There’s not much else on the galnetwebtubes today ?
The original question was whether Ali’s desire not to be referred to nor addressed as “Alizabeth Vea” nor “Vea” should be respected. The main case for refusing her seems to be that her (soul’s, or her name’s, or her other branch’s) past should be remembered, and be something she’s stuck with even if sticking her with it violates common courtesy.
As for Else’s point … should I just start calling her “Ms. Rhiannon” again despite her clear preference to the contrary because we’re on different sides and so I shouldn’t care what she wants? We don’t have to think well of each other to respect each other’s naming preferences or customs.
It doesn’t necessarily help, either, that our names, as a matter of public record for the CRC, are recorded upon our entry into capsuleer school and cannot be changed. And, really, this above is why. We aren’t permitted to be anyone else (whether or not we physically are someone else) so that our history can be reliably tracked. Not only can we not escape our names, we can’t change them even if it is culturally important to do so.
In the end, there is only one way to answer the darker stains in our histories, and that is to do what we can to prove we have changed. Our names aren’t going anywhere for whatever reason we would prefer them to.
^ Hey, I was going to say that.
Right. I wasn’t really arguing about whether it should be respected but that can someone truly repent for their actions while also refusing their part in it. Well, actually, she herself seems to accept that what is done is done, but some goody two-shoes keep arguing about that it’s unfair to remind her of that by calling her by a name she doesn’t like.
Because of what said above, she’ll just have to learn to live with her name, whether she likes it or not. There will always be new people who do not know the ins and outs about her, and for example I also tend to just reference CRC callsigns, especially if I don’t actually know the person more closely.
That said, I don’t and won’t go out of my way to call her with a name she doesn’t like, but nevertheless - that is a name she simply can’t escape from until CONCORD changes its policies.
You have no idea how many people do just that.
But should they?
People call me all sorts of mean names despite my preferences to the contrary.
Can’t see why they should not, if they think it insults me or adequately expresses our hostile relationship or whatever the hell they are after with that. They are not my kin or allies.
Rather amusingly, Nauplius has caught the essence of this debate. Names have power.
My slave name is Raphael 7. Though frowned upon, it was permitted for elders of our breeding group to give me the name Kumakatok, after the circumstances of my birth. My owners used the former name and it is who I am in all official documentation.
Yet on being put forward for capsuleer training, it amused my Father Confessor to register me with my so-called ‘tribal’ name. It amuses him further to put the stress on the middle syllable, so as to mimic an echo of the Matari khumaak. These are all expressions of power.
Several of the prominent Minmatar here like to use insulting names or childish diminutives for their enemies, even up to the Empress herself. As he notes, Nauplius is almost always characterised into a ridiculous figure by nicknames.
We respect other people’s wishes or we do not. I will respect the Marshal Protector’s stated desire, just as I try (and after a lifetime of due obeisance, believe me when I say this is harder than it seems) to respect the Director Arrendis’ desire to be know simply by her first name, despite her great achievements - and that she is currently an enemy.
Names have power.
Personally I just find it amusing that someone who wants to present themselves as the “Beast of Dhabka” and impress how great they are at shooting slaves has a meltdown over a name they don’t like.
I remain amused that you also called it ‘collusion’ when ARC initiated its suit against the FIO over failures to comply with the HFA.
Very simply, Kim, the Federation and State have continued trade relations, and corporations are doing business on both sides of the border. What’s more, I’ve made no representation as to what authority (if any) I believe the Federation has in this matter. What I’ve said is very simply this: the Federation has an interest in the welfare of its citizens. This doesn’t necessarily stop at the border.
This is much as the State has interest in its citizens, within the State, Federation, Empire, Republic, or anywhere else; likewise, the Empire, the Republic, and so on.
It’s really quite simple.
It seems you’re playing the same trumpet each time you’re caught redhanded, Priano.
I am pretty much aware about liberals politics and trading with entities outside of the State.
But there is a war going on for ten years already. Wake up. Dealing with enemies is not being a liberal, it’s being a traitor or collaborator.
And I am really sick of these pseudo-liberals who hide their ulterior motives under rhetoric of following liberal ideals.
Caught redhanded? Doing what? Saying that governments have an interest in the welfare of their citizens?
Uhhh, you know, how much I want sometimes just grab you, put handcuffs on you and just push into tribunal room!
You seem to be hinting at something here.
Speak straight before you embarrass yourself further.
Last time I checked, Wiyrkomi, Kaalakiota, and NOH have a presence in and continue to do business in the Federation. There’s also a variety of other supply chains contingent on State-Federal trade beside that.
Do keep in mind that the walking one-track mind insists the ‘warzones’ are real wars, not just a violent bloodsport league administered by CONCORD, on behalf of four empires who never want it to be won.
To be perfectly honest, I’m not sure what, if any, laws I’ve ever violated. I’m not saying I’m a paragon of virtue; clearly not! Like all of us, I have plenty of vices.
Just, not sure what crimes I’ve ever committed.
At least - slander.
Pretty sure I’ve legal defense against all your accusations, and that you’d be laughed out of a court room.