There's been some mommentuous evolution this morning, spurred as such often is by lateral discussion of misdeeds :
mircea_popescu: unrelatedly : hey trinque, now that there's actually multiple functional castles the time's prolly come to update the deedbot voice model into awareness of this situation. so how about a patch making voice in #trilema dependent on ~my~ wot, rather than deedbot's own ; and similarily in any castles that ask for it / you come to an understanding with the lords thereof, so they can use the voice model there if they wanna.
mircea_popescu: this way the ad-interim imaginaria of a bot's wot can be put back on the shelf where it belongs.
Neat, huh! It's the way of the future.
This draft leaves two major questions open : one being the signalling of lordship to the botsi ; the other being the licensing of castles.
Currently castlehood's a nebulous concept not specifically defined anywhere, merely flowing from curated practice ; but if one's to decouple voicing in #trilema from castle owning, obviously any and allcomers could in principle make their own abominatiou wherein to monkey after the fashion of children the comings and goings of the adults they naturally (if disavowedly) worship. The two may co-exist, but passing one for the other'd be at best harmful and in any case fraudulent, so some mechanism to distinguish legitimate castles from monkey castle's required.
At which juncture... why not make use of the deed system ? Produce a nice standard form, and grant people worthy of running their own castle a deed, something they can frame and put up on the wall, why not!
At which juncture formal considerations take hold, such as... well ? What language should this grant be spelled out in ? Obviously not english, right ? Absolutely not Romanian, either... well I guess that leaves
Ego, mircea_popescu, per accidens et pro tempore custodem de rebus hoc ultima Respublica,
Omnibus quo competit, sciant per hoc brevis et factum
Quod ego, considerans dedicatione ostensum necessitatibus Statu, et sui abnegationem quod ostendens, et dignus fidelium servitium fiat idem per eius Dominium <> Dominus <> in congruis tempus locusque ;
Et volens excitare ardor in futuro, aut saltem non possit in via tale ;
Concedo hoc titulo ad castrum <>, usque rescissus, cum eius reditus et eius bona, cum omnibus eius pertinentibus ut sint constructum sursum per dominum, sine reliquum vel cauda.
Datum in #trilema anno 11 et post Rempublicam quinto.
It's a draft ; let the half dozen or so currently running one, and the half dozen or so perhaps considering getting themselves one comment ; and let the whole rest of the world keep quiet, because quite plainly nobody asked it anything.
What say you, then ?———
- Though on this score I'm actually growing to like diana_coman's proposal as refined, to simply admit into system what was long tacit practice -- namely that the ten integer values of the ratings actually have human names, with 10 standing for bodily expiration and (hereby) 9 standing for ennoblement. [↩]
Saturday, 14 September 2019
Perseus.tufts.edu to the rescue! Though if this isn't good motivation to brush up on Latin, I don't quite know what else could there be! I think I got it (at some point it started making sense as a whole - as it usually does) but I'd still prefer to mull over it some more.
Fwiw I've been background-thinking the whole morning (while going about doing entirely unrelated stuff) quite similar thoughts re status (even pageboy/squire/knight) and the obvious link to deeding. The easy/obvious route would be similar - deed it. I'm still undecided though if it's also the best route.
I can fully see the point of mechanism to distinguish legitimate castles - to some extent I'd say this is already in place simply by means of owner's status (or lack of same) within TMSR. That being said, why not have a deed to show for it too, sure.
Sunday, 15 September 2019
Re Latin, it seems a little out there, in all honesty, but what the fuck am I gonna do, cement English into a role it neither earned, deserves, nor well satisfies through pure sloth and complacency ? The problem of pompous people isn't so much that they take insane routes, but that they perceives dilemmas invisible to the herd. Certainly more accessible than Greek, in any case.
Re people's status, the wot is probablty (and still, and forever) the correct approach. But castles are eminently real estate, and real estate's unlike chattels, which is why they're even called facta (deeds) as opposed to breve (writs). Which incidentally turns out the first error, should be brevis et factum, breve's the neuter form of the underlying adjective.
Re mechanism, it definitely is already in place, of course, of course. The problem here addressed is that it's in place by tight fusion with other things, and the uncleftish beholding's come (or could soon be expected to come) in the way of development -- so here came the time to cleave. This being, of course, how natural things grow -- parts grow together until time splits them apart so they may differentiate in form and function.
Re deed to show for it : the important part's not even the person of the lord, but the investment of the other people in his castle. Are they supposed to uproot and turn inside-out their lives on the relatively flimsy basis of a wot rating which stands at will ? Or can they rely on the comparatively harder bedrock of a deed, upon which in time trees can indeed grow ? If a lord goes drunk, and the basis of the knight's hall is his personal rating alone, what are they to do once he's unrated, bejenie ? Rather, have the thing redeeded and all's well again.
Sunday, 15 September 2019
Re Latin, my answer to the "why Latin" question is already given in #o as:
diana_coman: the answer to that is rather long but in a nutshell: because the alignment of the republic is much closer to Latin than to English (and that's in a deeper sense than "just language"); and to flesh this out for you just a tiny bit: a. English has a very poor record regarding actual learning and development; contrast the English-speaking empire + colonies with the previous (and much more durable, at that) Latin world b. English is also a rather "thin" language.
So no, I don't really have a better suggestion and yes, the first reaction was "phew, at least it's not Greek!!"
The deeds/writs distinction is very clear indeed and quite helpful to keep in mind, noted.
Re deed and investment: I guess this is where it's not all that clear to me - to what extent are the people in the castle invested in the "castle" rather than the lord anyway? And this circles back to the nature of the "castle" - to what extent is it anything other than what the lord makes it, anyway? I can see the very real plight of those invested, certainly, and I can see also how a deed may give them more peace of mind as it seemingly reduces the plight - the lord goes and another lord comes and we're still fine. What I'm not sure about though is whether a deed really reduces the actual plight all that much - so if I go nuts tomorrow, you'll re-deed #ossasepia to Stan and that does precisely what for those in there?
Sunday, 15 September 2019
> that's in a deeper sense than "just language"
To put meat behind that claim : http://trilema.com/2018/discordatum-wormatiense/
As far as the republic currently knows (on the basis of research by yours truly), the place where the idiots broke off our main chain was no later than ad 1122, full nine centuries ago (though it is entirely likely earlier splits ultimately unresolved may be identified, chiefly driven by jewish idiocy they call "christianity" nowadays).
> to what extent
The problem with exceptional men is that everyone's a fool sometime. In general humanity tends to invest itself in the best of the best, not the average of the best, and certainly avoids investment in the worst of the best, "oh, Napoleon had hemorrhoids, I don't, fuck him I'm better". The controlling aspect of the Corsican isn't his anal health.
I believe this is sound, other than being absolutely necessary irl ; to support it, this crude attempt at a voltage gate, whereby for as long as the guy's great the people can invest themselves in the guy, and should he ungreat, well... they can rely on the deed instead to at least protect from loss if not enact any further gain.
Thus, supposedly, yet another ratchet is built.
> to what extent is it anything other than what the lord makes it
To the extent history permits. No man is eternal, but castles could well be. Certainly this our more advanced latest kind.
> whether a deed really reduces the actual plight all that much
I don't expect it reduces it ; I expect it humanizes it. There's an important difference at work here, a group of people may be hungry a little or hungry a lot, they may have food a little, or have it a lot -- but in any case however it may flow saying to them "here's your food" is one kind of thing and saying "go find your food" is another kind of saying ; and the distinction's that in the latter the man dead of hunger dies whispering "twas a fair cop" whereas in the former the man sated thinks "i should've had s'more".
It doesn't fix the plight, no fix for the plight exists, all will eventually die. Dar...
> if I go nuts tomorrow, you'll
I don't know what I'll do, and therein lies the difference : that in one case you know what'll happen, and it's all dissolution ; but in the other case you don;t know what'll happen, and where knowledge stops hope may breathe.
Monday, 16 September 2019
@Mircea Popescu :
Of all the available dead languages, this one is imho definitely the most fitting for this job. I can read it ok, but hope that I'm not being counted on to emit it grammatically any time in near future (being atrociously out of practice.)
Monday, 16 September 2019
Well, traditionally the lords were illiterate, relying on the services of monks to actually write the shit out...
But no, you don't have to make anymore deeds than you want to.
PS. Speaking of grammatical : I've switched to the more traditionally correct styling of Respublica (nominative singular) / Rempublicam (accusiative singular) rather than whatever contracted form. It's true that the implicitly separate (and severally declensing) two-words item is kinda clunky, but it is also less gratingly UStardian. What can you do.
As a factual matter, medieval Latin wouldn't have been judged particularly literate by the men of the previous Republic. It's how this goes. If whatever idle boys wasting away in the previous proto-edition v0.1 alpha of our current wankasteries won't be impressed with postmodern Latin, they can go make a pillowfort and jack off in there about it, what can I say.
Monday, 16 September 2019
After further chewing on this:
1. I can see this castle licensing mechanism as the step that effectively enables (as in: opens up the possibility; no guarantee though, as there can never be a guarantee anyway) castle permanence in particular and the very notion of TMSR real-estate in general. As such, I can only say a full YES to it.
2. I can also see the castle licensing opening up the possibility (again, not the guarantee) of castle (real-estate) transfer even under normal rather than catastrophic conditions. Perhaps a lord makes it to finding a worthy and willing successor before going insane/dying and as such can arrange for the re-deeding of the castle as a smooth transition before it ends up done as the last-resort consequence of a catastrophic situation. As such, I can only say a full YES to it, again.
3. With a bit of beating down of some of my (possibly less-than-common) preferences, I can just about see it as a potential sort of protection from loss for the people *of* the castle (ie those growing up there, not visiting lords that don't depend on it). At the very least, I don't see it working against them in any way, so I'm fine to say yes to it again.
4. Having said yes to the 3 points above, I'm left however considering in more detail: what does it actually mean "being of the castle"? To the extent that "being of the castle" seems so far to mean mainly being in the castle owner's L1, how can a transfer (esp. under catastrophic circumstance rather than a planned and agreed one) actually happen? As noted previously, ratings are potentially volatile and certainly not preserving history. Is one to dig through the preserved logs and verify claims of belonging to the castle and/or roles even? And this links again to my background-headbanging re best way of marking roles of people of the castle - to the extent that they are simply a matter of owner's rating, they suffer in some sense from the very same problem that the non-deeded castle suffers: they don't really preserve history and especially they don't really allow a very solid recording of one's own history beyond his own diary of things as they happen, perhaps.
Monday, 16 September 2019
> what does it actually mean "being of the castle"?
The local notions of patriotism will have to be left to the definition of the locals, both because it's most likely this'll produce something that fits them well, and also because this is likely to unearth generally applicable principles helping out everyone across the board. So, by all means, think what it should mean, state it and stick to it.
> Is one to dig through the preserved logs and verify claims of belonging to the castle and/or roles even?
But.. .why ?
I can't say I well understand what problem you're trying to solve.
Tuesday, 12 November 2019
Further changes and corrections : fixed the dating (nfi why it said year 10 after trilema, it's evidently 11 ; the year after the republic is 5th however you date it -- presently dating it from the definitive sovereign, though alternative schemes are perhaps possible) ; fixed a stray ejus to match the eius following it ; turned the previous "in congruis loco et tempore" to the more Livius-esque "tempus locusque" ; fixed the stray plural (excitare ardor -> via tale) ; also removed some clunk in the concession clause. As a funny aside : apparently the internets have never heard the 15-character string "usque rescissus[3rd singular passive perfect rescindo]" ever before. Such originality!