Well Hi cthia,
And good morning to you too.
My apologies for again misspelling secession's, and woe is me for misspelling it twice [I thought I had deleted the second C, but my eyes are getting rather worse], though I wanted to avoid the apostrophe in the title.
I don't understand how you can claim I'm trying to frighten you [HOW?], albeit trying to stifle your silly ideas (though I was never a fan of All In The Family) when I think you're wrong, yes.
However, your lengthy bizarre vilification of me below reflects more on you as your previous presumptuous attacks did.
I am merely disagreeing with you and your apparent trolling from obvious wrong assumptions and premises, especially when I find it very disagreeable.
Am I allowed to disagree with you?
Can we have an honest truthful discussion?
What is the best way you feel I should correct one of your mistaken ideas or concepts?
Granted it may just be easier for you to post some silly idea at the forum than bothering to look in the books, even when you know its impossible, or silly to start with.
I capitalized Cthia as a attempted compliment as I do all posters, yet you are the only one to take umbrage. So be it.
I honestly appreciated your correction to my original post and said so very honestly and courteously, leaving only my original textev error so people could still understand your post.
I thought that was the courteous thing to do, to keep your post meaningful, not obsolete, but take it how you will, though I must thank your extra effort to help me finally get it right.
Hurrah!
Yes, I too thought we'd broken new ground in our distant arcane relationship.
I'm sorry and surprised you felt I was trying to act as the moderator in shutting down the quandary over the TQ's poor basic education, [the idea of attempting to moderate boggles my mind] but you and PeterZ had gone round and round, and other posters had felt it wasn't progressing either.
Now I was indeed excited by all the great posts and wanted to add my own enthusiasm.
I'm sorry you took it so awry to think I thought I could speak for all the other posters, when I can only express my own opinion, I've never tried or claimed to speak for others.
I've only attended the first Honor-con, so how did you get the impression I try to somehow lord it over others?
I was amazed that particular thread drift did stop, so I thank you again for that, since from our past experience thread drift never has stopped in the past, despite however many remarks by all and sundry etc.
How can I be so inhuman as you claim when I'm so obviously a flawed human as to annoy you so easily?
You seem far more agitated by a few critical words than I would think someone of your apparent accomplishments would or should be, so I'm curious how your beautiful wife and brilliant niece point out any of your all too human mistakes or frailties.
Although I have no intention of pleasing Rose by having us become one of her 'couples', I'll try to ignore or overlook your silly jabber the way Steph learned to do with Andrew [chapter 29, CoG], who you remember, was a genius in his very special area of expertise, so I'll pay very polite attention when you broach something you know a lot about.
But don't expect me to ignore all of your silly jabber.
L
quote="cthia"Enjoyed the post, right up until the last sentence where you absolutely could not resist taking another stab at me. Does it ever get old with you? Are you even capable of growing up? Do you really think that your ill manners is an embarrassment to me? Really? You do!?
quote As usual, Cthia wasn't paying attention or thinking about the implications of the textev. quote
It is
cthia NOT
Cthia. I purposely use all small letters to signify an ideal and NOT a name.
Oh great parser of the implications of Weber textev. 
lyonheart,
I have tried to get along with you. Yet every so often you see fit to get a wild hair up your bum. Every time you stick your head above water you peer through your periscope at me. Does it ever get tiresome? You are not frightening me, just annoying me.
In the secessions thread that you created, I attempted to inform you of the wrong choice of words in your title "succession" as opposed to "secession." I attempted to manage it as respectfully as possible. I even admitted to coming close to making the same mistake—an admittance tendered for the sole purpose of lessening any of
your potential embarrassment. I even smiled when you seemed to accept it graciously and thanked me for it. And then I considerately refrained from pointing out that you corrected the choice of words but left it misspelled, as it is still misspelled in the title. But all and all I thought we had broken new ground and I also thought maybe, just perhaps... but then you later proceeded to call off an interesting conversation that had developed in the thread (playing moderator), and claiming that the discussion that had materialized "was growing tiresome for the rest of us."
What "rest of us?" "The rest of us" were participating in the discussion. The discussion saw input from every single participant. Even lyonheart himself. Yet you spoke for everyone, when everyone were part of the thread drift. It was interesting. Yet I dropped it as soon as you interrupted it, for the sake of peace. Didn't I?
I didn't mean to hijack your thread, if that is what you feel I did and is the essence and fuel of your new wild hair. I only saw a matter that I thought needed addressing, and did.
I attempt to participate in everyone's thread. I really hate leaving a thread dangling as someone created that thread wanting to discuss it. When I participate in threads, I try and do it peacefully and in a respectful manner. I even participated in your "Names for Space Stations thread" in a respectful manner. Yet you keep following me with silly, childish nonsense. I do wish the real Duckk, the real moderator, would please stand up. There seems to be several in the forum.
Now go on and tell me again how
your disrespect, how
your lack of manners is somehow my fault and not your own, how my failing to read the series fifty-leven times has given moral license to abandon common courtesy, decency and respect.
Perhaps Duckk should quickly move to place that requirement in the forum rules -- "Must be inhuman and can remember every single thing that you read, or must have read the series X number of times. And must not, absolutely not, have any opinions of your own, especially IF your member name is cthia. Eh? And you must not improperly digest, "misassimilate," or disagree with anyone in the forum, eh? And you cannot be human. One must be perfect as is lyonheart."
Anyway, the thread had faltered, as soon as you disrespected me. I noticed that disrespect seemed to have the effect of you shooting it in the foot. I think people are tired of
your incessant childishness. Perhaps you give more credit than is merited to the fact that you may have met many of the members at HonorCons. That does not mean they share your ill manners or common lack of decency. It is
that that people seem to grow tired of. Perhaps it is why this thread died a quick death
after your disrespect??? You should consider ceasing embarrassing your friends.
This was an attempt to revive the thread. You are welcome, though your appreciation is absent.
Duckk, I really wish you would fix whatever the hell the problem/quirk is with the mechanism to place enemies on your foe list. It does not work properly. In my case, it does not "refuse to display" foes' posts when I am viewing
as a guest. Simply when I log on. What good is the option in that case. It also
will display the users post the first few times in either case. What good is the option? It does not work globally and it does not wholly work locally.
I'd really like that feature to work properly, seeing as though this rampant disrespect by a couple of members will not be moderated, unless it would have the effect of closing one of my threads, that is.
lyonheart, you will be permanently ignored. It is odd your ill manners, as you always begin your posts with a pleasant greeting "Hi." Reminds me of an old saying...
lyonheart wrote:Hi Jonathan_S,
Quite right.
Obviously the SL was never intended to be the monster it became, it was intended to be a council of equals; remembering that Earth was in shambles, and the only interstellar communication was by small dispatch boats, NTM trade was extremely limited; expecting that condition to continue for some time, they made it the primary revenue for the league to keep it small, so it couldn't get big enough to threaten or intimidate any members.
Then another case of 'disruptive innovation' occurred, like the way Eli Whitney's cotton 'gin' destroyed the US constitutional expectation that slavery, being uneconomic, would die out in the early 19th century.
But when Adrienne Warshawski invented her gravity wave scanners and impeller hyper drive [alpha nodes] she also inadvertently ruined the premises on which the SL constitution had been kept small and limited.
Once huge amounts of money began flowing into the SL's coffers, it could not be kept small anymore; and while we don't know how quickly it grew in the 14th century [first full century after Warshawski's discoveries], the potential advantages were obvious to all those near and not members, whose quick membership diminished the influence of those relatively few original members far sooner than they had anticipated, before they could establish other restrictive means and traditions that could perpetuate their intended vision of a very limited alliance or confederation, not a very centralized powerful federation.
One wonders when they realized it was too late to save their original conception.
Given the five centuries of the OFS exploiting the current crop of protectorates rather than helping them as lawfully intended, among other things, one should ask what took any morally based star system so long to quit such an abomination.
Keeping the easy means of leaving probably acted as bait for many star systems, since they could always quickly leave with no league impediments or restrictions.
As usual, Cthia wasn't paying attention or thinking about the implications of the textev.
L
quote="cthia"
Yes, but the legality of a plebiscite is what I question. I thought it was simply to measure the feelings of the population. The plebiscite to determine whether Beowulf would secede was held in spite of the League, of which they are still a part, and was held
on Beowulf.
I misunderstood the plebiscite as simply being a determination of the population of Beowulf as whether they wanted to go the next step. I didn't think the outcome of the plebiscite was anything more than the preliminaries. I was shocked to learn differently.quote
Jonathan_S wrote:Remember that Beowulf was one of the founding planets of the.League. All of them were separate sovereign systems and all wanted to make sure that if this League thing didn't work out that they could leave.
That's why, like the European Union constitution the League constitution contains an explicit method for any member to withdraw.
RFC hasn't spelled out ine mechanical detail but clearly it must be something that can be exercised unilaterally - otherwise the independent planetary governments wouldn't have joined way back then as they'd be worried about being trapped by some collection of the others.
So while the plebiscite almost certainly isn't the whole mechanism once Beowulf sends formal notice there'd be no mechanism within the written constitution to deny or reject it.
Most of the planets OFS has been screwing over are still protectorate status or however else the League buerocracy can contrive to keep them from having the significant rights of a 'full' member.quote
quote
