Back in the early 2010's I was regretfully heavily involved with Didonus and his circle. I have since moved on from the game but would be interested in sharing this and more. I wasn't one of the figure heads, he just saw me as another 'asset'. I'm not sure how many people know this but Stormbinder for a time was also at the beck and call of Didonus. A much more subtle vile attack dog then compared to his overt aggressive nature now.
As his nature and views became more public Didonus was forced to cast him aside or to risk exposure for being associated with Stormbinder who is a literal neo-Nazi. Didonus' circle had a lot of grunts over the years, all we were was 'tools' to be used and discarded so they could protect their little clique and monopoly. The PCU is no different you have the 'officer/figure head class' who reap all the benefits only because they're enabled by useful tools and footsoldiers. Revisiting the forums made me sad to see how badly these people have been manipulated and how they're enabling such behaviour. The sad thing is that when any risk to the PCU comes about or when there must be consequences they'll be the first ones sacrificed and when they realise that it'll be too late.
I realised this too late and don't look back upon those years fondly because of the person who I was. My service to Didonus and his group cost me my guild, reputation and friends. Once you become one of those 'grunts' or 'footsoldiers' for a cabal like that, it is difficult to escape that cycle. When my GM and I failed Didonus he disposed of us too and then a new wave of foolish youths replaced us - they harassed us and came after us too no different than what happens in the PCU today. We had to start new characters and struggled to escape from that group or the things we'd done.
If you're interested in some old skype screenshots that show some of the interactions between Stormbinder, Didonus and some other old names I'd be happy to provide them.
We would gladly take any screenshot evidence you have on hand as corroborating evidence for these highly interesting claims that you have made here.
The language of "assets" and "tools" however does generally line up with the nomenclature that the Royal Court/House of Essington has shown over the years though.
