Aren't you punishing every member of Emeriti for something that maybe 1-2 people are responsible for?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Printable View
Aren't you punishing every member of Emeriti for something that maybe 1-2 people are responsible for?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Yes, because that is the standard. I like to point this out because people like to paint pyro with a broad brush and then say that only a few of the leadership of emeriti were part of the conspiracy.
Obviously the rest of the KD had no idea! none! ahem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
The settlements seemed very reasonable. The GB and blatant CF break was not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Gb'ing 2 v1 a kd is probably not cheating per se. Its just going back on ones word that there is a CF. Oh and the small matter of 2v1 ing. Obviously its not punishable by the mods like pyro were punished last age as it went against no written rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Then why are BB allied with Pyro if they're cheaters? Isn't this whole thing about ethics?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
I would suggest a proportionate response and not the backstabbing that bb did to Emeriti. There seemed to be some very reasonable proposals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
I have stated as much, you may believe it or not as you wish. There are I think three theads around someplace dedicated to rehashing all of that. I will refer you there. But here I too can question that no one else in emeriti had a clue that there was a conspiracy to use allied kingdoms in the manner described in the logs. It is easy to just label all in one KD as it is in the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by lampost
Please show your calculations of value as to how their proposed offer was reasonable and be sure to reference how you derive their values for actual, compensatory, consequential, deterrence and punitive damage awards. No, they did not seem reasonable to BB, they don't seem reasonable to me. They don't seem reasonable to a great many people. They may seem reasonable to you, but before you write that in stone, I urge you to actually calculate the damages and test your conviction on that. I will be curious to see your analysis.Quote:
The settlements seemed very reasonable. The GB and blatant CF break was not.
Is it going back on ones word, or lets generally make it more clear, breaking an agreement if the agreement was made pursuant to fraud and conspiracy? Those on the BB side believe it is not. Address the fraud and conspiracy and then reanalyze if BB is being reasonable. I will again be curious to see your analysis.Quote:
Gb'ing 2 v1 a kd is probably not cheating per se. Its just going back on ones word that there is a CF. Oh and the small matter of 2v1 ing. Obviously its not punishable by the mods like pyro were punished last age as it went against no written rules.
If a party has paid their debt to society, are they forever regarded with suspicion and locked out of all decent company in society? Or are punishments not only meant to deter but also to allow a chance for reform? If pyro was actioned and paid that debt, then the focus is more properly on THIS age, not a given previous age. Alternatively, if you believe that such actions forever color the character of the participants, than I will point to all of the absalom members being associated with or directly involved with cross logging, account trading and other direct game rule violations out the wazoo for a period of over 30-40 consecutive ages. Should we discuss why people are siding with them, known cheaters that they are?Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
No, lets keep things simple and deal with this age.
Honestly, even if it was a settlement below expectations, the reaction should STILL not have been what happened. Below expectations offer? Counter-offer. Negotiate. TALK.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Don't respond to the first unsatisfactory offer with a full wave and CF break. The diplomacy dialogue had been opened, but instead of staying in the dialogue, you attacked instead. Again, I stress, the dialogue for talking was opened. The offer was not satisfactory. You didn't have to then go right to guns blazing.
You don't think we talked? You don't know ASF very well, do you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Verminator
You keep pushing for ethics argument to level of absurdity in your comments Palem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
Shortly after it happened there was an offer for the 2-3 retired abs players to take themselves out instead of making us waste the 24 hours (and unlimited ops) to do it ourselves. This was rejected by ASF. We then did diplo with Zauper a few days later and the same offer was made and their council rejected the offer.
We weren't going to settle for anything less than that, and I guess they greatly misjudged how upset we are.
Aren't Emeriti being treated this way because they were formally Abs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Almost everyone in this thread refuses to call them by their name and instead, Abs.
If you had found out that Godly+Elit had suggested to the ghetto cow to raze to secure a CF, would you have still declared an absolute crusade like you've done against Emeriti?
I'm not pushing anything. That's what people keep saying it's about.Quote:
Originally Posted by citadela01
"Emeriti **** played, now they need punished"
^something along those lines.
yes, for my part, I would have Palem.
Yes you are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
War didnt erupted in a blink of an eye, it started over one incident that is ethically wrong and moved in downward spiral from there.
To ignore everything and dumb it down to one sentence is parody on your side.
You belive we all jerk of to gb'ing absalom ... we get it
Think you misspelled my friend "We do" and not "We get it" :P
Palem, you are extremely blind in this case i feel, as far as i know BB made a number of "offers" that was declined, 1 was the Emeriti pulled out of the growth race, which im pretty sure they also rejected, as flogger says above there was other offers too.
Dont get me wrong im staying out cause i think its a huge overreaction, but one i feel BB is intitled to, not so sure with the rest of the KDs, i know some of them got reasons too, but those just joining in for the joining in seems a bit meh.
ps. lampost you argue/discuss like bombdigie :/
@angels while I do dislike abs I dont have itch that needs scratching. I'd just as eagerly participate in ghetto slugfest, I just like melee and think its welcome change from typical utopian rut.
As far as participants go I dont care much what's their name.
I'm confused. What else happened that fueled the fire? Emeriti had the gull to not just sit around while BB OOW razed them?Quote:
Originally Posted by citadela01
I'm not blind. I don't think people appreciate what asking Emeriti to not go for growth means. It's why they play. It's like telling war kingdoms they're not allowed to war. Basically what they're asking Emeriti to do is disband. Do you think that's a reasonable offer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aranfein
No, the point is we have a KD which was punished and established as a rulebreaker which taints them. You can choose to deny that the whole/some of the kd new about it, but its easy to see why that is not the case. Here the point is that what Emeriti did and the response was completely disproportionate. (as an aside there is room to argue that what Bour did is in principle is not wrong if he new for sure a couple of days later he was going to be GB'd down by those very same people, at the very least its a point for debate imo)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
No, I'v never been the best mathematician (and ill tell you a secret i never will be) so I will not even bother trying, there were other things such as a fake hostile also offered. More to the point, so instead of 3x take 4x or whatever is necessary. The explicit breaking of a ceasefire deal coupled with a 2v1 GB just seems retardedly overplaying the hand. And yes I will repeat dont go down the ethical road. Pyro as established cheaters were punished by the mods. That does not suddenly make them ethical again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Here again, your on a slippery slope and opening up a huge can of worms with this argument so please re-think it. Dont make that agreement in the first place. And more specifically dont make the agreement with the INTENTION of breaking it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Previous age is very relevant. Something that happened many years ago that I dont even know about not really so much. There is a basic difference I feel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
They are all guilty even the cr that play thereQuote:
Originally Posted by Palem
ASF has been playing since age 2, as have most of their kd. I can assure you they would have no problems fielding a roster of 25 diehards next age.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
ASF gangbanged Elit/Realest and told him he was not allowed to play ever again because two of his players were Realest's girlfriends former x-loggers. The GB on elit only ended once Elit kicked Realest and Versace out of his kingdom. As far as I know, Realest has never played for growth since. (I think this was age 50?) What's more extreme, telling them to go for honor for one age or requiring them to kill off dorje and leshrak?
Are you trying to tell me a story about how bad ASF is? Or about how forcing good monarchs out of the game works?Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
Neither seem like good angles to me imo.
Your arguments are all over the place. You really need to organize your thoughts. What you write looks like something a hurricane ripped through. Lets organize topics. Pretend you are trying to write a well constructed essay for your composition class, that may help.Quote:
Originally Posted by lampost
Let me respond to what I think you are trying to spout as best I can.
So, you maintain that prior acts taint people. OK, then all the players in Emeriti are cheaters because over over 30-40 consecutive ages of cheating including account trading and crosslogging in ways few people can even fathom. Do you know they had whole servers dedicated with logins for each province so anyone could log in from anywhere in the world and run any province in the KD at any time? Wonder why their chains were near flawless? So, Emeriti is fully tainted cheaters. Pyro are fully tainted cheaters. Heck, probably 80% of the server are fully tainted cheaters in your world. Good, one principle of yours is now established.
Next you jump to severity of punishment, which is completely unrelated, unless you are saying that because "Karl" a known burglar was punished one age ago, that "William" a known arsonist has been caught today, that the punishment for William is unfair because Karl is a known burglar? No, I am sorry your argument makes no sense. You really need to rewrite this part.
Lets see, then you refuse to analyze your stance on punishments, but rather spout them based on a false assumption of some parity for completely unreleated and non parity offenses. Then you suggest that ethics can't be brought up because one party was found to have cheated, even though you want to bring it up...... God its like trying to talk politics with someone in a bar after they just downed a 5th of vodka.... Re-write this.
Don't make an agreement because you assume it was entered into with intent to break it when the agreement was made before the connections were completely hashed out and the fraud and conspiracy were uncovered? so there is a slippery slope? God, you are making my head hurt even trying to parse what you are raving about.
So, because you don't know personally that the people in Emeriti are known crossloggers and cheats for at least a consecutive 30-40 ages in the past, but you do know about pyro having a multi last age, that is the basic difference in your last paragraph. That is a wonderful basis for a decision. So, lets say that you never knew that Bill was guilty of murder one year ago, but you do know that Karl is guilty of petty theft two months ago. Therefore Karl is worse than Bill?
You know what? You are just certifiably incoherent and raving. I hate to have to say that, but its true. Please rethink your argument and follow the basic principle of comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges and grouping similar arguments together, use transition sentences and introductory sentences that help us follow wth you are trying to say.
Neither is abs as the victim angle eitherQuote:
Originally Posted by Palem
Depends on how you define a victim. I think you've both done some fairly poor play.
1. Prior acts for sure taint people for good or for bad, that should seem simple enough. A prior recent act clearly makes more of a difference. I'm not here to discuss what happened years ago. The now is that we have a so called ethical kd (bb) siding with a non ethical kd (pyro) who were recently caught in the act. So we can scrap the morality on that front.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
2. Points are simple. Emeriti does something serious but small, offers reparations and benefits which seem to put BB at a big advantage. Gold, fake hostile, additional acres...you name it, I realy dont see what more calculations are needed. Instead we have the response which is completely disproportionate. I think some of your friends even admit to this. They just say it deserves a disproportionate response for one reason or another. Emeriti deserves to be beat up. They deserve have there CF broken with BB and then GB'd. There is no hurricane here and one does not need to be Shakespeare. Just simple logic.
OK this is better. What you are describing is a process called "attenuation" that is the more distant something is, the less weight it may be given. You come down clearly on the side that prior acts taint and taint permanently (which seems to argue counter to your concept of attenuation, so I have no idea how your logically work that out, but OK). You were doing alright until the last sentence where you just suddenly whip out an unsupported conclusory statement that contradicts a centerpiece of your own argument. No, we can't scrap morality! Its at the center of what you are trying to argue! If morality is immaterial, then the character of pyro has no bearing! ACK! Talk about throwing out the baby with the bathwater! Simply terrible! Go back and revise this again. But chin up! This is a MUCH better effort this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by lampost
If it is serious, then it can't be small. Don't self contradict. Perhaps better to say, "Emeriti transgressed, but in a minor way". This is also a conclusory statement as to magnitude which is sent to mask as fact. It is simply unsupported opinion as to magnitude. Poor lead-off choice. You then follow it up with another unsupported conclusory statement which merely parrot's ASF's arguments. Another conclusory statement as to magnitude of response. An assumption regarding the stance of unnamed posters. A contradictory statement, it can't be disproportionate if its deserved.Quote:
2. Points are simple. Emeriti does something serious but small, offers reparations and benefits which seem to put BB at a big advantage. Gold, fake hostile, additional acres...you name it, I realy dont see what more calculations are needed. Instead we have the response which is completely disproportionate. I think some of your friends even admit to this. They just say it deserves a disproportionate response for one reason or another. Emeriti deserves to be beat up. They deserve have there CF broken with BB and then GB'd. There is no hurricane here and one does not need to be Shakespeare. Just simple logic.
Sadly, its not simple logic. There is no logic here yet..... but you ARE getting a little better..... Keep trying!
Right there, you try to play the attorney and your FIRST assumption is wrong: the first razes were 380 acres, a whole ~1.3% of BB's land at that time (we negotiated right after the initial razes). Then you continue with making calculation based on more fictionnal assumptions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
So let's make it clear, the facts are:
1) We razed 380 acres.
2) We proposed acres, acres compensation, gold, releasing wizards and cover for a fake hostile.
3) It was declined and protector asked me a farmwar.
4) I told him I wouldn't give him a farmwar but that if my offers werent good enough, to come one that he would find more reasonnable and that we would accept it.
5) He told me it wasn't about the reparations, it was about the "principle" (right after asking for a farmwar )
6) If BB wanted any reparation, my kingdom had #1 province (2800 acres) and two other big provinces (2x2500 acres) and my kingdom was on ~23k acres (top 4) while BB's biggest were 2200 acres and were on ~32k acres. If BB wanted reparations, there was A LOT of ways to make sure they could get them, they just werent interested in that.
So please, just stop posting, you're as much an embarassment to lawyers than you're an embarassement to reporters.
Why do you keep lying? That wasn't your only demand nor was it rejected by me. I said something about that i don't control their kingdom but that I could talk to them about it. In the end, the kingdom did take themselves out and agreed to your acre caps and gave you 2.8x the land back that they razed.Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
What you wanted was:
[23:48:46] <flogger> all I want is an apology, an admission of what happenned, and I want the punishment being they don't go for the crown
[23:48:53] <flogger> this is the heart of our diplomacy
[23:49:13] <flogger> I want to quit, leave our kd to our brand new monarch to learn, fight, and probably lose
[23:49:37] <flogger> and leave this age to like WSK, coss, our new nub without me and whoever else wants to crown
What you wanted all along was for Emeriti to not compete in the top so that they could not war you fairly and so that you could have a free crown. Later in order to get enough ally support you promised them to not go for the crown with BB. This whole thing seems to be you being terrified of Emeriti owning Bb 1v1 for the third age in a row and therefore latching on to an excuse to go nuclear over a minor incident where full reparations were offered.
I started playing YR3.Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
Sonata disbanded after they deal broke my kingdom and gangbanged us while we were on low draft. They convinced allies to join in on false pretenses but later admitted the real reason was that Rage was unbeatable 1v1 at that point and the Sonata cf was up soon. There were a lot of similarities to what you did this age and both were very dishonorable acts. After farming out Sonata's ally Playboys in war, rage was ready to go for Sonata. At this point Sonata mass deleted and admitted to tricking their allies into the gb to begin with. Sonata's allies were mad at having been tricked and then to top it off having Sonata delete mid awar.Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
After a number of ages, Realest announced in the forums that Sonata was back. At this time Cheese (one of Sonata's former allies) approached me and said he wanted to make a deal to gb them as repayment for what they did before if it was true that they really were back. I agreed.
They indeed were back and most of the former Sonata leaders were all there. There was one new addition though - Elit. It was the general opinion that they brought in Elit both because he's good but also as a new face to try and prevent them from being gb'd as payback. Due to Elit being there now I was on the fense about whether to go through with helping in the gb. When Versace hacked two of Rage's provinces (due to the players being former kingdom mates with her in Secrets and Versace having had the players user/pass and they were dumb enough to have never changed it) then I agreed to help follow through with the planned gb.
As part of the diplomacy talks, Elit insisted that his kingdom was not Sonata despite Realest announcing that it was. Elit insisted that even though all the main sonata leaders were there, it wasn't Sonata since he was there now. I said that if that was true, then he should kick out the Sonata leaders that were involved in hacking us -- specifically Realest and Versace. Elit did not agree to this and so no, the gb didn't end by them being kicked out. Also I actually like realest and if he wanted to play in the top again he could.
lampost if your refering to me saying its an overreaction and me being a friend... Im not in the awar so that arguement is void, I dont care for either awar sides, i got friends on both sides and i think a solution could have been made, but i also state both sides are stubborn as mules...
As for you saying Pyro is worse just because thats the only thing you remember/knows about, kinda makes your argument on that void, I could tell you why but that should be obvious for you to see.
Palem you are blind, Emeriti isnt being asked to disband as far as i know, what stops them having a fun age in the war tier? I certainly remember both Elit and Drixx being asked to stay out of top race... Emeriti did something pretty lame whether its the whole kingdom or just the leaders doesnt matter, the leaders bad decisions reflects on the kingdom (mainly the name) which you should know, seeing your vendetta against FREE... Didnt you remove yourself from your kingdom in order to FSU FREE so it wouldnt reflect bad on your KD?
BB asking Emeriti to remove Leshrak and jdorje amounts to the exact same thing... (not that i agree with this, but it is what it is). Also your reaction was ott vs FREE but that didnt make it any less right did it? So why are you saying BBs cause of action isnt right? if thats what they feel must be done, and they have offered Emeriti ways to stop it which has been declined, just as Emeriti offered BB ways which was declined.
1) You explore big provinces in eowcf in perfect range to topfeed me and my other 2.5k provinces.Quote:
Originally Posted by protector
2) I know you're trying to cf Emeriti until YR2, which is the only threat you have.
3) All of you other targets beside my kingdom are on 25 players and are less juicy than my kingdom.
4) I attempt diplomacy and gets ignored by your steward and 3 of you grunts.
Also, about the "no threat", who do you think you're kidding? You are a kingdom of 25 ToGers with eowcf BR's bonus, it was a matter of around 24h to 48h before you were ready to start farming us. I'm sorry, but you add all of this together, it made absolutely no doubt in my mind you were coming for us.
What are the real reasons exactly? That the razes were all planned and all the messages I've sent priors to the razes and all the solutions I offered after were just a tissue of lies to try to cover up? You're a bunch of paranoiacs guys.
I'll end with logs of what I have said 24h after the initial razes in Emeriti's LS channel (yeah, I'm so pro a coverup that I also coverup into emeriti's leadership channel where we plan all the big mastermind conspiracy):
[03:29:29] <+bour> I've been thinking about this since yesterday and I think it was a mistake to hit into eowcf. I always tried to upheld myself to the highest possible moral standards, except when people were complete ass. BB werent ass to us or to almost anyone in the game. Sadly, all they want is either to kill us or to war us. I'll probably delete my province in a couple of hours and altough it doesnt repair the damage done to BB, I feel it's the best decision to make at this moment.
PS: The "us" in this quote is me and my kingdom.
Of course there are assumptions to ballpark. 750 is a number I saw thrown around a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoOrDie
Being wrong there is not a fatal flaw.
AT LAST! Something to sink our teeth into! How much in each of item #2? PRotector rejected those items as inadequate and then you rejected his counter. So there WERE negotiations, not going straight to the current actions. #5 is not inconsistent. If he wanted a farmwar to make a punative impression on your that would be in keeping with the principle. #6 is inaccurate in that they did counter with what they were interested in, which falls into the category of "A LOT" but they were not interested in your specific proposals.Quote:
So let's make it clear, the facts are:
1) We razed 380 acres.
2) We proposed acres, acres compensation, gold, releasing wizards and cover for a fake hostile.
3) It was declined and protector asked me a farmwar.
4) I told him I wouldn't give him a farmwar but that if my offers werent good enough, to come one that he would find more reasonnable and that we would accept it.
5) He told me it wasn't about the reparations, it was about the "principle" (right after asking for a farmwar )
6) If BB wanted any reparation, my kingdom had #1 province (2800 acres) and two other big provinces (2x2500 acres) and my kingdom was on ~23k acres (top 4) while BB's biggest were 2200 acres and were on ~32k acres. If BB wanted reparations, there was A LOT of ways to make sure they could get them, they just werent interested in that.
So you did produce facts, clarified one misconception that I had (thank you) and you also clarified for me how much you misconstrue of the situation. Also a plus. Your weak attempt at an insult aside, this post was at long last informative. Thank you for posting.
Bour, you posting that line just makes it sound like your telling Emeriti leaders that you feel it was a mistake that they made you do what you did.. like you didnt want to do the razes, but only did cause you were asked.(which kinda removes the "advicing" you to do it), which again puts Emeriti in even worse light in this situation.Quote:
I'll end with logs of what I have said 24h after the initial razes in Emeriti's LS channel (yeah, I'm so pro a coverup that I also coverup into emeriti's leadership channel where we plan all the big mastermind conspiracy):
[03:29:29] <+bour> I've been thinking about this since yesterday and I think it was a mistake to hit into eowcf. I always tried to upheld myself to the highest possible moral standards, except when people were complete ass. BB werent ass to us or to almost anyone in the game. Sadly, all they want is either to kill us or to war us. I'll probably delete my province in a couple of hours and altough it doesnt repair the damage done to BB, I feel it's the best decision to make at this moment.
(It sounds like that to me atleast but maybe not for others).
This information has been posted again and again in the past month. There was absolutely nothing new. Making long posts and trying to argue without using the real facts is just a big waste of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
#2: No amount were discussed since BB wasnt interested.
#3-#4-#5-#6: I rejected the offer, but counter-offered that if he wanted something else than a farmwar, to come talk to me and we would find a solution. Eventually, after a few days, he counteroffered 2500 acres and size cap for all the provinces on my kingdom, which I negotiated down a bit and that the final amount was ~2100 acres + size caps.
That's because you assume they made me do it, which is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aranfein
The accusation of protector was that the messages and the offers were just a coverup for the "real reasons". This quote prove that the offers weren't a coverup, that I was REALLY trying to give reparation to BB and that I felt powerless that they were just interested in some bloodlust's crusade. Here are some more quotes (right after the razes) that proves that the offers weren't a coverup:
[00:59:51] <+bour> Well, its stupid to raze into eowcf
[01:00:07] <+bour> I was totally willing to give the acres back + bonus
[01:00:18] <+bour> but flogger went all holy paladin
[01:00:29] <+cerberusv6.66> But he just wants to fight you instead now?
[01:00:49] <+bour> he wants to kill me
[01:00:49] <+cerberusv6.66> Holy paladin? Wtf does that mean lil
[01:00:52] <+cerberusv6.66> *lol*
[01:01:06] <+bour> he said : "eowcf is sacred, now you die"
[01:01:06] <+cerberusv6.66> Gotcha.
[01:01:42] <+cerberusv6.66> Just don't give him a button. :p
[01:02:58] <+cerberusv6.66> How do you feel about this situation?
[01:03:07] <+bour> I like flogger
[01:03:36] <+cerberusv6.66> Me toom
[01:03:38] <+cerberusv6.66> *too*
[01:03:42] <+bour> and hitting into eowcf is ****ty
[01:03:57] <+bour> but well, he doesnt want to make thing right, he want a crusade*
*I never have been so right about someone just wanting a bloodbath and not wanting to settle things.
LOL rofl^Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoOrDie
Yes but this is the first plain statement of them.
OK, so that was the resolution there. Now, why does that make it unreasonable to pursue the conspirators in this action?
The real reason this happened is because I was on vacation and wasn't there to say what a bad idea that was. I did do an excellent job of calling it retarded after the fact though.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoOrDie
On the flip side, I wasn't there to enable Shamus. I fully support his approach of just doing whatever the **** he wants, all the time.
you still seem to miss out on the fact that the domino effect of them getting hits does and how it effects the time line. Not a single one of you have addressed that. You think acres fix having a time to strike and a time to pump what was explored. You did a lot more than take acres and you "should" be a smart enough player to realize it.
squee gets it.
But we are working to get there with the rest of them squee. It's a process.....