The Kingdom of the Emerald Hills

A lot of your argument seems to apply to both corporas. Yes, the althing could vote to amend the corpora in order to then change anything in it. But that will apply to any corpora we make.

I think the ultimate point on which we disagree is whether or not a knighthood should be able to be removed. You feel it should not. I feel that it should. knighthood is different from any other award whether we want it to be or not. People who are Knights reflect themselfves, and like it or not, are looked at as ambassadors of the kingdom in which they reside. We (the CoK) always discuss holding ourselves ot a higher standard. And I think that means accepting both the benefits and the responsibility of knighthood.

Many kingdoms have removed Knighthoods. The EH is one of them. But the historical presedence it there that it takes more that lack of skill due to age, or someone being rude, to result in a belt removal. Sure, it COULD happen, but the new corpora has no bearing on that. The only change is the process by which it is done.

So the question becomes, is it harder to get a belt removed via althing, or via the CoK and Monarch?

_________________
Forest Evergreen

Puppet Master of the EH

"Of course you are Forest. You're like the Mr. Burns of EH." - Finn

(insert titles and awards here)

Ok, lets see the facts that you claim.
Please name the Knights of the EH who were belted without the CoK.

Please show any e-mail or CoK vote that I brought forward to initiate the removal of his belt. I'll sit back and wait.

Oh and since we want to throw out our history as if it lends any strength to our arguments...

As a 4 time Monarch, 3 time Regent, and a Flame and Crown Knight of The Emerald Hills (see I got mine here). And as a member who has been a member of the EH longer than you, I urge people to think for themselves.

_________________
Forest Evergreen

Puppet Master of the EH

"Of course you are Forest. You're like the Mr. Burns of EH." - Finn

(insert titles and awards here)

Oh Forest...
You just keep waiting...
Too bad the Knight's List does not archive.
Perhaps I can find some saved notes from your posts, perhaps not.
Perhaps I could list the names & dates of every EH knight who did not have Circle approval, perhaps not.
Perhaps you have been a member of this kingdom longer than I, perhaps not.

Yes, my belts were "Awarded" in the Burning Lands...
Damn hard to get that Serpent Belt out there, let me tell ya!

Like I said, those in the know are aware of your actions... past & present.
Those who know, are aware of how you talk down to people and use personal attacks to win any argument in an attempt to make yourself look good.

My history in the EH is an open book for anyone to read.
You can toss around all the BS you want...
It doesn't change anything.
It doesn't change what I know about You.

You can pull your scales over the eyes of many... but not everyone.

Yes, think for yourselves People...
Don't let politicians think for you.

Read the document. Talk to people. Get some information.
If you believe in the direction Forest wants this kingdom to travel, then vote Yes.
If however, you feel that something is wrong with this Corpora...
Vote Against it.
The choice is yours.

Forest,

We certainly do disagree about whether knighthoods should be subject to ongoing policing by anyone. But "make it hard to remove a knighthood" does not address my concern.

I'm obviously a bit of an outsider on this discussion. Perhaps it would be useful if I knew how and under what circumstances the EH has destroyed knights in the past.

We also seem to have a more fundamental disagreement, though. I alluded to this in my teal deer post, but let me make it explicit:

Forest, where in the current corpora does it discuss the removal of a justly awarded knighthood? Is an explicit process for this removal put forth? I do not believe it is, but I'm having a hard time making sense of your reply given that understanding. What am I missing?

While the knight's list does not have archives, Yahoo! mail does. This is an email from May 13th, 2010.



A few weeks later, as GMK, Forest physically stood next to Brennon while Brennon informed me he had held an unannounced poll among the knights as to whether I should have my belt removed. Brennon also informed me at the time that he had the consent of the PM and therefore entirely held the authority to remove my knighthood under his understanding of the Corpora at the time. I can't say what Forest did when I wasn't around, but I plainly attest he was riding shotgun when Brennon pretended to offer me a reprieve he stated I did not deserve.

I would like to think that was not a retributive act for coming within one vote of the guildmastership myself. However, I know no action was taken against Fytakin, who was knighted the same day I was, also without the consent of the Circle, and who has a steady history of problem behavior.

Setting aside attempts to remove knighthoods for nakedly poltical or personal reasons, Forest's claim that this merely changes, and not adds to, the methods of removing knighthood is clearly false. Forest admitted this himself, when he said,



I completely agree with Forest that removing or suspending a knight's belt is a matter of "law." It is therefore subject not only to the whim of the Monarch and PM, but to the democratic process of the Althing.

I also agree with Forest that knighthood is held in a special esteem compared to most other honors. However, I disagree with his assertion that it should be subject to a constant review by a new generation of knights. The newly knighted should be considered the least qualified people in the Circle, perhaps the Kingdom, to impugn an existing knighthood. And yet Forest would place every existing knighthood in such constant peril.

My view is that, instead, knighthood should be regarded as a kind of tenure. As it represents the culmination of years of effort, I do not think any tribunal, however well-intentioned, can justify removing it. If, by some chance, we acquire a Monarch who does something insane like knighting half the populace, or if a knight becomes genuinely tarnished by actions such that they should not even be permitted to attend Amtgard, I think it then falls on the Althing to reverse those awards (and probably take additional actions as well).

It would be of far greater benefit to our club to limit the authority of the Monarch and PM to "make law" and to improve the system of removing the Monarch such that it can be employed even against a Monarch who refuses to convene an Althing.

I will concede that there is an argument here for removing a belt. If a knight has been permanently banned from his own kingdom, it's a bad thing if that knight goes to another kingdom and is permitted to play Paladin.

But...

If a play has been permanently banned from his own kingdom, it's a bad thing if that player goes to another kingdom and is permitted to play.

As between "Ed Gein is playing Amtgard" and "Ed Gein is playing Paladin," I'm not convinced the latter is measurably worse. (Although in the latter case, I'd suggest offering him a macrame cord white belt, just to be on the safe side.) So I guess that's where I'm really coming from: I have difficulty imagining conduct which would justify destruction of a knight that wouldn't also justify a permanent ban.

- with, of course, one exception. If it is found that a knight perpetrated a fraud which resulted in others believing him qualified (the easiest scenario to imagine is a serpent knight who submitted the work of others as his own), then of course the kingdom would be justified in annulling that award, but obviously we don't ban cheaters and frauds. But this is different from removing a knighthood, and this is what i assumed was referred to by the old IX.H.4 - when a knighthood should never have been granted in the first place, and the entire knighting is to be undone. Obviously, Forest and I read IX.H.4 differently, but I'm fairly confident this is not the situation he seeks to address with IX.H.5.

Wow, this was just going to be a two-sentence reply. Teal deer indeed, KodiaK.

C. Removing Club Officers
1.Can be initiated by a petition signed by at least 20% of the active residents.
2.2.Requires a 2/3 majority vote at an Althing to remove a Club Officer


H. Knighthood
1. The Monarch may knight people (other than themselves) into any of the four
categories
2. If the current Monarch is not a knight, he/she shall appoint a Knight to perform the
knighting ceremony
3. Although not required, candidates for Knighthood should have achieved the
recommended criteria as described in the Amtgard Rulebook and have the approval
of the EH Circle of Knights (as set forth in the COK bylaws)
a Note - Achievement of the criteria set forth does not automatically grant
Knighthood
4. If there is any dispute about a Knighthood, a formal complaint and/or petition must be
submitted to the Monarch and Prime Minister and GMK
5. A Knighthood may be removed by 75% vote of the voting eligible COK members and
the current Monarch
a Removal of a Knighthood does NOT remove any other awards or Masterhoods
from the individual
b The individual is still qualified for Knighthood and may earn a Knighthood via the
same method as any other player


Since I am the EHPM now ...IF you even think that I would choose to back a belt removal due to someone's personality/ how they were Knighted ..you are insane. For me to even give something like that a thought, it would have to be for something extremely dire. Also remember that 3 ppl have to receive a petition : Monarch, EHPM and GMK.
Yes, we will have members that might not feel as I do in the future..which is why our voting is so darn important.
Brennon tired to pull your belt ...HE FAILED ...I have heard NOTHING to suggest that anything like that is going to happen to anyone. Since 75% of the CoK HAS to vote to remove a belt ...I'd be asking them if they plan on that!! Somehow that seems to me to be the bigger 'threat' within this revision ..and I personally think that the Knights we have are not going to act irresponsibly. The real power rests with the CoK.

BTW the CoK might want to take a look at their own very basic by-laws and do some revisions of their own ...that hasn't been revised since 2007.

Kodiak: There is no explicit process in the corpora, so it would fall to the althing as per any other item. It can be placed on the agenda by the Monarch and would require a 51% vote to remove.

Darkangel: I felt that as GMK I should be present when Brennon made his decision for 2 reasons. I wanted to be able to report back to the COK in case your belt was pulled so I could tell them what transpired. Secondly, (as I stated at the time) I wanted to inform you that the process was NOT initiated via the CoK, or by me, and was a Monarch descision. I had no part in it other than to give Brennon my personal opinion when he asked for it.

Also, this would change the method for removing a belt because in the proposed Corpora, the Althing has listed powers and then is also allowed to deal with issues not covered in the ROP or Corpora. Since the process for removing a belt is outlined, it could not be done via a direct althing. As Kodiak pointed out, an althing would have to change the corpora 1st. But that is going to be the case regardless of what copora we have. Althing ALWAYS have the power to change the corpora itself.

_________________
Forest Evergreen

Puppet Master of the EH

"Of course you are Forest. You're like the Mr. Burns of EH." - Finn

(insert titles and awards here)

Here's the problem I have. You keep saying "the method for removing a belt" and similar things. My point is that right now, there isn't a method for removing a belt. The only reason we know that belts are things that can be removed is that we're having this discussion; the corpora is silent on the topic.

Let's have an analogy. We had gas driven air pumps for decades before someone called one a leaf blower. But that dude's the asshole, because he's the one who told us it was ok to use a gas driven air pump to blow leaves around. Before that, it was possible to blow leaves around with a compressor driven by a gas engine, but nobody thought that was a good idea.

Adding this to the corpora says "removing belts is something we do routinely enough that we need a process for it." It places an onus on every monarch and every knight to constantly examine the conduct of every knight from every kingdom in case they might want to remove that knighthood at some time. (Did you notice that XI.H.5 does not place any limits on what knighthoods can be removed? Of course, everyone knows that the kingdom can only remove a knighthood if it granted that knighthood originally, and if the knight is currently a resident of the kingdom, right? It would be the barest folly to suggest that the kingdom could remove a knighthood after the knight moved away. But still, the circle of knights must monitor that knight's conduct in case he moves back!)

I think at this point, I do need to know about the knights of the Emerald Hills who have been unmade in order to continue this discussion, because as I said, I was not aware that this had happened.

Oh, hey, but when I went to the knight page on amtgard-eh.com (spoiler: there's no list of unmade knights), I did see the by-laws. Hm, yeah, that's just as bad as the corpora. Meetings have votes, but there's nothing stating that votes only happen at meetings. Maybe there's something in the corpora? I'm honestly growing pretty bored with this. Mostly, I just hope against hope that Forest will acknowledge the difference between "this can be done" and "there is a process for this."

...especially when we're talking about The Beyonder. The althing can do anything, there's no way to stop it from being able to do anything, so of course it can unmake knights. The fact that the one thing that can do anything is already able to do something is so very different from "there is a process in place to deal with that."

I see what you are saying. But that (IMO) is looking at it in a vacuum. Early on the EH removed Landolf's belt. The WL just removed a belt this spring. Multiple Kingdoms have removed belts over the years, and to me the bigger danger seemed to be to not have a process.

Our corpora may not have indicated a need to remove a belt or brought attention to it by having a process, but the attention is there regardless because it has and continues to happen all across the game.

_________________
Forest Evergreen

Puppet Master of the EH

"Of course you are Forest. You're like the Mr. Burns of EH." - Finn

(insert titles and awards here)

Looking at Landolf's wiki says he dropped his belt. The whole reason for this discussion is there is no "formal" way to strip a belt. (i remember this from my first Knight's circle meeting, in which at this point when reminded of this, Sir Nevron stated "that man is no knight" and walked out of the Circle.)

According to the Wiki, yes other Knighthoods have been stripped, usually for theft of Kingdom funds, but no the EH has not stripped a belt.

_________________
"Passion overrules Reason" wizard's rule #3 of the Terry Goodkind series "Sword of truth"

I was not aware that Landolf's belt was removed by the kingdom. That misapprehension no doubt led to my belief that the EH does not, as a matter of course, remove belts.

OK, I do have one last thing to add. I dislike having a process, because I don't think it should happen at all. But if it is something that we're planning to do, I think that the populace should have input into what makes an UnKnight, the same way the populace has had input into what makes a knight. No, we don't get to vote on individual knights; I understand that. But just as the criteria for knighthood flow from the populace and not the knights guild, I feel that at the very least guidelines for what sort of behavior warrants unmaking a knighthood are appropriate.

Yes, I know that certain people have MASSIVE STONES, and they would NEVER let someone be unknighted for a bad reason, but at least a vague indication that removing a knighthood is a serious matter and what might justify it would be nice. I know the corpora doesn't exist in a vacuum, but it should be able to be interpreted in a vacuum. That's why we bother to write the rules down. Looking at XI.H.5 in conjunction with the by-laws of the circle of knights, hell, maybe we just unknight all of Crawling Chaos~ until Martello runs for Monarch again, and then he can re-knight them all without any controversy since they've each passed a vote, and need not be voted on again. That will show us! Well, for values of us that don't include me, obviously.

And this is obvious from the things I've said before, but in closing I'll just say that I'm entirely comfortable with unknighting being something that happens throughout Amtgard, but doesn't happen here. I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from Arkansas.

The fact is, people do not knight themselves. It seems to me that when someone is knighted who later disappoints, there is a rush to assign blame to that person for being an imperfect knight. But they did not make themselves a knight, only imperfect, as are we all, imperfect. I think there is a level of cowardice in punishing the knight because the Kingdom (or at least the Circle) cannot tolerate its embarrassment.

I think it is invalid for a later Circle to judge whether the reasons someone was originally knighted for outweigh later misbehaviors. Knights do not become brothers and sisters because they choose each other, but because each was, at some time, by some person, for some reason, chosen. To me, the idea of a tribunal to banish a knight is against the very fellowship knighthood should represent. Any knight who stumbles is my friend, because I may yet help them, if they allow me.

I think, having considered this topic much more in the past week than I ever have before, that the only legitimate reasons to remove a knighthood would be that the knighthood itself were illegitimate, or that the person's actions placed them ouside Amtgard's society. If a knight simply engages in misconduct, even serious misconduct, I think they can be held accountable the same as any other populace member. In fact, it would be good if they were. Hopefully, they will be ashamed, and if not, it is unlikely that losing their belt would inspire them to develop a sense of shame, and they can serve as an warning to others.

If they literally cannot walk while carrying their knighthood without doing grave harm to the Kingdom, then let the Kingdom remove it so that our society may survive. Let us never take away a belt only because we can. It is not appropriate for the knight's Circle to undertake this on behalf of the Kingdom.

The thing a knight should do, if they wish to uphold the standards of knighthood, is to be a good knight.

There are some who feel uncomfortable intruding on knights' business. Well, the knights of old are not all present any more to represent their viewpoints, nor can decisions that were once made now be unmade. Forest never did post this suggestion to the EH Knights list, so I cannot say how many knights feel about it. I can only say that I hope never to sit in on a Circle meeting that concerns itself with removing the knighthood of someone duly earned, who continues to play Amtgard. That is not a business I think the knights should concern themselves with.

Knighthood is not some mystic prize you earn and are entitled to. It is the most unique award we can give because it comes not only with respect from others, but with expectations. As I said before, whether knights like it or not, the belt represents more than the individual. It representes the COK and the Kingdom.

And no one is advocating to remove a belt over personality conflicts. No one is advocating removing a belt because they disagree with the person's qualifications. But belts DO get removed in amtgard. People do engage in behavior that warrants the removal of a belt. I hope it doesn't happen here. I hope that the Knights of the EH understand the honor they were given and live up to it. But if they don't, then I want it to be clear how that priviledge can be taken away.

No one has to accept a Knighthood, but if they do, they should (and will be) held to a higher standard. It is part of being a Knight.

_________________
Forest Evergreen

Puppet Master of the EH

"Of course you are Forest. You're like the Mr. Burns of EH." - Finn

(insert titles and awards here)