GT: Nobles

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
Absolutely. As long as you stop altering my single and double quotes into question marks (see example above vs. original content shown immediately below), I’ll be happy.

To be fair, that may not be Hans' fault, it's more likely down to different keyboard mappings or character sets or somesuch. (in fact, I'm pretty certain that this is the case). </font>[/QUOTE]I don't know what to say about that.

There was a huge discussion in the TML just a little while ago about the necessity of using standards compliant software (it was specifically in regards to standard email quotation attribution (some people were responding without adding levels of > marks), though I believe transforming quotes into questions marks falls along the same lines), but I suppose I haven't the heart to ressurect it here, as it became quite flamy.

"Never mind," will have to do, in this case.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
In return, I?d also ask that you stop altering the content of the material I post. It?s extremely irritating. I thought the few subtle hints I dropped would make the point, but apparently, they did not.

I didn't even notice them. Probably because I haven't been editing your posts. Cutting them, yes. Not repeating the attribution over and over again with each new quote, yes (I'll stop that isince it bothers you; I just thought it was superfluous), editing, no. The software is the culprit.

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
I?d also ask that you cease removing quotation attributions, or if you clip and rearrange, that you add quotation attribution.

Very well. Though I seldom if ever rearrange.

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
A nation is a nation. Two nations of dissimilar size may be compared to each other if one takes into account the passage of time objectively.

Yes, and when you take the passage of time into account you very often see that the meaning of words and the content of concepts change. You can compare the Roman Republic to the British Empire, and when you do, you note that words like 'duke' and 'emperor' means something else than 'duce' and 'imperator'. You can compare the Senate of Rome with the Senate of the USA and find that the two do not work in the same way.

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
If one takes the entire milieu of AD 1300 (or AD 1100, or AD 1700, or whatever) vs. IC 0 or IC 1100 or whatever, one must make the comparative adjustment for time.

And when you do, you'll discover that they don't function the same and that some of the words don't mean the same. Surprise!

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:Terra of AD 1300 was an entire milieu with nations, wars, great/vast distances between the nations, long communications times, strikingly similar to a certain nation we all know about in IC 1100 (perhaps strikingly similar to all of Charted Space). The milieu of 3000 years later has gotten bigger . . . but that?s it. It is otherwise largely the same.

Except for all the differences. I have to tell you that I simply can't follow your thought processes here. To me it would be much more implausible if there really was a solid one-for-one correspondence between the OTU of 5646 AD and any part of historical Earth.

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
Attempting to state that expansion due to 3000 years of advancing time and knowledge make the nobles of the future somehow better or higher on the ?precedence? list is wrong.

And that wasn't what I was doing. I was trying to point out that the sheer scope of the two setting were vastly disparate and arguing that you can't put a direct equivalence between the ruler of a county palatinate of a tiny island kingdom and the ruler of of 30 star systems just because they happen, by accident of history, to have similar-sounding titles. The whole idea is... unsound.

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
The 3000 year difference must be
?accounted? for. Either the modern nobles must be ?rolled back?, or the ancient nobles must be ?rolled forward? (for the comparison to be seen correctly). That?s why it?s ?comparative?.

But it's not a valid comparison. Sure, there is a correlation between the two positions. But you assume as a basic fact that the correlation is 100%. There is no basis for such an assumption.

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
I think I see where we differ. I believe there is a major link to the past in the nature and essence of modern Imperial nobility, you do not. Haarumpf!?! What do we do about that?

We could agree to disagree and stop arguing. But that would probably be too easy .

I do believe that there is a major link to the past. I just don't believe that link is 100%. Just as there is a major link to the past from 'duke' to 'duce' that just isn't 100%.

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
Hmm. I have this thought running around in my head. I don?t own M0, so I don?t know for sure, but I was a part of many and varied discussions on the TML last year about nobility and the Imperium in general, and blasted if I can?t remember reading something about Cleon locating documents from early Sylea that backed a claim that he was a legitimate descendant (in some manner or other) of the Emperors of the Second Imperium, and therefore the logical choice as Emperor of the Third. Am I smoking crack?

No, that's perfectly true.


Hans

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
Absolutely. As long as you stop altering my single and double quotes into question marks (see example above vs. original content shown immediately below), I?ll be happy.

To be fair, that may not be Hans' fault, it's more likely down to different keyboard mappings or character sets or somesuch. (in fact, I'm pretty certain that this is the case). </font>[/QUOTE]It is, and I'm a little upset that Rain would ever assume that I'd do it deliberately. I can be rude and I sometimes do pointless things, but I'd like to think I'm never rude and pointless at the same time.


Hans

 

[Malenfant]

Yeah, I mean deliberately going through quotes from someone and changing " to ? would be a bit of an... odd thing to do .

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
Yeah, I mean deliberately going through quotes from someone and changing " to ? would be a bit of an... odd thing to do .

How do I explain? I knew it was *some* sort of software problem all along. What I was hoping for was that it would stop.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by rancke:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Malenfant:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
Absolutely. As long as you stop altering my single and double quotes into question marks (see example above vs. original content shown immediately below), I'll be happy.

To be fair, that may not be Hans' fault, it's more likely down to different keyboard mappings or character sets or somesuch. (in fact, I'm pretty certain that this is the case). </font>[/QUOTE]It is, and I'm a little upset that Rain would ever assume that I'd do it deliberately. I can be rude and I sometimes do pointless things, but I'd like to think I'm never rude and pointless at the same time.


Hans </font>[/QUOTE]See my previous post addressed to Malenfant.

 

[plop101]

My apologies for interupting gentleman...

I notice that BooksaMillion [BAM] has G:N listed as 'special order' and that Warehouse23 has G:N as 'On Order'. My questions are, does anyone know if there doing another print run for G:N? If so, will BAM get copies well before Blorthog Day (Christmas for you Terrans)?

It would be easier for the parental units to send them over to BAM. They have yet to fully grasp the Magic Box, er, computer; and I am therefore reluctant to tell them to go online to get stuff at W:23. They have broken the magic box in the past, and I really don't want them touching it.

Also, BAM has G:N listed as 'GURPS Nobel' on their site. I don't know if thats any big deal, but GT folk may want to know that. I dunno.

 

[al duc]

Warehouse23 has G:N as 'On Order'. My questions are, does anyone know if there doing another print run for G:N?

G:Nobles is not out of print; it's simply a question of getting more books to the sellers. To quote from the W23 site:

Sale of Products Now "On Order"
We try to keep a stock of everything on the shelves, and re-order in advance so we never run out. Sometimes we guess wrong. This product has already been re-ordered . . . we ought to have it back in stock within two weeks at the absolute outside! Most of our suppliers can fill a re-order within a week.

 

[LKW]

Originally posted by Elliot:
Rain of Steel said
Maybe Loren and Jon were thinking of this when they wrote GT: N

We were thinking "Marc insisted Viscounts be RetConned."

LKW

 

[dancha]

Originally posted by plop101:
Also, BAM has G:N listed as 'GURPS Nobel' on their site. I don't know if thats any big deal, but GT folk may want to know that. I dunno.

FWIW, when I was shopping for GT:N, I noticed that Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Powells, AllDirect -- practically everyone had that same typo about "Nobels" vs. the correct "Nobles"

I suspect it originated with some big player like Amazon, and everyone else just copies their stuff...

I just checked, and Amazon has it correct, now.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by LKW:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Elliot:
Rain of Steel said
Maybe Loren and Jon were thinking of this when they wrote GT: N

We were thinking "Marc insisted Viscounts be RetConned." </font>[/QUOTE]Now the only remaining mystery is what Marc was thinking.


Hans

 

[Elliot]

ENLIGHTENMENT!!!

By the way, what does 'Retconned' mean?

 

[daryen]

"retcon" = retroactive continuity

It means that 'canon' has been 'officially' changed after the fact.

In this case, before GT:Nobles there was no such Imperial noble title as "viscount" in prior Traveller canon. Now, apparently with Marc's insistance, "viscount" is now an official Imperial title of nobility in Traveller canon.

Of course, this will just make the GT haters go in a tizzy.

They already complain that jump masking is "GT-only", even though it is endorsed by Marc. This just adds a new item to that list.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
How do I explain? I knew it was *some* sort of software problem all along. What I was hoping for was that it would stop.

The basic answer is that smart quotes are not a part of the ASCII character set, and therefore should not be used when dealing with applications, such as web boards, that are basically ascii. Use only " and '.

 

[Gruffty]

Coming back on topic here...

The disparity between 11th/12th/13th century nobility titles and those of the Imperium (in any era) is evolutionary.

Take my home town of Northampton (UK), as an example:

Earl Waltheof (Anglo-Saxon) pre-1066
Simon de Senliz (Norman) up to approx 1106
William de Bohun (Norman) early 1300s

The title died out and came back into use at least 4 times between 1370 and the mid 1700s. There is an Earl of Northampton now, but he is not related to any of the previous families. Today, many people in the county of Northamptonshire do not know who the Earl of Northampton is, where he lives, what he does, etc. The Earl of Northampton of today is, in reality and despite his title, no more powerful than anyone else. He has no power over me as an individual (he cannot take my taxes/sheep/wheat/pigs, etc) yet in the 1300s Bill de Bohun was quite within his rights to do so, in the name of the King.

There is no basis, therefore, to assume:

a) That noble titles in the future will remain in a fixed hierachy;
b) That noble positions automatically qualify for "a group/cluster of worlds" in the future.

If a fuedal style government is needed (as it would be to govern the Imperium), titles and system ownership would most likely be organised to meet local needs (i.e. some titles might die out or not be used for centuries) and would be affected by wars, political events etc.

A truly perceptive Emperor would be wise to this and manage his nobles (i.e. Bill de Bohun was a favourite of the then King, and did a lot of warmonger on his behalf in France and got rich and lots of land as a result). However, even this didn't stop the title disappearing in the end.

 

[TheDS]

Originally posted by daryen:
... Of course, this will just make the GT haters go in a tizzy.

They already complain that jump masking is "GT-only", even though it is endorsed by Marc. This just adds a new item to that list.

Ah, thank you for mentioning me, but I am not a GT-hater.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by LKW:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Elliot:
Rain of Steel said
Maybe Loren and Jon were thinking of this when they wrote GT: N

We were thinking "Marc insisted Viscounts be RetConned."

LKW </font>[/QUOTE]FYI/Note: The above quote makes it look like I said the following . . .

Originally posted by Elliot:
Rain of Steel said
Maybe Loren and Jon were thinking of this when they wrote GT: N

. . . it really was from Elliot's Post Here, a ways back.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by LKW:
We were thinking "Marc insisted Viscounts be RetConned."

LKW

I'm happy to have them along, now if someone will just provide a list of which hexes belong to which counties and sub-counties . . . oh, wait, that's a part of that, "Learn to live with disappointment," thing. Right.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by daryen:
Of course, this will just make the GT haters go in a tizzy.

They already complain that jump masking is "GT-only", even though it is endorsed by Marc. This just adds a new item to that list.

Of course, thanks to Malefant, we have Jump Masking Based on the Force of Gravity.

This makes so much sense. Since jump is prohibited by the force of gravity, limiting them based on the force of gravity, just, well, seems so right.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
How do I explain? I knew it was *some* sort of software problem all along. What I was hoping for was that it would stop.

The basic answer is that smart quotes are not a part of the ASCII character set, and therefore should not be used when dealing with applications, such as web boards, that are basically ascii. Use only " and '. </font>[/QUOTE]Well, the characters, &#147; and &#148; are accepted by this board, as they reproduce faithfully.

However, I&#146;ve found a workaround, and when I&#146;m determined to have them, I just used the HTML escape character sequences, the characters involved don&#146;t seem to get inadvertently converted by other applications, and they seem to display properly in HTML browsers. I don&#146;t bother very often anymore, but I also don't intervene and change things when writing in Word, either.