to define rights as those that are inalienable, and those that are granted as simply protections under law, so that I don't have to say the whole thing out each time

Some protections under law would still not be reasonable under SMA (for instance, a law that says if a commoner and a noble disagree, the commoner's word is to be believed), but simple things like "don't arrest or attack them without a very good reason" are fine.

5571

Helpline / Re: Adventurer Thread

« on: May 19, 2011, 01:10:29 PM »

Before, I was in a guild, and I had to pay a fee that was automatically taken from me every month, I think. Or perhaps it said 'you're balance has been adjusted accordingly', so I never paid, seeing the guildhouse was half a continent away

Yes, just like you can't actually pay people through a guild, only adjust their balance upward, you can't actually take money from people through a guild—just adjust their balance downward.

5572

Helpline / Re: Adventurer Thread

« on: May 19, 2011, 01:04:55 AM »

Well, yes it costs them some money to send letters. But seeing they receive between 5 and 15 gold each month if they make it to the full ranks, that shouldn't be a problem.

Um...no, they don't.  Not unless you make a proactive effort to deposit money in the guild treasuries and get advies to withdraw it.

That 5-15 gold per month is just to the guild balance, which doesn't pay for messages.

5573

Development / Re: FR: Time

« on: May 18, 2011, 09:36:02 PM »

All Tom has ever said on the subject is that BM time is real time. Period.

Aging, seasons, and harvests happen faster in BM than in real world, but that doesn't change that time flows the same. Days, weeks, months, and years.

5574

Development / Re: FR: Time

« on: May 18, 2011, 08:54:26 PM »

A year in BM is a year in RL.

Did you actually read what I said?

5575

Development / Re: FR: Time

« on: May 18, 2011, 05:56:22 PM »

Tom has always been quite clear that BM time is, essentially, real time.  Processes such as aging, crop growing, and progression of seasons do not run at the same speed as they do in our world, but time does.

5576

Dwilight / Re: Dwilight IC and OOC updates and news!

« on: May 18, 2011, 04:51:37 PM »

See, I think the problem is you're still talking in terms of "rights for commoners," when it's been explicitly made clear on numerous occasions that commoners have no rights.

If you talk about them as "protections under law," that's something fundamentally different, even though it may have the same practical effect.

So, under this interpretation, commoners do not have the right to their own property.  However, they can be protected from having it stolen from them by nobles for no reason, with no compensation.

5577

Dwilight / Re: Dwilight IC and OOC updates and news!

« on: May 18, 2011, 02:47:05 PM »

Well, Skyndarbau is no longer Banker, so Lord Raych will have to do. I haven't seen or heard anything from him though.
The Privateers are assembled in Mangai and Kamade, to face the monsters soon. And Skyndarbau is on trial for 'peasant-loving', after demands for basic rights for peasants (such as property). The Advies might rebel, or just leave Fissoa, seeing that the Judge said that commoners have no rights whatsoever. A referendum asking 'Should commoners have rights' is being held, and Skyndarbau doesn't like it one bit

It seems to me that one of the fundamental problems in such cases is differing definitions of what it means to "have rights."

My guess would be that in this case, the Judge looks on "having rights" as meaning that they are fundamentally on some sort of equal level with nobles, and that they inherently deserve something that nobles must acknowledge or be in the wrong.

On the other hand, the other side, I suspect, looks on it as meaning that commoners are not something you should just kick around and abuse however you want, and that this should be enshrined in law.

In my view, the most appropriate way to define it is to say that commoners do not have rights, as such: but there should be protections in the law against persecuting them for no reason.  This is something that the nobility do for them because it makes sense, not because the commoners have an inherent right to it.

5578

Helpline / Re: Blank letters

« on: May 16, 2011, 04:21:03 PM »

Yes.

5579

Helpline / Re: Blank letters

« on: May 16, 2011, 04:14:43 PM »

You want it to go back in time and read the minds of the people who were writing those messages to figure out what they wrote, but never made it into the DB?

No, it should only work for future messages.

5580

Helpline / Re: Blank letters

« on: May 16, 2011, 03:20:24 PM »

I have found what I believe to be the source of this problem, and committed a fix (rev. 5424).

I have emailed Tom asking him to run another update.