Shireroth

It has been the proposal of some to return the lands of Cognito and Lothloria to their original owners, due to the fact that they aren't being used. In th that follows, I shall offer a solution to the problem of keeping said lands firmly imbedded in Shireroth.

Since these lands are pretty well devoid of population, but may not be so in the future, I suggest that an official, known as a Marquess, be made the governor of any such land (should a similar problem occur in the future), so that it may remain in Shireroth though lacking citizens. Marquesses would be lower on the feudal pyramid than counts.

I urge the Landsraad to enact such legislation.
Thank you.

Accually.. they aren't being returned to anyone.. We would maintain the rights to the names and cultural stuff. Just they wouldn't be on the MCS map anymore, and no one could claim them as their own, as we would still control them, they just wouldn't be on the map.


And... Did anyone evern bother securing the Landsraad?

Sloppy sloppy sloppy...

Hm. It *used* to be moderated by Voting Nobility. I think the problems we've been having with moderator settings recently might have screwed that up.

Marquess below Count? Gods! What next? the Kaiser below knights? pastors above popes? Barons above Counts? wait.....

Most of us are from America, David. Get used to it.

Even though I'm an American (and a Hoosier, for God's sake) I didn't think the logics of a marquess being below a count would seem nearly as silly as a baron above a count. After all, in the British nobility, a baron is the lowest rank of the peerage, isn't it? Rather below an earl, the British equivalent of the European count.

Magistrate (the rough equivalent of a mayor) would probably be a better title than Marquis.

Good idea. After all, title is less important than position.

Even though I'm an American (and a Hoosier, for God's sake) I didn't think the logics of a marquess being below a count would seem nearly as silly as a baron above a count. After all, in the British nobility, a baron is the lowest rank of the peerage, isn't it? Rather below an earl, the British equivalent of the European count.

yeh, I just dont want any more of it....and (if you look at the last bit I said) I was allso showing annoyance at the current system.

*coughs* Glad we dont have nobles in the US.

yeh, you lot just get emporers with democratic sounding titles....at least Napoleon had the good manners to wear a crown and get a proper title.

It wasn't always that way. Once upon a time we had a lovely little thing called a federal republic. Anymore, the United States is an oligarchy thinly disguised as a republic. Of course that's what happens when the public is uneducated, blinded by the endless tirade of shopping mallls and raw crap that is shoved down their throats, and votes for whatever rich bureaucrat has the flashiest ad campaign. There will be no return to a republic in this country until regular people stop being such little piggies and start to vote other regular people with intelligence rather than riches and family connections into positions of power. In short, **** the Kennedys!

P.S.: Delphi could probably tell you my whole theory.

I agree. The rich and the connected are the ones who get anything. Sad.

I don't think you understand what the point of this proposal is...

I think the pertinent question to ask is - Do we really need another tier of nobility below the level of count?

There aren't enough counts to fill all the open slots anyways. So why create another tier?

A land-lease option would be more viable and practical in application. And by that, I mean by allowing certain nobility to obtain feudal contracts in the form of a lease over a certain area of vacant land for a period of time.