This silliness.
#24017

Fatalus the Scroungerto Battlemage Fistandantilus

My friend. I agree with your assessment that this whole business has nothing to do with temples. I think we can exclude any and all religious reasons as clouding the issue. I believe it's a simple property rights dispute.


You ask for less posturing. Let me state the facts.


- Mercinae and Springdale came to terms with an agreement, a SOI Treaty.


- The agreement included Marshton going from Merc hands to Springdale's.


- The agreement was accepted by the baronies of both cities.


- The agreement was the result of mutual consent, without influence under duress, bullying or coercion.


- The agreement has been honored by both cities for years approaching a century up until the recent Merc takeover of Marshton from SD.


I have posted what I believe to be the salient facts in earlier posts. I've waited for them to be disputed. I've not seen Mercinae respond with even a 10 foot pole. So let me be blunt Fist. Which of these facts does Mercinae care to argue?


The facts are documented and available to both sides. Do you dispute them? SD does not. This is why we have \"this silliness\" my friend. Judge Springdale by the standard of these facts and perhaps you can then

understand the Springdalian mindset on Marshton.


In my conclusion, Merc must either disprove these facts or admit that they are in violation. My coin is on Springdale.


Written by my hand on the 21st of Springflower, in the year 1194.