Aaron hears Sycamore's questioning, then approaches him, drinking from his flask and offering it over.

There are several angles to consider in this question mate.  For me personally, I prefer it when a Godfather decides it's time to end lives and comes out and speaks himself.  If he was spearheading the move, then he should be the one addressing it, am I wrong?  That aside, it's a courtesy to begin with, that anybody comes out and tells the rest of the world what they did.  When a council of people decides on a move, it is their business.  They don't have to come out and tell us the inner workings that caused their family to make these moves, but they do, more to sate everybody's curiosity than anything.

So, I guess, my thoughts on this matter are that simple.  I don't really care either way, if they're going to offer me the information I'll thank them for the look into it, if not, I won't hold it against them, and if only one man steps forward, speaking for the whole group, I'm thankful because I don't have to hear the same words five times over from different people.  If he steps forward and only tells a part story, and anybody who collaborated with him thinks more should be told, I would hope then, as leaders in our society, that they would step forward and explain the whole story, if it becomes an issue as well.

Sanji wanders by stopping when he hears a man giving a speech he finds to be interesting. He takes a moment to listen before commenting on the matter himself.

I always find it interesting to hear the details of what happened whether they be the truth, a little fabricated or straight up lies. It's all the same, I enjoy them either way. I feel like there's something to be learned from it all as well, be it a little about the leader giving the speech or how the different leaders work in both their way of thinking and their way of getting things done. Not to mention, it's just nice to hear a version of what happened. 

Once finished voicing his opinion, Sanji takes a step back as to let other people comment if they should wish to.

Sycamore, as a person that frequents the streets very often, be it to speak or to listen, the post-war victory speeches are my favorite. We've all heard the old adage that a Godfather doesn't have to give a reason if he/she doesn't want to, and of course that is a valid point. I was always curious why the victor of a war or take downe wouldn't want to. People sometimes feel that a post war explanation is solely for the benefit of the kin of the losing side, but it's not. It's for the victors as well. And the entire community for that matter. A well explained post-war speech can inspire others, inspire one's own city, and endear him or herself to other cities and districts that may have come up with their own conclusions otherwise.

Take the most recent takedown of Viene in DT and Penquin in Chicago. Prior to Godfather Dripple's public address, we were all lead to believe that it was over "rumors". This in itself was just a rumor. As it turns out, it was about Dripple's ancestor's MR divorce to the jynx bloodline but prior to him saying that, the masses were unaware that the reason was far more deep-rooted than simply "rumors".

Those with the capabilities to go back into the history books should read war speeches by the likes of Deimne, Roman, Gwarble, I could go on and on but those are just a few examples. Mostly I believe leaders should recognize that a war speech is an honor to give, and should deliver the speech moreso for themselves to celebrate a victory. Its' purpose is not to placate the kin of the fallen.

That being said, I am always appreciative when a leader delivers a post war speech and hope it remains a staple in our community.

Two_Taps listens intently to what has been said before him, taking drags out of his cigarette and nodding in agreement now and then.

I was always one who enjoyed a war speech, and more so I enjoyed a war speech just as a war was starting, this is what we are doing, this is why we are doing it, bang! Now I know that this is not possible all the time, and rarely happens. But definitely speaking after a war i think should be an unwritten law, not a definitive law, but a mutual understanding among us mafioso.

See I think our crew leaders, our city heads and out esteemed God fathers can use this tool, and actually lead us, inform us and guide us. I myself am a watcher and a listener, a quiet sort of guy who doesnt say too much and absorbs whats around him. I know im not the only one like this either, so with Speeches at all concerning a war it lets me know what is going on and how our leaders are leading us, and from there I can form my own opinion and thoughts. 

Kale slips into the conversation. Half listening to the ones before she addressed Sycamore.

Personally, I like the speeches. Although there is the saying only believe half of what you read. At least with an explanation you can grasp some sort of idea otherwise it gets jotted down to rumours. Although I am gathering that rumours play a large part in wars which is unfortunate. I have always believed that facts are better than whispers that circulate. You can't always believe what you hear but if you are paranoid enough you just might believe everything you hear.

So in short speeches are nice. Next of kin can add their thoughts or opinions onto those of the victor(s).

I think I am with Two_Taps as well, I have always enjoyed the war speeches that are announced as the war begins. Also, as he stated it's not always possible but I think it adds even more excitement to the war.

Despite the reasons or there validity. I have always been of the belief there are three sides to every story, your side, there side and the truth. In the case of war, the reasons don't even have to be what one may consider "good" reasons, just to hear some one come out and say, "hey, we decided to expand." or "Well, we are trying to ensure the longevity of our family so we took down everyone who's loyalty was questionable."

Just having that extra element is great.

I always appreciate it when the leader in charge, be it a crew leader or a Godfather, comes out and explains.  For me, it has nothing to do with the histrionics of the family members of the fallen, nor the multiple versions of the story.  For me, it is about one thing, integrity.  When someone gets a crew, or gets to the lauded rank of Godfather of a city, he must be a man of his word.  And we must trust, as those under him, that his choices will be in not only his interest, but our own.  Of, course, I am not discounting those leaders who are female by choosing the male pronoun, it is just easier, and so I will remain with the male pronoun when, in fact, I mean all of Mafia society in general.  

For me, the explanation in the streets is for his own crew, and the family of those who may have fallen in defense.  That they understand what matter of honor or value brought the world to such a crisis that there could be no answer but blood.  Words, once spoken can never be taken back.  And I do not fault those who have not come out with different versions once the Godfather spoke, for they are following what they know.  When a godfather speaks, you listen. He may not be your family but allies and enemies change very quickly on these shores, and it is always helpful to know what a family believes, not just what they say they believe, but what they will actually back with blood.  Words are worth blood, and sometimes it must be paid.  I am just glad that even some of the Godfathers take the chance to talk to us like the men of respect we claim to be, and tell us what mistakes others have made, that we are not so apt to make them ourselves. 

Do i generally care if a war is explained on the streets?

No

watches the gasps of what

Half the times i have seen wars happen, not everything in regard ever comes out from either side, and have seen this on wars have been involved in and wars i haven't.

Do i believe a family should know what or why it's fighting?

yes, as these people put their trust in you and risking their lives for a family so should be transparency.  Would you really want to follow someone who just see's you as shooter #1 or pro whacker #1?

Will rumours, etc always leave a family? of course whether in the know or not even though Omerta should prevail.

As much as i believe it can be used as a tool, i think if used badly, or enough of a crowd turn on someone it will do the opposite.  A recent example would be -assassin-.   Now -assassin- recently decided to remove someone from Brooklyn, he followed all the political steps, looked to his fellow leaders. 2 approached a GF outside NY for impartiality before removing Mr Bonnano.  Yet on IRC Avenue he was hounded and in the streets destroying any power he had, and ultimately leading to him losing head of the district before his death.

Did his colleagues come out and support him en masse, help fight his corner? no.  For the limited support he got others the opposite helped sway others mind on his future in the district which was yet another failure experiment as i had expected from start..

So it is sometimes down to who will back you and how you articulate to use it as a tool, otherwise can be a reason for someone to rise against you, or society as a whole.

Godfather you are spot on it has to be used in the correct way and if you show any signs of weakness this world is unforgiving and people will jump on any weakness if it gives them the upper hand. At the same token by not coming to the streets and explaining certain things it can have the same effect of coming to the streets and explaining your reasons but not doing it very well.

It is a very fine line but surely that is what the good leaders will do explain with just the right amount of information rather than leaving it for the rumor mills to make up reasons for wars/takedowns.

Well we have all seen a lack of explanantion can cause un-needed violence and often misdirected in the past,  X commits an action, Y dies, Z y's son strikes at p as think they may have been involved.  An innocent dies and comes back angry and frustrated.  Sometimes can tell them the true or an opinion due to circumstance on the situation and people will still be angry anyway.   Politics and diplomacy are the hardest part of leadership.

I agree that people will always come back angry that they died regardless of whether there has been an explanation or not, unfortunately those souls are list and cannot be helped by anyone the only thing that will help them is time.

Yes politics and diplomacy are the hardest things in leadership but that is why our leaders are in the position that they are in because someone believes that they have the characteristics to excel in those departments hence why the auth system works well and how certain experiments tend to self destruct.