Dumb Peerage Question.
Jan. 30th, 2008 06:09 am.....So, this does not have the depth of dissection as the peerage question on the major e-lists has, but it has me thinking all the same.
.....Here is the situation. In Pelican Council, we sometimes discuss very controversial candidates. In those instances there are lots of things on which to think. History, bearing, what they've done, how they treat others, general PLQ's, yada, yada, yada. It takes me a while to process all this information before I come to any kind of conclusion. Furthermore, for me, I like to bounce ideas off of another, sometimes playing the proverbial 'Devil's Advocate'. In this way I get a better understanding of my own perspective.
.....My favorite person upon whom to discuss deep and controversial subjects is The Beloved Tamm. She is smart, creative, and has lots of good ideas. The problem? She's not a Pelican. So, in discussions with her I try my best to not talk names or particular details. I try to talk in generalities. (let me further add that I don't even discuss 99% of the candidates who reside on our 'lists'). But there has been a time or two where I have actually come out and discussed a particular name with her in order to gain her insight from the perspective of her time on the throne and her perspective of a Royal Peer.
.....Now, is that wrong? The initial take is that yes, it would be. Some would say that any talk outside of Council is a betrayal of trust. But, if the conversation you have with the non-Pelican gives you an understanding of the person in question that you did not have before? If it helps in the understanding of a 'problem' candidate? So, I'm rather torn.
.....Anyone have their own thoughts on the matter? Of course, it isn't the solution to world hunger, but at least it is a distraction from how cold it is outside. :-)
.....Stay warm, Aaron / Arontius.
.....Here is the situation. In Pelican Council, we sometimes discuss very controversial candidates. In those instances there are lots of things on which to think. History, bearing, what they've done, how they treat others, general PLQ's, yada, yada, yada. It takes me a while to process all this information before I come to any kind of conclusion. Furthermore, for me, I like to bounce ideas off of another, sometimes playing the proverbial 'Devil's Advocate'. In this way I get a better understanding of my own perspective.
.....My favorite person upon whom to discuss deep and controversial subjects is The Beloved Tamm. She is smart, creative, and has lots of good ideas. The problem? She's not a Pelican. So, in discussions with her I try my best to not talk names or particular details. I try to talk in generalities. (let me further add that I don't even discuss 99% of the candidates who reside on our 'lists'). But there has been a time or two where I have actually come out and discussed a particular name with her in order to gain her insight from the perspective of her time on the throne and her perspective of a Royal Peer.
.....Now, is that wrong? The initial take is that yes, it would be. Some would say that any talk outside of Council is a betrayal of trust. But, if the conversation you have with the non-Pelican gives you an understanding of the person in question that you did not have before? If it helps in the understanding of a 'problem' candidate? So, I'm rather torn.
.....Anyone have their own thoughts on the matter? Of course, it isn't the solution to world hunger, but at least it is a distraction from how cold it is outside. :-)
.....Stay warm, Aaron / Arontius.