Stormwind Government

by **Valestrion** Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:17 pm

It seems that we have a bit of a crisis in Stormwind government right now. A number of individuals and guilds have recently denied the legitimacy of the Stormwind Council, which reached a head at the last Council when a member of the Stormwind Regiment threatened to arrest the Council's Minister of Justice for illegally claiming to represent the King. I believe that some form of player government in Stormwind is important for the following reasons.

1. The regular meetings provide somewhere where new guilds and individual roleplayers can find other roleplayers, and get involved with the general RP community.
2. The government is a focus for inter-guild events, sometimes organised by the members of the government, but more often organised by individuals and guilds and begun by an announcement at the meeting.
3. Some types of RP work best with an "official" component, such as law and order where someone needs to represent the state, or military RP where the government is able to provide a common cause for people who otherwise would have little in common.

The government doesn't have to be the Council but whatever the government is, it can only really work if there is an OOC consensus on whether it is legitimate. While occasional IC challenges to the Council can provide RP, if the challenge comes from an OOC disagreement as to whether the government is legitimate, it is likely to lead to a division of the Stormwind RP community, with different factions unable to interact with each other ICly because they have no common frame of reference.

It seems to me that there are two main options.

1. The Council - This is a government where anyone may hold a post, whether noble or commoner. The Stormwind Council has fulfilled the role of being a player government for several years now. While it is not perfect, and has fallen into disrepute recently because of the inactivity of many of the members, it has the advantage that it is open to anyone except known criminals and cultists, and the Council has recently been introducing reforms in an attempt to fix many of the problems with it.
2. The House of Nobles - While this form of government has more legitimacy in Lore, it is less inclusive for players. Positions would be limited to those who have chosen to play their characters as nobles.

The choice of which form of government we should have is effectively a choice between Lore and playability. Whichever form of government we have, however, I believe it to be important that we have a government that is accepted by a consensus of the community as being the legitimate government.

My personal preference is for the Council, as it is well known and, as long as it moves away from the image that councillors are only appointed because they are already friendly with existing councillors, it provides an opportunity for more people to get involved compared with a House of Nobles limited to a self-appointed subset of society. However, I'm willing to work with either, as long as the community is agreed on it.

Please can we make a choice so that the government, whichever it is, can get to work?

by **Gilran** Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:21 pm

Torradan:

I don't understand why an IC issue is being dragged into OOC. We recognize and role-play with the Council, just because we disagree with it does not mean we will cease role-playing with it. Our interactions are strictly IC, so as I have said multiple times..

Retain the separation of OOC and IC. It is to late to go back on something up five years ago OOCly, RP it out.

by Guest Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:26 pm

Does seem like IC and OOC being mixed here. It...is working? I've nothing to do with the people denouncing it, but just because there's IC tension/drama/conflict/shenanigans doesn't mean everything's OOCly wrong.

by **Valestrion** Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:28 pm

Thanks for that, Gilran. Although Torradan's challenge was a little inconvenient, it was Treavor's contribution on Tuesday and the subsequent discussion on the LFRP chat channel that I was more concerned about. That was the main indication that some people consider it more than just an IC issue.

by **Gilran** Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:33 pm

Torradan:

Treavor's opinion matches my own completely. I still think the Stormwind Council is a stupid lore-breaking organization, but what is the point in OOCly arguing about it? Absolutely none. I'd rather RP out discontent with Braiden's rule over it, absentee ministers and whatever other propaganda that can be spewed forward.

To add to that, I think that any decision making body representing a high NPC faction or lore is stupid, but it is just too late now to change something unless it is instigated ICly and then brought into OOC, (the way law discussions and other infrastructural discussions come about?) Though I found that the SW council reformations being brought forward OOC and not IC was rather dubious.

None the less, I've posted my opinion, you know it, and you know Treavor's, let's see who else responds!

by **Braiden** Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:43 pm

We have actually had both of these arms of goverment represented by the playerbase before and the House of Nobles has had very mild intrest from the community as a whole and that's the main reason it's put on ice currently. The main disagreement however was based on the fact that the council is the Kings Council, meaning that the council to some degree speaks for the king. The essence of this conflict with the regiment or rather parts of it you speak of is as such an OOC matter that is reflected IC by them not working with us. It's not a new situation since the regiment actually distanced themselves from the council in the past aswell and it had no major consequences as the council does not work to exclude anyone disagreeing.

Then of course there is resistance to the council IC and OOC on other levels, it's only natural with the history the council has. IC is IC however and factions are very much allowed to distance themselves from the council there. The OOC situation is hardly new either, the council has alot of "baggage" where it has made bad or controversial descisions because its members are human just like the members of any organization replacing it would be.

There are and will be further discussions internally with those of us who remain in the council after the recent reformation and those who chose to leave for various reasons. There will also be fresh blood added and we will make a shot at trying to make something out of what we got to work with... if it changes anything only time will tell but we will try and anyone is welcome to apply to help us make it happen. Suggestions are always welcome aswell as I have been saying since I joined the council.

The thing about making the choise is that no matter what is chosen there will be disagreements... not to mention that the choise if taken by the community as a whole shouldnt be limited to these forums as only a portion of the playerbase is represented here.

by **Braiden** Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:47 pm

Though I found that the SW council reformations being brought forward OOC and not IC was rather dubious.

It was presented IC at a meeting actually.

by **Gogol** Thu Nov 22, 2012 12:15 am

I belive it is common courtesey, logic and sence that no one should claim to be speaking/acting on behafe of a NPC faction leader. For obvious reasons.

But for those who don't see them, I would like to reffer to a very old publicly posted IC letter here on this forum, from the Council adressed to King Magni of the Dwarves.

I cant quote it straight from memory, but the context of it was that SW Council accused the dwarven senate of being corrupt, and pleaded to Magni;

Drengi, the long sitting Grand Chancellor replied IC. A rather subtle one which remained being from his own characters view up on untill he stated that "Magni chuckled at these humans interfering with his senate".

This was meet with a public outcry from the council and many players alike, and rightfully so. "Who are you to speak and act for the NPC leader of the dwarves?"
If the Council now wishes to go in this direction it would create a hamster wheel that would, sooner or later, ruin it self.

by **Valestrion** Thu Nov 22, 2012 1:37 am

There is a difference between reporting something specific that the King has said or done, and speaking on behalf of the King on the grounds that certain powers have been delegated to you. In English criminal law, for instance, the prosecution acts on behalf of the crown but doesn't claim to have spoken to her personally. If we are discount speaking on behalf of the King, we must reject any form of player government, as a government in a monarchy, by definition, speaks on behalf of the King. We can do that, but we lose a useful focus for the Stormwind community.

by **Raenmar** Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:45 am

There is a difference between reporting something specific that the King has said or done, and speaking on behalf of the King on the grounds that certain powers have been delegated to you. In English criminal law, for instance, the prosecution acts on behalf of the crown but doesn't claim to have spoken to her personally. If we are discount speaking on behalf of the King, we must reject any form of player government, as a government in a monarchy, by definition, speaks on behalf of the King. We can do that, but we lose a useful focus for the Stormwind community.

This.

by **Thelos** Thu Nov 22, 2012 11:17 am

Valestrion wrote: In English criminal law, for instance, the prosecution acts on behalf of the crown but doesn't claim to have spoken to her personally

I feel this is a valuable distinction to make and use in actual role-play itself. "Speaking on behalf of the King" is indeed ambiguous and can invoke the false idea that the character is actually saying that he discussed this matter personally with the King. "Acting on behalf of the Crown", however, is a different matter entirely: it merely is a reference to the sovereignty that has been bestowed upon you or your organization by the monarch.

People sometimes forget that monarchs don't rule a society on their own, but have to delegate certain duties to trustees. Power in a monarchy is a transitive force in the sense that the crown can bestow part of its sovereignty on a person or an organization which means as much as that organization or person being given authority of a certain aspect of the kingdom. This being a monarchy however, this power is only legitimate if it can directly be traced back to the Crown. In other words, a Monarchy can have many legislative and enforcing institution, but they are only legitimate if they can trace their sovereignty back to the Crown. In a Monarchy, the "State" and "The Crown" are almost synonymous. "L’État, c’est moi".

If you deny players the ability to represent the Crown, you deny them the ability to represent the state, which will snowball into denying players even something banal as playing a guard or serving in the military.

TL;DR:

Acting on the basis of authority that gains legitmacy by being tracable back the Crown in an abstract way is fine and even inevitable in role-play.

Directly representing the King and speaking on behalf of him ion role-play is not.

by **Kittrina** Thu Nov 22, 2012 11:27 am

Paozi wrote:
Acting on the basis of authority that gains legitmacy of the crown in an abstract way is fine and even inevitable in role-play.

Directly representing the King and speaking on behalf of him ion role-play is not.

Exactly. Destroy that concept and many guilds cannot function at all- may as well get rid of any guard guilds (representing the King's laws), or church of Light/Druid guilds (representing the in-game religions) on similar grounds.

Also Torradan you may wish to examine your wording as you seem to be stating "I cannot do anything about this oocly, so I've placed my ooc viewpoint into my character to further my aim icly". Which is terrible for rp and just increases drama as it's always apparent when that's the case.
Myself I have characters who are pro or anti Chapter, or Council, they very rarely align 100% with my own ooc viewpoint, the point of rp is portraying a fictional character, not engineering a game world/community through whatever means you can, surely?

by **Grufftoof** Thu Nov 22, 2012 11:40 am

Paozi wrote:
TL;DR:

Acting on the basis of authority that gains legitmacy of the crown in an abstract way is fine and even inevitable in role-play.

Directly representing the King and speaking on behalf of him ion role-play is not.

Pretty decent summation of much of the "group RP" on either side of the game (Horde or Alliance). Legitimacy isn't just something a bastardborn son seeks!

I'm hazard a guess that most (if not all?) players in institutional guilds or RPing "on behalf of..." do so respecting the above. or at least attempting to. From Kor'kron Guards to Ironforge Senators, Deathstalkers to Councillors. They all take some of their "voice" (and ideals/ideas) from an NPC (or NP Organisation) of "power".

It's no bad thing, infact it's quite the norm in RP (here and in every other game I've played).

by **Gogol** Thu Nov 22, 2012 11:47 am

Kittrina wrote:Also Torradan you may wish to examine your wording as you seem to be stating "I cannot do anything about this oocly, so I've placed my ooc viewpoint into my character to further my aim icly". Which is terrible for rp and just increases drama as it's always apparent when that's the case.
Myself I have characters who are pro or anti Chapter, or Council, they very rarely align 100% with my own ooc viewpoint, the point of rp is portraying a fictional character, not engineering a game world/community through whatever means you can, surely?

Why dont you just stick to the topic.

To my suprise my point seem to have been lost.
If now the Council are truley representing the King, how come we see no reaction from King Wrynn that his strongest and wealthiest ally without comparising, the dwarves of Three Hammers with their Senate declared the Stormwind Council a sham and not an official represenation of King and country?

Wouldent then a logical action from him be to see over his(made up) council? Offer the dwarves some sort of solution.
My point is this, once you begin turning this hamster wheel, there really is no stopping of it.

Of course it could be all handled IC, but then all of these events must be faced, and not just a few of your picking.
Represent a King, do it logicaly, according to lore and sensible. Do take in to account that your own corrupted, shadow using, slandering, unproffesional alcoholic, traitour of the crown might get hurt/lose titles/be exectued by a warrior king.

Of course if this could be done, it would be marvelous.

by **Humphry** Thu Nov 22, 2012 11:56 am

Gogol wrote:
Kittrina wrote:Also Torradan you may wish to examine your wording as you seem to be stating "I cannot do anything about this oocly, so I've placed my ooc viewpoint into my character to further my aim icly". Which is terrible for rp and just increases drama as it's always apparent when that's the case.
Myself I have characters who are pro or anti Chapter, or Council, they very rarely align 100% with my own ooc viewpoint, the point of rp is portraying a fictional character, not engineering a game world/community through whatever means you can, surely?
Why dont you just stick to the topic.

To my suprise my point seem to have been lost.
If now the Council are truley representing the King, how come we see no reaction from King Wrynn that his strongest and wealthiest ally without comparising, the dwarves of Three Hammers with their Senate declared the Stormwind Council a sham and not an official represenation of King and country?

Wouldent then a logical action from him be to see over his(made up) council? Offer the dwarves some sort of solution.
My point is this, once you begin turning this hamster wheel, there really is no stopping of it.

Of course it could be all handled IC, but then all of these events must be faced, and not just a few of your picking.
Represent a King, do it logicaly, according to lore and sensible. Do take in to account that your own corrupted, shadow using, slandering, unproffesional alcoholic, traitour of the crown might get hurt/lose titles/be exectued by a warrior king.

Of course if this could be done, it would be marvelous.

If you look at her entire post, you'll see the first thing she spoke about was the topic at hand. The section you quoted was simply an opinion on a previous post.

Now, if I recall correctly there was talk from the council about sending some form of an envoy to speak to the Dwarves regarding discontent with the council. though again I believe that would be sent from the council as representing the crown, and not speaking for the King directly.

by **Braiden** Thu Nov 22, 2012 1:46 pm

The three hammers as represented IC is again a player made , so is the senate as represented IC. There has been reaction and there are work in progress to mend the relations, just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not gonna happen or is considered a real issue IC.

You seem to have alot of old issues with old members of the council and what the council has been in the past Gorgol. However rather then going on a rant concerning what the council has done in the past perhaps you should look to the future and the people that's involved now/will be involved soon.

Also as a note, yes the council is representing the crown rather then doing statements that's directly from the King. That's the entire point.

by **Gogol** Thu Nov 22, 2012 2:03 pm

Braiden wrote:The three hammers as represented IC is again a player made , so is the senate as represented IC. There has been reaction and there are work in progress to mend the relations, just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not gonna happen or is considered a real issue IC.

You seem to have alot of old issues with old members of the council and what the council has been in the past Gorgol. However rather then going on a rant concerning what the council has done in the past perhaps you should look to the future and the people that's involved now/will be involved soon.

Also as a note, yes the council is representing the crown rather then doing statements that's directly from the King. That's the entire point.

Braiden I am in the Senate, I know when something is being done or not.
And you would do better off not assuming so much. I happen to consider most all of the previous councillers old friends, if anything.
What it was in the past? I was a member my self of that one. Holding a chair(for the OTS) and I had nothing against it. Not that you would know, being to new in the game, but please reffer from the asuming part.
As for the Senate it is not a governing body made up by players, it actually excists lore wise. But this is not about that.

And I am very much looking at the present and the future, however giving an example of what could come, can only be done looking at the past.

But for example; If you do claim to be taking money straight from the Kings treasury, then you are inderectly saying you have his approval of doing so.
Then you are stating what the King does, and are not only representing.

by **Braiden** Thu Nov 22, 2012 2:28 pm

No matter if it's established in lore it's an organization run by players Gorgol, that's the entire point. You do the same in essence with the senate even if the Stormwind Council is something made entirely by players. I also know you are in the senate, we have presented very little of what's being done to a senate member already... the rest will come once preparations are done but it's not realistic of us to deal with the crisis before we have something to present so please... if you want me to stop making assumptions then perhaps you should do the same hmm? Let IC play out IC rather then going on about what we do and dont like you know everything that is to come, it's frankly arrogant to do so when there's players working hard to make a difference.

We dont claim to have the entire treasury at our disposal either but rather a portion distributed to our budget just like the army or anyone playing a state funded organization would have. Indirectly the various army units are stating what the king does aswell... so does the people heading up the army in TTH (not with the King of Stormwind of course tough).

by **Ledgic** Thu Nov 22, 2012 2:41 pm

I'm not sure I see the difference between people playing the Stormwind Council (player made) and -players- playing the Ironforge Senate. It may exist in lore, but you can't argue against the chance of them "potentially representing the king" when you're filling the roles of a lore organisation anyway.

scratch

As for the Senate having issues with the council... well, it isn't like that doesn't come up every other month.

Most of the issues between the two ended up being more OOC than IC the last time it exploded, so please, do try and work together on both an IC and OOC level to remove the problem. It only ends in copious headaches and silliness.

by **Gilran** Thu Nov 22, 2012 2:57 pm

Kittrina wrote:
Paozi wrote:
Acting on the basis of authority that gains legitmacy of the crown in an abstract way is fine and even inevitable in role-play.

Directly representing the King and speaking on behalf of him ion role-play is not.

Exactly. Destroy that concept and many guilds cannot function at all- may as well get rid of any guard guilds (representing the King's laws), or church of Light/Druid guilds (representing the in-game religions) on similar grounds.

Also Torradan you may wish to examine your wording as you seem to be stating "I cannot do anything about this oocly, so I've placed my ooc viewpoint into my character to further my aim icly". Which is terrible for rp and just increases drama as it's always apparent when that's the case.
Myself I have characters who are pro or anti Chapter, or Council, they very rarely align 100% with my own ooc viewpoint, the point of rp is portraying a fictional character, not engineering a game world/community through whatever means you can, surely?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Torradan:

You are welcome to have your own interpretation and opinion of what I am doing and what I am not, I cannot stop you from doing that, as false as it may be.

Let me explain it to you so you may understand it better from scratch:

I have never liked the authority that the Council threw upon people forcefully, this "you don't have to role-play with us if you don't want to" is a sham used to take the moral high ground when people are pissed off at a few people claiming they represent an NPC lore faction.

My character is the manifestation of the absentee, inactive and useless ministers that do nothing, or would you like to actively contest that the Council consists of enthusiastic, active members? The only member who was like that in a long time is Braiden. Or are you saying there are zero reasons to be discontent with the so called government when Westfall is in near famine and close to rebellion? Duskwood & Lakeshire are semi-secure and the only real province that's any bit loyal to the Kingdom is Elwynn, would you like to genuinely argue that nobody has a bone to pick with the government for being inefficient? Murky waters, history is vastly against you.

While I do enjoy accusations of mixing OOC/IC, I will point that you may find it is not I who has been constantly using my OOC position to manipulate anybody to do what I wish or to rise up against the Stormwind Council.

I agree with Gogol, the Council should be a city Council, not the King's Council. There is no King's Council, jurisdiction and the separation of powers exists within the Kingdom of Stormwind, there is NO centralization of power. This is in lore and I can back it up.

Finally: Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

To Braiden,

A note on representation of the crown, your representation has currently had no limits in terms of what you can and what you can't do, there has to be limits, it is clear and simple that certain things the King just would not let you do.

The way it is currently being role-played is that the Council has access to the coffers of the King, when you don't even have a position handling that aspect of role-play, to be perfectly honest you should lose several seats and retain only the ones that are most interactive. As Valestrion has perfectly outlined the Council is there to interact with other people, in practicality it is a public service, and as such the positions that are useless and contribute nothing should be removed.

Let the guards role-play their own thing, let the Church role-play it's own thing, Justice/Army should really be the only things at the Council, and even both of those should realistically only have some sort of senior judge and a senior military ranking officer, to say that the "King personally went and created this council and appointed these people" is just god RP.

tl;dr
• The Council needs to lose several 'powers' it has.

• The Council needs an OOC veto to strip down any decisions that are god RP because you don't represent the King, you represent what you believe are his best interests, multiple times there have been decisions made that have been dubious and when come under fire been flamed.

• The Stormwind Council is a public service, otherwise saying that holding the same thing every single week is a community service is just a blatant lie to people.

• Personally, an alternative? I prefer the separation of all organizations, Church, Army, Guard, Citizens, Magistrates(elected), Judges and what-not, the decentralization of all this is yes, more difficult to conduct, but it's also not bending the lore over and making it your prison bitch.

I rest my case.

by **Krogon Devilstep** Thu Nov 22, 2012 3:01 pm

Gilran wrote:
Kittrina wrote:
Paozi wrote:
Acting on the basis of authority that gains legitmacy of the crown in an abstract way is fine and even inevitable in role-play.

Directly representing the King and speaking on behalf of him ion role-play is not.

Exactly. Destroy that concept and many guilds cannot function at all- may as well get rid of any guard guilds (representing the King's laws), or church of Light/Druid guilds (representing the in-game religions) on similar grounds.

Also Torradan you may wish to examine your wording as you seem to be stating "I cannot do anything about this oocly, so I've placed my ooc viewpoint into my character to further my aim icly". Which is terrible for rp and just increases drama as it's always apparent when that's the case.
Myself I have characters who are pro or anti Chapter, or Council, they very rarely align 100% with my own ooc viewpoint, the point of rp is portraying a fictional character, not engineering a game world/community through whatever means you can, surely?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Torradan:

You are welcome to have your own interpretation and opinion of what I am doing and what I am not, I cannot stop you from doing that, as false as it may be.

Let me explain it to you so you may understand it better from scratch:

I have never liked the authority that the Council threw upon people forcefully, this "you don't have to role-play with us if you don't want to" is a sham used to take the moral high ground when people are pissed off at a few people claiming they represent an NPC lore faction.

My character is the manifestation of the absentee, inactive and useless ministers that do nothing, or would you like to actively contest that the Council consists of enthusiastic, active members? The only member who was like that in a long time is Braiden. Or are you saying there are zero reasons to be discontent with the so called government when Westfall is in near famine and close to rebellion? Duskwood & Lakeshire are semi-secure and the only real province that's any bit loyal to the Kingdom is Elwynn, would you like to genuinely argue that nobody has a bone to pick with the government for being inefficient? Murky waters, history is vastly against you.

While I do enjoy accusations of mixing OOC/IC, I will point that you may find it is not I who has been constantly using my OOC position to manipulate anybody to do what I wish or to rise up against the Stormwind Council.

I agree with Gogol, the Council should be a city Council, not the King's Council. There is no King's Council, jurisdiction and the separation of powers exists within the Kingdom of Stormwind, there is NO centralization of power. This is in lore and I can back it up.

Finally: Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

To Braiden,

A note on representation of the crown, your representation has currently had no limits in terms of what you can and what you can't do, there has to be limits, it is clear and simple that certain things the King just would not let you do.

The way it is currently being role-played is that the Council has access to the coffers of the King, when you don't even have a position handling that aspect of role-play, to be perfectly honest you should lose several seats and retain only the ones that are most interactive. As Valestrion has perfectly outlined the Council is there to interact with other people, in practicality it is a public service, and as such the positions that are useless and contribute nothing should be removed.

Let the guards role-play their own thing, let the Church role-play it's own thing, Justice/Army should really be the only things at the Council, and even both of those should realistically only have some sort of senior judge and a senior military ranking officer, to say that the "King personally went and created this council and appointed these people" is just god RP.

tl;dr
• The Council needs to lose several 'powers' it has.

• The Council needs an OOC veto to strip down any decisions that are god RP because you don't represent the King, you represent what you believe are his best interests, multiple times there have been decisions made that have been dubious and when come under fire been flamed.

• The Stormwind Council is a public service, otherwise saying that holding the same thing every single week is a community service is just a blatant lie to people.

• Personally, an alternative? I prefer the separation of all organizations, Church, Army, Guard, Citizens, Magistrates(elected), Judges and what-not, the decentralization of all this is yes, more difficult to conduct, but it's also not bending the lore over and making it your prison bitch.

I rest my case.

you know, the point of a restricted account isnt so you can circumnavigate it by posting For him and make it completely pointless. you should probably stop before the MoD's take note that your violating that.

oh, and i'l be the one to point out the simple solution.

If you dont like the council, dont get involved with it. people poured thousands of hours into it, its not there for you to dismantle for your own IC Agenda's at the expense of the hard work of others.

by **Vaell** Thu Nov 22, 2012 3:04 pm

Woah, woah, woah... Anyone wanting to denounce the council and pushing to it can go rp on their own. It has provided a lot of good rp over the course of its duration and though I've had my disputes with people like Geldar (for example, the exiling of Lexgrad's Ebons) there have been many more times where I've met new RPers because of council or it has lead to more rp.

The reason I've personally applied to it is because it is a hub for creating more rp. With fresh faces put upon the council - Braiden is an example - you can really improve the RP as a whole. I'd like to see the Minister of War actually creating campaigns, etc.

The Council is good for rp, acting on behalf of the crown is fine. I agree that some things deserve to be vetoed if they don't fit the best interests of the majority and, as Uncle Ben says, with great power comes great responsibility.

Stripping them of the power, neglecting them can be your own IC choice - sure - but if we lost the Council as a whole, the rp would suffer.

by **Gilran** Thu Nov 22, 2012 3:06 pm

Torradan:

I will take your bait just once.

You can't "not get involved" with an organization that claims to speak for your faction leader, there is no way of going around that.

And no, if I want to role-play discontent I will do so, keep your dictatorial sentiments to yourself.

by **Raenmar** Thu Nov 22, 2012 3:17 pm

you know, the point of a restricted account isnt so you can circumnavigate it by posting For him and make it completely pointless. you should probably stop before the MoD's take note that your violating that.

There's really no harm in it.

If you're going to fanboy the council, at least give valid reasons instead of disputing someone's right to give their opinion.

by **Grufftoof** Thu Nov 22, 2012 3:24 pm

There is a tonne of shite (and yes, a lot of it is shite) in the past here. Even those "not involved directly" know this. I'm not entirely sure anyone could/would deny it. Things regarding the Council are in flux, are being changed, things are being created. That is positive. There is no good in pushing for things to be done quicker, or raking over past grievances.

History may help shape the lesson, but it is also dead. Imagination is a thing of tomorrow, the future. Look to that, you're all supposed to be bloody imaginative, artistic, roleplayers afterall.

I'll make the rest of this a (hopefully) simple post:

We can't all be friends. That much is clear and certain. But we can be civil and discuss things. This doesn't mean bitch and moan and fail to see anyone's point but your own - no one is that myopic.

Converse, debate, talk - please do! It's why people have forums (look up the word itself).

And, finally. The mods are very capable of saying their own piece, and monitoring what we need. If you are worried about a post, flag it (if you have a genuine belief it goes against our rules or ethos). If you want, throw a PM. We're watching you, but in a nice way. Like a slightly leery but attractive drunk.

by Sponsored content

Stormwind Government

Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government

Re: Stormwind Government