House of Nobles open discussion

So you're saying that Anduin Wrynn makes the members of his HOuse of Nobles swear to uphold the laws set in place by our player made council? Which cements council laws as the actual, official lawmakers of Stormwind, which leads to the endless chain of NPC authority which invalidates any and all IC power play since again in the end it all comes from the King.

As for complex rules, if anything, its taking some away.. up until now Ministers have this vague thing where they may or may not need something voted in, Mael says major changes but its open for debate WHAT they are (law change might be easy to cover.. but iv seen things voted that in all respects, was fully within the Ministers duty's as written and should never of been voted in the first place or that may be debatable to require a vote? wheres that line?) my point being, we remove that and just have it so people can question an action that was considered wrong rather than telling people they need to have permission from everyone else before they start,

There is no need to create problematic scenarios when there are none to be found, I cannot remember any case when this was even a problem..it's like selling protection against earthquakes (if there was such!) in an area that never experienced them because it could potentially happen some day.

at no point did i expect the HoNs main objective to be purely to focus its intent on "HOW" the Council works, it wont walk in and tell them they have it wrong and this is how it should be.. most of its debates are aimed around land, ownership, tax, currency trade and "internal" workings of the city, but as long as the Council claims to what it dos now, it is everything you claim to fear mael.. its unquestionable and dos not answer to no one, sure you guys can be arrested and such, but you are making the very laws you expect to be judged by, that in it self is defeating unless there is an overseer, because it means the council dos indeed, both enact AND enforce the rules of the land with non who can overrule or over throw it .. it is currently the most unanswerable force in stormwind.

Currently I think all Stormwind based guilds/organizations are part of the Council, it's them who have the voting right, no Minister or any other person, which was the biggest part of the reform mentioned a few times, if the guilds of Stormwind decide on something, who would they answer to in terms of RPable groups/people? This is what the whole community thing is based upon after all.

then the system i see is just madness and has enough room for power play that if anything this idea i present counters that off by simply giving you something to BE answerable..

Could you state some examples please?

Also regarding boring meetings, the Council used to be closed in old days but by having public meeting we wanted to involve people and not make into some exclusive club, I totally understand and respect that political RP might be boring for some, that's why we have announcements in the first part, so people who are only there for that piece can listen in and then leave.

Finally the main purpose is really to create RP that tries to involve lot of people and guilds, given the fact we have less RP in these days because the community is smaller I think we should promote and encourage more RP, which is why I don't want to reject the idea of HoN, just that it could be done in a better way that would benefit everyone involved.

Ixirar/Kavalis.. what your doing is saying everyone needs to stop what there doing now and drop everything that has been done over the past 3 odd years.. because by the time you would be happy, pretty much everything that is set up now would have to be fully reformed as it is

Ministerys make the laws, sure ICly they are done though the kings word and all that BS.. but in the case you are making, everyone needs to stop what there doing now (not just my discussion post on some ideas ) and rebuild everything they have got so far.. and by everyone i mean Maelmoor and the council in general ... i some how see people not following that path of thought with you

secondly... who defines what line in RP we cross over on here? all the rolls of guards/law and everything else boils down to this very problem if we prob it for eternity to where its rooted foundations came from. its down to PLAYERS to not let it go beyond and stupid.. if you cant trust the people you RP with to be at least reasonable and understand that then you are clearly in the wrong crowd of people

Maelmoor wrote:Could you state some examples please?

more than 7 or 8 people have made a debate against the case of the change of the magic laws.. making light not be a "magic" but in the current state.. you guys because IC cant be made to change your mind, however,, that led to the problem of a few started to mention it to me then.. who do you go to if the council ignore your case against there choice? the subject got brushed away like 3 times so far but i know OOCly a few people only walked away because OOCly they felt there case was pointless if the council wont budge onto a topic beyond a statement, now if more than 5 people have come to me and addressed this,, i would feel it needed to maybe be brought up as a topic as clearly it enough people go against the opinions of the table to at least question it, but what if nether side can come to an agree ment, how dos a group press this case if the council ignores the stand?

I distinctively have seen an OOC grievance being used as an excuse to deliver IC hindrances though the council, Heldrick i am sorry to refer to you as reference , but an OOC dispute led to an action on the council where he demanded Mallicus was not allowed to lead his own guild IC .. if this is not power gaming and abuse of what he had.. i dont know what it

No, see, what you don't understand is that Maelmoor and the council has over the past few years actually been moving away from the "We claim our authority from being appointed by the king" approach. They've shifted it into a community union of guilds. Guard guilds don't face the same problem because every guard isn't appointed by the king. Take the Stormwind Regiment (I know they don't exist anymore but I don't know any of the current guard guilds) for example, the commander of the 1st Regiment was a self sustaining position that didn't take its authority from anyone else. This is why, for example, the Regiment and the Blazing Shields didn't claim the right to boss lower ranked people of the other guild around. The Stormwind Regiment only had authority over itself.

Same thing with the Council. It only has authority over itself. Claiming the King's authority means claiming authority over the entirety of Stormwind. If somebody ICly doesn't recognize the Council's authority then they should be free to oppose it. In turn, the Council could ICly be free to try and impose their authority either way. As long as it's not by OOCly claiming that Anduin gave it the thumbs up, because he didn't. Anduin doesn't care about the council, because it does not exist to him. By acknowledging this fact you open up the Council to being vulnerable to the will of the players, which is the way to establish a community organisation. If it's the King's council, it doesn't belong to the players, and the council is prevented from acting accordingly to the players' wishes if it doesn't fit Blizzard's narrative of Stormwind, lest they directly conflict with it.

In the past there's been a lot of controversy over the Council trying to decide whether or not certain guilds got the rights to pursue Guard duties. In the system I propose, this right wouldn't prevent someone from RPing a guard if their application was rejected. They'd simply be denied the authority to represent the council in their doings, but they could still RP members of Stormwind's army belonging to organisations not involved with the Council.

But the House of Nobles is different in that it is a pre-established entity in the lore and actually -does- have the authority to govern Stormwind on the king's behalf, which makes its existence as a player organisation troublesome, as it means that some people simply rule over others based entirely on an OOC claim that the king said it was ok.

What I'm suggesting isn't to discard the past many years of RP. My suggestion is to take the progress that's been made recently and going further with it. The sooner you guys realise that the king doesn't give two shits about your characters the sooner this kind of controversy can stop.

Ixirar/Kavalis wrote:No, see, what you don't understand

i can tell by your response you have NOT been to the council to see for your self.. for a LONG time .. see what happens there, before you judge what im seeing (and not JUST me)

Sigh. Okay. Nevermind lol, I'm not gonna get through to you.

wow... just wow...
*blinks at textwalls*

Right that took me over an hour including two afk's to work through all that.

There is just way too much info for me to drop a solid reply about things atm, I was pointed at this and requested to form an opinion, which would be obvious since my main seats in both Council and HoN.

Things I'd like to say now that jump up in my head;
-If there is to be a situation of a HoN gouverning over the Council, then the HoN would only be meddling with Council if a case is brought to their attention and that would only happen if (someone) in council is crossing a line to someone elses opinion and that it couldn't be dealt with in the Council itself.
- imo bullocks that we couldn't use the name of the King or the King as npc. Plenty of people salute the king in the keep as they walk by him during rp, many MANY npc's are used in rp by a ton of rpers, and the King can't be one of the used npc's? Paladins can speak in the name of the Light? A noble (wo)man can speak in the name of the King.
- The Council is the perfect reason for chars to meet eachother and guilds. It's a solid event and if a new char or new player wants to meet up with others, that is the place to go. Taking the difficult politics out of it will only lessen ooc annoyance and people leaving prematurely so a win situation imo.
- we do not -have- to keep the HoN in closed sessions ofc. People can turn up if they like. It's rp. If your char is a blockhead that doesn't care for rules then he's bound to walk in uninvited anyway.
- rp is rp. Anyone does what he likes. It is more fun to go along with the grand story usually since that gives you better chance of more interaction with more players and longer storylines. Cross (unwritten) rp agreements within an rp community people then tend to dislike you.
- the power is with the people, it has been like that and always will be. If the majority doesn't agree, then the few will be left aside. Same with rp, if most people start to not show up at council, then there is no use for it anymore. If the council or HoN or a guard guild or a group of vendors or just any group or institution is deemed not fun or not useful then people wouldn't show up anyway. ABout the king in this; he needs them. simple as that. A king is no king without his subjects. His power is given to him by his people, they could revolt if he is unfair. Then he'd not only lose his throne but also his life.
- Writing my own textwall YAY
- I love political rp. I think it's fun, and that is clearly not fun for everyone. So why not make it more fun for most? Pick up the biggest political discussions and move it to another evening where all who are interested in it can join and keep the Council meeting for the main meeting point on for Stormwind based alliance people.
- anyone can powerplay. No need to be a noble or a Minister or a Councillor for that. Evenso, if you are a powerplayer in such a position you will soon lose all ooc credibility from other players anyway.
- shoot HoN in a few minutes and I still need to log WoW...
- to be continued.

*edit* some replies have been posted inbetween me starting writing and entering this reply haven't read those yet. WIll get back on it at another time.

Azapha wrote:

Ixirar/Kavalis wrote:No, see, what you don't understand

i can tell by your response you have NOT been to the council to see for your self.. for a LONG time .. see what happens there, before you judge what im seeing (and not JUST me)

I think you focus too much on the Council, if you want to talk about the Council I gladly do so, just poke me in-game. Just like when starting a new business it will not be a smooth ride from day one, we have done mistakes but we have also learnt and improved. For ten years we have tweaked, changed, tried, this is how you evolve and get better after all. With that said, as I previously stated there is always room for improvement.

As for your idea, let us take ideas and suggestions in this thread and see how something centered around political noble RP can be done.

A king is no king without his subjects. His power is given to him by his people, they could revolt if he is unfair. Then he'd not only lose his throne but also his life.

You can't though. You can't revolt against the king. This is why king-given authority is BS. Because the moment the king gives you authority to rule over other people, those people can't do anything about it. OOCly claiming the King's authority is something that can not be ICly fought. You -can't- revolt against the king because the king -can't- be deposed. So when your revolt fails and the status quo returns the noble guy still ICly has authority over your character because -the king said so and he's still the king because plot armour means you can't do anything about him-.

That's why you can't use the King to grant your character authority. Because the only way it can be fought is OOC, so it doesn't promote roleplay at all. It only serves to alienate those who don't want to go along with that. So instead, get your authority ICly from people that you can ICly interact with.

Ixirar/Kavalis wrote:Sigh. Okay. Nevermind lol, I'm not gonna get through to you.

Nor do we seem to get through to you that the Council as it stands right now are doing EXACTLY what you're arguing against, the only difference being they don't reference the King to begin with. But still, they do all the things that would require the authority OF the King to do in the first place as I have explained to you in previous posts.

When was the last time you were on DB? Two years ago, when you jumped ship to a different server? Because you obviously have no clue what the Council have done recently, at all, by your previous posts. You have your opinion of course and that is fine, your most recent post actually adds something to the argument in my view.

But when you talk about the Council? Are you going off old information there? Because I can tell you right now, the Council MAY have shifted away from it, or started to, when you were around but have since gone back to their old habits. It isn't about the guilds anymore or promoting that community, that hasn't actually been raised in months.

What has been raised? Politics, laws (guilty of doing it myself there), guard rights... Things you'd need the correct authority from a certain someone to address.

If you think claiming authority from the King is a bad idea then that is perfectly reasonable as a stance to be on, I can get it. But just be perfectly aware that very stance puts you in opposition of the Council as well.

Ladies, Gentlemen, what you are discussing is one of the oldest problem in RP ever existed. One roleplayer likes this the other likes that. In the end, the roleplayer who has more people to back his ideas up wins. This is how politics work. So, if you want to play politics, find voters/supporters/followers.

Ixirar/Kavalis is brave and bold enough to always stand as a valiant guard of the lore and should be used in that way. But, no matter how he may like an idea or not, he is not the Community. No need to use attacks ad personam, trying to prove one point by questioning his activity. Thank him, as he does for you something you should ask him to do.

When I forged the idea and started it I tried to create a sphere for nobles to roleplay, bah! to make people aware what does it mean to be a noble. It took a year or so of preparations, even to make people aware that roleplaying a noble is not powerplaying nor trying to live by some higher standards than a typical "commoner." I tried to stay away of any big politics, as I knew I would need enough people to outvote the Council, which still serves as the bureaucratic heart of the Community, lorewise or not, either you like it or not.

On one hand it's nice to see that the idea lives on...

My four cents.

Ah, and just a reminder that a complete summary of this server's nobles lore is [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

Okay. This is a massive wall of text, and I am not sure whether I stayed track of it all. I'll be writing up something myself however. Count is as a suggestion or something.

"Gathering" of Nobles

Nobles = People with Money. People with Land. People with lots of possession. People with some fancy titles.

Ministers = People Hired/Commissioned by the Nobles for a Job. Their paycheck coming from the Nobles. Their job = to work forward improvement of the Kingdom.

Reason = If the Kingdom prospers, more Money flows, Nobles get even more rich.

No King Involved

No-one can be Minister + Noble same time.
_______

Stormwind Council

Councillors = Representatives of different guilds and organisations, the Voice of the People.

Ministers = Individuals hired by Nobles to forward improvement of the Kingdom, each in their own designate area.

Meeting Purpose = Announcements, News. No Voting whatsoever.

Minister Purpose = Listen & Work together with People in their designate area. Forward idea > Listen Feedback > Execute/Dump Idea. Ministers use Nobles money to Execute idea.

People feedback, Minister no Listen = People complain to Nobles. Nobles question Minister. Offence Big enough (and/or) Public outcry big enough> Nobles dump Minister.

Minister does job good = Everyone is happy. More Roleplaying all-around

Ministers does job bad = Nobles question Minister. If no improvement, Nobles dump Minister.

_____

I tried to write the suggestion in as simple manner as possible for easier reading.

Skarain wrote:
"Gathering" of Nobles

I see what you did there.

In all seriousness though, that way of looking at it works. It works very well.

tbh Hutchins, the council hasnt changed too much in 2 years. other than rambling on about laws. this is my ooc opinion on ic things. It has occationally been boring and bland and I'd rather get on to other stuff than 1 word of the law because the light and magic.

p.s: I'm also drunk.

Skarain wrote:
No Voting whatsoever.

It's good to see something constructive, it's the only way forward really.

However this part would be against the whole idea of the Council, it would be to remove the very foundation of it, why would the guilds/organizations of Stormwind ICly accept this?

Hutchins wrote:

Ixirar/Kavalis wrote:Sigh. Okay. Nevermind lol, I'm not gonna get through to you.

Nor do we seem to get through to you that the Council as it stands right now are doing EXACTLY what you're arguing against, the only difference being they don't reference the King to begin with. But still, they do all the things that would require the authority OF the King to do in the first place as I have explained to you in previous posts.

I've said, multiple times, that -if- this is the case then I'm against the council too, but that when last I was active on DB, the council underwent a reform that moved it away from this, that put all the power in the council in the hands of guild representives, which meant that the council derived its authority from the guilds that participated rather than from the king. And, based on the fact that Maelmoor, who has over the course of DB history been one of the most constant presences in the council, confirmed that this was still the vision, I got the impression that you lot were the ones arguing from a skewed perception of what the council is and does.

I am very consistent in my opinion on this and if Maelmoor admits that the Council still considers itself authorized by the king personally to govern the kingdom, then there's still a problem and I will still be a vocal critic of the council. But according to Maelmoor (again, a person who has for years been very involved in the council, and who was one of the people who actually formulated the reform of the council in the first place), the vision of the council right now is that it's the voice of the people, not the voice of the king. When I was in the Band of the Brave, our guild master chose to say that he didn't recognize the authority of the Council, and such the Band of the Brave had no representive in it and were not affected by its rulings. The guards still kept the peace if our members got unruly but things like the ban on carrying weapons that the Council proposed at one point, and the ban on warlocks that they also proposed, did not affect us, as we did not observe its authority. If their authority was granted by the king, they would've forced that on us. Like the council has done in its past incarnations when they claimed to be the king's council. They didn't, because we weren't in their jurisdiction as we -opted out-.

It's perfectly fine for the Minister of Justice to propose laws that affect its members and this doesn't conflict with the King nor does it assume governance over the kingdom. So long as they don't claim that it's approved by the King and don't assume governance over the kingdom.

Nonetheless, Skarain's model is great and should be iterated on if you want to go through with this.

Edit: And yes as Mallucis says I'm not an authority in this community and have never been. If someone desperately wants to claim to be part of the House of Nobles, effectively granting them dominion over all RPers in Stormwind, be my guest. I'm only telling you it's a bad idea and leads to drama.

I agree with Ixirar about Skarain's idea for this is good, and well worth trying out. I also agree that HoN will in the long run only cause unnecessary drama and grief in the long run, thus what Skarain suggests makes more sense to use. I hope that this will be the beginning of a brighter future for roleplay here on Defias Brotherhood.

One bit is missing from the lore part.

This was posted:

wow.gamepedia.com wrote:
The House of Nobles form the bureaucracy of the Kingdom of Stormwind and is under the direction of the ruling family: House of Wrynn. King Varian Wrynn currently occupies the throne and acts as the head of government. The House of Nobles is comprised of some of Stormwind's most powerful aristocratic bloodlines and positions in this governing body are typically inherited.[1] Presumably, they serve a legislative role as they are able to lobby for legislative issues [2] and serve as the judiciary branch for the kingdom as they are able to overrule regional elected officials on matters of law.[3][4]

And this wasn't:

wow.gamepedia.com wrote:
They wield considerable power in the city, but less amongst the Alliance as a whole. They are mostly royal advisors who have major influence over business and labor in town, since they own much of the land. King Wrynn has learned not to let them push him around anymore.[5]

[1] Page five - The Green Hills of Stranglethorn
[2] A [30] A Noble Brew
[3] A [26D] Crime and Punishment
[4] A [25D] What Comes Around...
[5] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Kosak on Twitter

Maelmoor wrote:

Skarain wrote:
No Voting whatsoever.

It's good to see something constructive, it's the only way forward really.

However this part would be against the whole idea of the Council, it would be to remove the very foundation of it, why would the guilds/organizations of Stormwind ICly accept this?

I am going to ask one thing.

What needs voting?

If a Minister plans something big, and needs the support of the Organisations of Stormwind, it's their problem to coax them in and make them approve the plan. If they do not agree, they can simply ignore it, just like the mentioned "Council Authority" ignored by Band of the Brave, mentioned in Ixirar's post.

That's the point of raising something up, and listening to feedback. If you want to get something of the sort through, you need their approval, since you lack any "divine authority". You are just a guy, with a job, with money at their disposal, a fancy title that comes with the job and potentially respect if you do your job well enough.

Do you need to raise a vote for something though? No.

Do you need the people support for it to go through? Yes.

What I proposed was from the standpoint that you "raise the topic up" during the Council and AFTER the Council you meet with the different people, discuss with them, change terms, get into a compromise (if such is needed) with those who disagree.

The proposal more or less takes decision making away from the Council table and spreads it out into the world of Roleplaying, in order to generate more roleplaying and to have the meeting able to proceed smoothly without stopping to vote at every turn.

You can of course discuss it right at the Council itself, but that does extend out the duration of the event. I do not know whether that is favourable for the purpose of the event.

If someone does not disagree (figuratively votes no), they simply do not acknowledge the Council authority in the matter. The outcome is still the same.

Secondly, a Question.

Does the Council 'need' to vote for new "representative of their guild" character? Do their "voice" need to be approved by the others, or can they just walk up to the table and "hi, I represent "X", this is our interests"?

----

Mind, I don't even vaguely claim to understand what you deem the 'foundation' of the Council being. I am here to write my thoughts, my own suggestions into the discussion. I will not be applying to any kind of Council-position anytime soon, as all my characters on Alliance would either be immediately rejected or otherwise not fit to the job. I do however what I can to contribute with ideas, even with my lacking knowledge of the Council inner workings.

Also, a curious thing about foundations. If the foundation is weak, the building will crumble. Then there is obviously a problem. To my understanding we are here driving forward suggestions. Admitted, it is about House of Nobles, not the Council itself, but since the OP proposes to link them, I've written my own thoughts to the conversation from that standpoint.

But yes. Excuse my wall. I originally had just that one question.

What really 'needs' voting?

Skarain wrote:
What really 'needs' voting?

I suppose, under your suggestion I mean, the only real voting would be the Nobles voting in new Ministers (based on interviews and all that nonsense)

Annnnd... Uhm. For the Council I guess any votes would be to decide how the guilds want to act during inter-guild events maybe? Not too sure.

Although I might be get understanding the point of your post right now, skim reading as I'm on the final few minutes of my lunch at work right now.

Skarain wrote:

Maelmoor wrote:

Skarain wrote:
No Voting whatsoever.

It's good to see something constructive, it's the only way forward really.

However this part would be against the whole idea of the Council, it would be to remove the very foundation of it, why would the guilds/organizations of Stormwind ICly accept this?

I am going to ask one thing.

What needs voting?

If a Minister plans something big, and needs the support of the Organisations of Stormwind, it's their problem to coax them in and make them approve the plan. If they do not agree, they can simply ignore it, just like the mentioned "Council Authority" ignored by Band of the Brave, mentioned in Ixirar's post.

That's the point of raising something up, and listening to feedback. If you want to get something of the sort through, you need their approval, since you lack any "divine authority". You are just a guy, with a job, with money at their disposal, a fancy title that comes with the job and potentially respect if you do your job well enough.

Do you need to raise a vote for something though? No.

Do you need the people support for it to go through? Yes.

What I proposed was from the standpoint that you "raise the topic up" during the Council and AFTER the Council you meet with the different people, discuss with them, change terms, get into a compromise (if such is needed) with those who disagree.

The proposal more or less takes decision making away from the Council table and spreads it out into the world of Roleplaying, in order to generate more roleplaying and to have the meeting able to proceed smoothly without stopping to vote at every turn.

You can of course discuss it right at the Council itself, but that does extend out the duration of the event. I do not know whether that is favourable for the purpose of the event.

If someone does not disagree (figuratively votes no), they simply do not acknowledge the Council authority in the matter. The outcome is still the same.

Secondly, a Question.

Does the Council 'need' to vote for new "representative of their guild" character? Do their "voice" need to be approved by the others, or can they just walk up to the table and "hi, I represent "X", this is our interests"?

----

Mind, I don't even vaguely claim to understand what you deem the 'foundation' of the Council being. I am here to write my thoughts, my own suggestions into the discussion. I will not be applying to any kind of Council-position anytime soon, as all my characters on Alliance would either be immediately rejected or otherwise not fit to the job. I do however what I can to contribute with ideas, even with my lacking knowledge of the Council inner workings.

Also, a curious thing about foundations. If the foundation is weak, the building will crumble. Then there is obviously a problem. To my understanding we are here driving forward suggestions. Admitted, it is about House of Nobles, not the Council itself, but since the OP proposes to link them, I've written my own thoughts to the conversation from that standpoint.

But yes. Excuse my wall. I originally had just that one question.

What really 'needs' voting?

Voting is an essential part of political RP, it adds depth and leads to more RP based on experience.

It also adds a solid framework that is not only easy to understand but also very clear, so a lot of IC advantages.

We had these kind of discussions and decisions taken "after" meetings or behind closed doors and trust me, it doesn't add more RP rather it makes it something exclusive and often elitistic, these were some of the major issues that we did address and most felt it was for the better to not ínvolve the community more but also invite everyone who is interested in political RP to take part. Having public discussions and votings was a big improvement for both IC interaction and reducing OOC issues, cannot see how going back to something that was proven to not work as well would be an improvement?

I am very consistent in my opinion

Yes Ixirar you're not the only one and yes you've said it multiple times and you'll say it a thousand more and Azapha will say the same thing back at you.

... and who was one of the people who actually formulated the reform of the council in the first place)

Becouse the people wanted drastic change, but got a compromise of what they wanted, ministers stayed for the sake of:

However this part would be against the whole idea of the Council, it would be to remove the very foundation of it, why would the guilds/organizations of Stormwind ICly accept this?

Wasn't so much becouse of one person but a collection of people the council had changes. Only thing else related to the matter is that even before that not everyone followed the council and it's rules, least from my experience.

What needs voting?

Valestrions tuesday pizza topings need voting of course.

But I do agree the council doesn't really need it. Just holds it back. Sure guild representatives were given votes but the main topics of voting have always been the same allowing or disallowing something rather then an open discussion on what's happening or people can make happen.

Yes Ixirar you're not the only one and yes you've said it multiple times and you'll say it a thousand more and Azapha will say the same thing back at you.

So long as people keep suggesting that I'm being a hypocrite and allowing the council divine authority while saying the nobles can't have it, I'll keep reminding those people that this is absolutely not the case.

And I'm not saying Maelmoor was the one who initiated the change. I'm saying he was one of the people who worked on implementing it, and thus he would know what vision the council is trying to live up to now. Sure, tons of people wanted change in the council. I know that. I hope I don't need to remind you that I was one of those people, too.

And no, I know even before the reform some people didn't follow the Council's rules. But back in the day, possibly before you were on DB (this isn't an insult. Far as I'm aware you only came around during Cata and I'm talking about things that happened in TBC and WLK here) there has been a lot of drama over the council trying to impose its influence on people that wanted nothing to do with it. Certain iterations of the council has deemed itself so important that everyone RPing in Stormwind should, by default, accept its authority. And that is a right that you have if the King appointed you to govern his kingdom, which is why I'm arguing against using the King to grant your character IC authority.

I hope I don't need to remind you that I was one of those people, too.

Nope, i'm good.