Proposal to end he Awar

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sheister

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?

No, lets keep things simple and deal with this age.

---

Aren't Emeriti being treated this way because they were formally Abs?
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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by citadela01

You keep pushing for ethics argument to level of absurdity in your comments Palem.

---

I'm not pushing anything. That's what people keep saying it's about.
"Emeriti **** played, now they need punished"
^something along those lines.

yes, for my part, I would have Palem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

I'm not pushing anything. That's what people keep saying it's about.
"Emeriti **** played, now they need punished"
^something along those lines.

---

Yes you are.
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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by citadela01

Yes you are.
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

---

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 Aranfein

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.

---

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 Sheister

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.

---

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

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.

---

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

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.

---

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

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?

No, lets keep things simple and deal with this age.

---

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 Palem

Aren't you punishing every member of Emeriti for something that maybe 1-2 people are responsible for?

---

They are all guilty even the cr that play there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

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?

---

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.

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flogger

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.

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?

Neither seem like good angles to me imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lampost

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)





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.




Here again, your on a slippery slope and opening up a huge can of worms with this argument so please re-think it. Don't make that agreement in the first place. And more specifically don't make the agreement with the INTENTION of breaking it.





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.

---

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

Are you trying to tell me a story about how bad ASF is? Or about how forcing good monarchs out of the game works?

Neither seem like good angles to me imo.

---

Neither is abs as the victim angle either

Depends on how you define a victim. I think you've both done some fairly poor play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sheister

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.

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.

Nest 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.

---

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.

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.