A commitment to the rules of society is a keystone of its function. Rather
than debating the source of the complaint (for if we removed the right to
speak over personal disputes, all would be silent!), perhaps we might
address the contents of the argument and not the speaker and his emotions.

For purposes of dispute, the subject is whether or not the symbel was
intended to mean "those who hold the status of Elder, active or not" or
"those who are currently active as Elder." This matter could best be
resolved either by the word of an Honourable Kindred, or the originator of
the Symbel, who has staked their status to arbitrate.

Logically, given that the choice was a matter for the organizer of the
Symbel, a call out really wouldn't refer to the Harpy in question who won,
but the originator of the Symbel, if there is an issue with precedence.

Harpy Haven, before I belabor and nitpick further, what precise commitment
do you have to this particular point? Is this in passing observation, or a
larger issue to the enforcement of our laws and customs?

On the subject of Elder Graves as an Elder, I am concerned that this
opening arguement, as phrased in the report, could be used to accuse Harpy
Haven of sedition or, less dramatically, insulting an Elder if someone else
were to take it up.

As phrased, It appears to question how an Elder might be worthy, by how
they came to be recognized. Machiavellian Prodigy, who achieve beyond their
years or blood potency, are a testament to the fairness of the judgement of
the Camarilla in the worth of a Kindred. Of course what seems, and what is,
are two seperate issues. Are you saying that not all Elders are equal to
each other in Status?

I trust in Harpy Haven's intelligence and rhetorical skill to elucidate,
should he feel the matter needs further addressing- I am sure
professionally we care only of clarity and appropriate commitment to
protocol, and protecting Harpy Haven from being misunderstood.

I state my gratitude to Master Harpy St. John, whose wisdom presents us
with the Socratic question, seeing how "Thy domain is thy own concern" is
correctly applied to this situation. She is known far and wide for her
skill and restraint.

As such, with the greatest of admiration for her I put forth that it is not
inherently erroneous to put to question, politely, the judgement of a Harpy
in certain limited contexts:

In the first place, the judgement of a single Harpy is superceded in the
context of Murders, so it is not a final arguement, regardless of Domain.
We are expected, by professional requirement, to be a check upon each other.

(In debate here, I think we have concluded it is not worthy or applicable
of launching a Murder, based on how Harpy Graves became Victorious.)

Furthermore it was the conclusion of the Connecticut Conclave Debate of
2017 that reporting on another domain, as practiced by the Tower Herald and
the Sectarian, is within the purview of a Harpy, provided no status was
expended- if Harpy Haven did not Warn, call Vulgar and so forth, he is
staying within his lane. Of course we may likewise offer both professional
criticism and the professional support he has received.

Likewise, boons and fleeting status travel across physical domain, as do
the Monikers deserved by persons who violate the underpinning of our
economy (or our Elysiums, God forbid!). Master Harpy St. John does well to
encourage us to check for boons spent, and status earned.

(We note that regardless of phrasing, Harpy Haven has no ability to
arbitrate that Harpy Graves is not Victorious, and can take this as simply
phrasing the truth in scathing framing. Anything else is weighted by our
pure personal judgement as Harpy Haven is not formally Honourable.)

And of course, it is self evident, that the status of Justicar in their
Commands, and the movement of their agents, and so forth, transcend Domain.
We are of course, nothing of that elevated state and would always support
the will of the Justicars and agree with them without reservation- in
upholding their will we should still use all the limited powers we hold.

(This particular matter is so small, in my own Domain, which this is not,
if someone tried to involve our Graces and waste their time I might see
them well on the path to Disgraced and most certainly Warned, such that the
will of one Northern Harpy matters. As such we fall back on Domain.)

Master Harpy St. John does also remind us that in matters of arbitration,
due to the power of Domain, we would weight the Harpy of Tulsa, in his home
Domain, over the Harpy of Little Rock, visiting and travelling on his Elder
status. But the Harpy of Tulsa is absent from the conversation, and has not
spoken on their own behalf- we have instead heard from the Harpy of
Oklahoma, the Harpy of Reno, and so forth.

We cannot let Harpy Graves have the last word, as he has not uttered any.

In conclusion to Master Harpy St. John's excellent premise I bring forward
the following:

If we are indeed deprived of the Harpy of Tulsa's reports, it is my
judgement this should be mended, if he doesn't want someone else conveying
the goings on in his Domain such that we might form another impression.

He may, mind you, think Harpy Haven is beneath him. We don't know, he
hasn't spoken.

(Perhaps the Harpy of Little Rock thinks the Harpy of Tulsa is shy, and
Harpy Haven is simply setting out debateable claims to encourage the former
to dispute his premises. I cannot speak to Harpy Grave's hypothetical
extreme modesty, having no familiarity with this worthy Elder, but I try to
bring a plurality of readings to matters including one that puts all
parties in the best light.)

I suggest that if some barrier such as the digital format or a personal
abhorrence for ghouls prevents reports, that if Harpy Haven is indeed
acting in good faith to assist the Domain of Tulsa and simply concerned, he
offers to use his mastery of this medium to publish the reports of the
Harpy of Tulsa, free of adulteration and commentary, perhaps for a period
of three months?

Then, nobody might be led to believe this was a petty grudge (as repeated
responses from Harpy Haven indicate this greatly wounds him to be told so),
and we will not be forced to consider what the Harpy of Tulsa might have
meant via secondary sources, and may enjoy the quality of Harpy Grave's
work first-hand.

E. Rhodes
Tremere Harpy of Vancouver
Prominent, Noble and Guardian Within Her Domain
Confirmed In All Other Places.