Principality...

[Michael Gunter]

Master Aodhan, I was not offended by the phrase "Once and Every Other King"
but by the context in which it was used.  I interpreted the posting as
sounding a bit petulant.  The moniker is amusing and I have used it upon
occasion as well.  My note was simply a request to keep things on an
intellectual and rational level and to not begin name-calling.  Especially to
those who are not on this net and therefore cannot defend themselves.

If I have caused offence to either  M'lord Popalisky, yourself, or anyone
else please accept my apologies.  As stated earlier I was only reminding
people to keep this civilized.

And, yes, I do have a life.

Yers,

Gunthar
_______________________________________________________________________________
From: ansteorra at eden.com on Thu, Oct 10, 1996 5:53 PM
Subject: Principality...
To: ansteorra at eden.com


Dia duit!

"Matthew R. Popalisky"  wrote in a message to All:

 "RP> To those that were offended when I refered to HG Inman as the Onc 
 "RP> and Ever Other King, I am sorry if this offended.  

Anyone offended by that needs to get a real life.

 "RP> I thought it
 "RP> was an affectionate nick-name and a take-off of the Once and
 "RP> Future King that had to do with his ability to win Crown and
 "RP> because he has always done a good job while bearing the crown.

I coined that phrase after his 3rd reign because he'd been King 3 times over
a
period of 6 consecutive reigns.  Unfortunately, a bard picked it up and ran
with it.  Also, unfortunately, Inman doesn't no when to quit and has sat the
throne entirely too many times.  And I don't consider telling the people and
officers of a Kingdom to violate the edicts of the BoD being a good King.

 "RP> It just seems odd to hear folk saying "it's being rammed, how dare
 "RP> they" about a proposal made by two peers that from what I have
 "RP> heard, are some of the most respected people around, and not the
 "RP> sort one would expect foul play and chicainery from.

Not at all odd when what you have in fact heard from your Baron is that one
of
those "respected" persons said that it *would* be rammed down our throats. As
I've stated before, that pronouncement radically altered the tone of the
discussion during our meeting. So, I'm not the only one that heard that; in
fact, three other peers, all with well over a decade and half of activity in
the SCA, heard it.

Baron Aodhan Ite an Fhithich, ML
Dobharchu Herald

------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------
Received: by msmail.fnts.com with SMTP;10 Oct 1996 17:49:10 U
Return-Path: <ansteorra-owner at eden.com>
Received: from natashya.eden.com by castle.fujitsu-fnc.com (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA06281; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:40:51 -0500
Received: (majordom at localhost) by natashya.eden.com (8.8.0/8.8.1) id RAA28597
for ansteorra-outgoing; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:19:57 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from holonet.net (root at guardian.holonet.net [198.207.169.11]) by
natashya.eden.com (8.8.0/8.8.1) with SMTP id RAA28585 for
<ansteorra at eden.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:19:51 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from dovarcu (root at localhost) by holonet.net with UUCP
	id PAA08699; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 15:19:48 -0700
Received: by dobharchu.org (0.99.960714)
  id AA00221; 10 Oct 96 09:20:29 -0600
From: aodhan at dobharchu.org (Aodhan Ite an Fhithich)
Date: 10 Oct 96 09:00:04 -0600
Subject: Principality...
Message-Id: <15a_9610100920 at dobharchu.org>
References:  <Pine.SOL.3.94.961009182445.29245C-100000 at comp.uark.edu>
Organization: Lough na Dobharchu
To: ansteorra at eden.com
Sender: owner-ansteorra at eden.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ansteorra at eden.com