Quote Originally Posted by Elurin View Post
I think your arguments are fair ASF; the question is just where to draw the line. In an extreme example as someone presented; if 2 kd's have a CF until age 10 and then mean to fight it out - are they immune from outside interference from OOP until yr10? Obviously not. If a kd starts to hit another kd, and gets hit back - should they then be immune to interference? Obviously yes. In between we have a greyzone with different opinions; is 48 hour notice a standard "everyone has to stay out" period? What if 2 kd's have 4 days notice? or 8 days? Still immune for the full 8 days?

I don't think we will reach a common view here. To me this has little relation to the ops we made (flogger explicitly said his goal with the age was to do what we did last age, and that it was a mistake to get big, so obviously Bio for one thinks what we did last age is perfectly fine). To me this is related to hurt feelings and ruffled egos. It's very human to find this type of reasoning where a person's failure to perform is projected outside the self; e.g. if inso feels they have proven a failure in every aspect of a kd, they need to justify their own existence by finding a reason for their failures outside of their own kd. With a lack of the self esteem/belief in self to try to make the justification 1 vs 1, a convenient reason is found.
3 Utopians can generally never agree where the line is, but when 6 utopians who all hate eachother agree it was crossed that usually is a good indicator.

I don't think BIO thinks robbing all age is perfectly fine. BIO wouldn't have done it to rage or sanc to the degree done by you because we know there would be reprecussions eventually.

The short answer to the quandry is fix the science system and no one will care about robbing anymore. All of these disagreements ultimately come from game flaws. If the ages lasted a month people would be alot less emotional. Since we have 4 month long ages, things always get trickier.