There are times when one must admit a wrong, a mistake or a lapse in judgment. This can be a little embarrassing for someone to do after presenting a strong defense in their decision. Leaders chance this meal everyday, bringing associates into their family/city and offering them protection. Correspondingly, they stakes their reputation on the line and by consequence they are often held accountable for their subject's actions.

There are seemingly exceptional cases where the leader in question are favorable to the powers that be. Even when their vouch results in a nationwide effort to resolve on more than one occasion. The question I wanted to pose is where do you draw the line?

Is there a level of chaos that calls for the eye for eye approach vs compensating a grieving family or is it a slap on the wrist for everyone?

I am but a lowly Goomba seeking knowledge of our world. I wish to have an open discussion and perhaps even get a leader's insight on all of this. Though I know there are some who shoot their own Dons and give us nothing more than a "No W/S" tribute so I'll keep expectations low.

Constipated listened to Vessel and replayed his words over and over in his head and each time he kept coming back to the same thoughts. He decided to take the time and address the young man.

I am going to take a go at it and say his is not a hypothetical inquiry and solely based on recent events. Whether I am right or wrong is moot. What stands out in my head is when you stated you will keep your expectations low for any and all discussion they may or may not happen. 

I have been around long enough to know leader takes any pleasure for the most part in killing one of their own, let alone their Dons. It would not serve them and their city well. When we witness such situations, we can bank on there was a reason and depending on the situation there may very well have been discussions and or alternatives on the table. Many are not privy to the exact details. Rest assured a brief explanation would be cascaded down to the residents of the city involved. Those who were under the reign of a Don who was put to rest and remain in their city have the option to inquire. 

Constipated walks off hoping he raised the bar a bit on the young man's expectations. 

Constipated tries to hurry back to fix his stutter. I have been around long enough to know no leader takes any pleasure for the most part in killing one of their own, let alone their Dons.

Internal matters are funky. Real funky. I am taking the assumption this frustration comes with the death of Bacon some few days ago.

There is precedence where high level mafiosi have been given a bullet out of the blue and their corpse just left at the side with zero explanation or reasoning. There is precedence where some reasoning has been given, but it ended in mistrust or lies or an unclear total picture. There is precedence where full reasoning has been given and things walked off smoothly.

Reasoning is not, and never will be, a factor of utmost importance to be explained upon a death. The chances of it happening publicly are even lower. Most of that comes from the fact it simply isn't necessary to be given out on a grand scale. Yet, most of the time, you aren't left in the complete dark about the issues that led to said high profile murder. Most of the time, you are given enough to work with from the get go, and having that at all should be appeasing enough. Funerals often provide enough context. Sometimes though, they don't.

I'm under the impression frustration comes from being voided of a crew leader and the given impression one should just ignore it and hop into a new crew like nothing happened. Nobody in their right mind would think that, I'd hope. I mean, its happened to me. If I witnessed the person who brought me into this life and gave me a chance to be successful murdered in front of me, you're damn right I'd want to know why. Nobody sane enough can just walk away from something like that.

The real question here is communication, and how much should be given. I'd say informing the remnants of the crew, now leaderless, of the reasoning for a removal would be well respectful enough. It's up to the leaders and organizers of a removal to determine whether they want to bother with anything directly public. It's also up to them to determine the right and the wrong.

Should every single death be explained? No. Should every high-profile death be explained? No. Are some things morally right to be explained? Sure, but there isn't a requirement. The bottom line is that the community as a whole decides whether things go public or not.

Regarding the death of Bacon, that is a matter for you to determine the "why" of yourself, or of those in Chicago if they desire. I had no business with this matter and the majority of people did not, and I'm not going to answer for them.

In summary:

All deaths of mobsters, high-profile or not, are not obliged to be explained unless the community desires to do so. One may ask around for answers if they want to, but there is no guarantee an answer will be given. Not every death is unjustified. Business is business, and internal matters should stay relatively internal, especially for instances like this. Cities have their own jurisdiction over these circumstances.

I'm open to continuing discussion though and hearing some other thoughts.

Vessel was met with surprise by the turn out though the topic was derailed a bit he still appreciated the engagement.

@Constipation, thank you for coming out and lending us a moment of your time with your response. Removing one of your own is without a doubt a tough decision to come to and usually one with a strong reasoning behind it. No argument there. The problem lies in the aftermath. When city heads choose not to inform the public of anything involving their city, decision or actions it makes the rest of the world rather boring. I get it, you want to keep internal matters internal but you have to understand how your position on the world stage impacts society.

PlagueGuy, it's always a pleasure to hear things from your perspective. Though I'm a little taken aback by your stance towards communication from leaders. I expected we would share the same line of thinking. But if it can't be helped...

Reasoning is not, and never will be, a factor of utmost importance to be explained upon a death. The chances of it happening publicly are even lower. Most of that comes from the fact it simply isn't necessary to be given out on a grand scale. Yet, most of the time, you aren't left in the complete dark about the issues that led to said high profile murder. Most of the time, you are given enough to work with from the get go, and having that at all should be appeasing enough. Funerals often provide enough context. Sometimes though, they don't.

Funerals don't often provide enough context. Okay, maybe for the in-house low rank but not for a CL Don. Their removal potentially puts everyone at risk of being attacked by unemployed street kids. Their removal puts their offspring into the hands of someone else who may auth them and run into a same issue. Maybe the next guys won't be as courteous to keep their Made+ ranks alive. There is really a lot at play in withholding reasonings.

I'm under the impression frustration comes from being voided of a crew leader and the given impression one should just ignore it and hop into a new crew like nothing happened. Nobody in their right mind would think that, I'd hope. I mean, its happened to me. If I witnessed the person who brought me into this life and gave me a chance to be successful murdered in front of me, you're damn right I'd want to know why. Nobody sane enough can just walk away from something like that.

This isn't the case for me but have been for my grandfather. Joined a leader who ultimately got themselves and their Made+ ranks killed by their own Godfather. The reason was nothing more than being tactless in mob mails. I don't blame the attacking side for killing the upper ranks, including my grandfather, who had nothing to do with it because there's a lot of risk involved in keeping those formerly loyal to the now dead crew leader. I blame the crew leader for failing to keep them safe. Their bloodline still gets authed regularly... guess who won't be joining their tutelage all thanks to the explanation given? 

Should every single death be explained? No. Should every high-profile death be explained? No. Are some things morally right to be explained? Sure, but there isn't a requirement. The bottom line is that the community as a whole decides whether things go public or not.

You're right, not every death warrants an explanation but I can't agree with high-profile deaths at least not the one that happens to be a leader. It's very rare that these situations occur and to not give one is a disservice to the community as a whole. I think we can all agree that the internal issue on the East coast brought a little life to the streets, no?

Anyways, we've gone a little off topic. I wasn't trying to debate whether a leader should have street presence or not. I'm still happy to engage with you guys on this if you both want to continue but for anyone else that may want to contribute to the original topic please don't be afraid to do so.

Vessel, let me clear up a few points for you here. The exact circumstances of the death of Bacon or for that matter any other high ranker is nobodies business other than the leaders of the city in which they operated. Internal disciplinary measures are not and generally have not ever been made public to the best of my knowledge except on the odd, aberrant, occasion. The tack down of an entire district or city is a different matter  and often is explained in some manner.

That being said, the leadership of Chicago explained to every member of the Chicago syndicate the circumstances of Bacon's death. They did not have to, nor were they oblidged to do so, but on this occasion Godfather Chairman CLO and Godfather Feryja decided that the people who knew and worked with Bacon deserved to know, and out of respect for Bacon himself, who as I understand it was removed only as a last resort.

This is how it should be, the internal politics of Chicago are exactly that, the internal politics of Chicago, and as such will remain internal. I will reiterate however that Bacon was held in the highest regard by all who knew and worked with him, he gave his all for the city he loved, ultimately laying down his own life. Had there been any other way for the issues to be resolved, they would have been.

You have every right to keep things to yourselves. It's your city. I'm free to call the method in which you conduct yourselves boring. And to say it's never been done before is completely off the mark. Cory_Chase's removal of Skorpeon, Zeitgeist's removal of Chun_Li and, a little more recently, Herbert's removal of Saanvi. I could rattle off more names if you would like. All of which were internal matters made public because well, those guys cared.

I'm not in the entertainment business; I'm here to run the city in the way I believe in. If that makes you so bored that you feel the need to raise this issue in the streets, I offer you my sympathies.

As Lincoln mentioned, this was an internal issue that was handled internally; every mobster in Chicago was informed; I don't see the need to come out here and give a full breakdown to the rest of the country.

My ancestors weren't around when Cory or Zeitgeist removed Skorpeon and Chun Li; however, when Saanvi was killed, I was around. 
Bacon was a crew leader operating under Godmother Freyja in the Northside district; Saanvi was the GFC of Chicago; that's a big difference in my book.

Regardless, the devil is in the details, and this is not an announcement we wished to share. We felt that removing Bacon would be an isolated incident and that the damage could be kept to a minimum so the people we felt needed to know, knew.

Your name won't stand the test of time like the names I listed off, CLO. If you're fine with that so be it. I'm not here to lecture you in the way of proper etiquette. Your mentor failed you there. Everyone wanted to avoid the elephant in the room and be stickler about one particular thing mentioned. When the next batch of rogues from @Belle's crew/city finishes what the previous ones didn't then don't say I didn't try to warn you.

Anyways, trying to justify being a mute with "bUt iTs aN iNtErNaL iSsue" is a silly take when we all know how Bacon reacted to being asked to step down. People talk. So much for the best kept secret? Enjoy staying locked in your city. You're not cut out to run things like the ones before you and it shows.

This response shows just how much you know Vessel, with the answer being fuck all.

Are we still on Bacon? Seriously???

SatoruGojo, care to comment on the questions I asked earlier?

There are seemingly exceptional cases where the leader in question are favorable to the powers that be. Even when their vouch results in a nationwide effort to resolve on more than one occasion. The question I wanted to pose is where do you draw the line?

Is there a level of chaos that calls for the eye for eye approach vs compensating a grieving family or is it a slap on the wrist for everyone?

Two rogues of same origins have already dragged your normal 0-10 hour workweek to 90-100 before. Can you say for certain that won't happen again? Do you think a slap on the wrist will keep your captains and everyone under you safe? 

You make assumption after assumption and sound like an idiot. You see only black and white, nothing else. You lack the ability to think outside the box and understand that there are things outside of your scope of knowledge.

To be frank, Im happy with you believing what you believe anyway, it matters not to me.

"your normal 0-10 hour workweek", this tells me everything I need to know if you believe thats all I have ever done.

Is it an assumption when a pattern exists? You're starting to argue in bad faith.

As someone with no horse in this race, I gotta say - I’m with Vessel on this one. If you ain’t got the time for it, retire to the old country and let someone hungrier take over operations. That being said… I know next to nothing of the circumstances, so could be wildly off the mark. 0-10 though… bad look.

 What is the purpose of brining up Gojo's activity level? What does  the activity level of a GF in Detroit have to do with Bacon's death?  

Constipated takes another look at the happenings on the now dead goomba who was sent to question the leadership in Chicago. In disbelief he thinks to himself this guy wore a set of balls to question how business by the top leaders in Chicago is conducted. His final words carry on to questioning a top leadership in Detroit. He rubs his unshaven face and agrees on the decision to have another clueless, and disrespectful motherfucker pushing up the daisies. He scratches his head and asks was he really clueless?  Was he just a puppet to grandstand on these shores?