Rush Sykes' Blog

Except that at the time I spoke to Pandas, my aid screen would have shown that no tech came from Great1. Its one thing to expect me to provide proof. Its another when a gov member says "I believe you" at a point in time when 2 clicks of the mouse will reveal the proof to him. I dont know if he did or did not check my aid screen. My aid screen at present, dates back to May 21. That would also, coincidentally, be the day I was owed the 2nd 50 tech (the message he sent me was on the 9th, he clearly stated that he owed 4 people tech tomorrow(10th) and me the day after(11th)... that would make the 2nd 50 due on the 21st. The only ... and I mean the ONLY way you can not believe me , is to think I made all of this up to scam 100 tech from FAR. And that, my friend, is the diplomatic mistake you made. You called me a liar at a point in time when Great1 had said NOTHING to ANYONE. You were, in fact, not even going to message him about it. You told me that you believe him(who has said nothing), over me. Maybe where you come from, that is acceptable. If so, that is unfortunate for you and your alliance. On a side note... Exodus and Pandas are both to be commended for their personal conversations with me. They epitomize the way diplomacy SHOULD go. Thank you to you both.

Rush, You in effect are calling Great1 a liar even after his reply to my message.

The point isn't diplomacy. You just want a stage now to vent what you say is a deal gone bad. Great1 isn't here crying about being called names. You got an answer.

Everyone has seen your position. Great1 said he paid, that's his position. So who is right? No one knows for sure.

So its best to move on. Your chances would have been better if you had not come over wanting to attack. Thats where you lost any chance with me.

Thousands of sellers on Planet Bob, I'm sure you can find one.

Rush, You in effect are calling Great1 a liar even after his reply to my message.

The point isn't diplomacy. You just want a stage now to vent what you say is a deal gone bad. Great1 isn't here crying about being called names. You got an answer.

Everyone has seen your position. Great1 said he paid, that's his position. So who is right? No one knows for sure.

So its best to move on. Your chances would have been better if you had not come over wanting to attack. Thats where you lost any chance with me.

Thousands of sellers on Planet Bob, I'm sure you can find one.

I am not IN EFFECT doing anything. He says he sent the tech. The fact is, he did not. He is either lying, or mistaken. Either possibility is acceptable to me. However, reasonable people would conclude because a) since he luckily missed 4 messages in ~30 days(collosal luck that each log-in of his would be after each of those messages deleted)... b) managed to log in and delete his aid screens prior to my 1st contact with Pandas (after my 1st 2 messages)... I know which way I lean.

I am not IN EFFECT doing anything. He says he sent the tech. The fact is, he did not. He is either lying, or mistaken. Either possibility is acceptable to me. However, reasonable people would assume that a) since he luckily missed 4 messages in ~30 days(collosal luck that each log-in of his would be after each of those messages deleted)... b) managed to log in and delete his aid screens prior to my 1st contact with Pandas (after my 1st 2 messages)... I know which way I lean.

You just did. Read the bold in your own quote.

The argument you make goes both ways then it cannot just be Rush is right.

There is a possibility that the fact is that either one of you is lying or mistaken, your words.

Or maybe you say you messaged him and didn't. See cuz your argument goes both ways....There is a possibility that the fact is that either one of you is lying or mistaken, your words.

You just did. Read the bold in your own quote.

The argument you make goes both ways then it cannot just be Rush is right.

There is a possibility that the fact is that either one of you is lying or mistaken, your words.

Or maybe you say you messaged him and didn't. See cuz your argument goes both ways....There is a possibility that the fact is that either one of you is lying or mistaken, your words.

Maybe the word EITHER escaped you. Regardless, you have figured it all out. I was sitting up late one night, and just decided I would scam FAR out of 100 tech. I would have gotten away with it too, if it were not for those meddling kids!

Maybe the word EITHER escaped you. Regardless, you have figured it all out. I was sitting up late one night, and just decided I would scam FAR out of 100 tech. I would have gotten away with it too, if it were not for those meddling kids!

And you think Great1 or FAR tried to scam you out of $3mil? We would have gotten away..... oh brother, see what I mean? This goes both ways Rush.

There is a chance that either you or Great1 is mistaken. Just move on.

What you don't seem to get is that Great1 says he did pay Rush his tech. To me thats all I need and the burden of proof is with Rush. No screen shots, nothing. Just his recollection.

Yesterday was the first I heard of this. And how do I hear about it. In our private channel I am told that Rush is here to get military clearance. So I query Rush and put a stop to that. At that point, he is dealing with me. He lacked any real proof. So my answer to him was no. My answer to him was and still is if I have to choose between Great1 v. Rush...Rush loses every time.

Like I said, don't come asking for a FAR member to be cleared for attack cuz the answer will be no and your proof better be 100%.

What could he show you that is 100% proof? Messages? Logs? Or do you want screenshots? You can fake screenshots really easily. If you were convinced that Rush was just making it up, what prevents you from just saying that he edited the html code to make it look like he was scammed?

Since even screenshots rely on you assuming the person who it's from is telling the truth, there can be no absolute 100% proof of a transaction, the only exception being if the slot still exists on the nations foreign aid screen at the time. Thus, you're saying that FAR members can get away with scamming people as long as they delay by enough such that the transactions clear. All that's needed is for them to say that they didn't do it.

You could, alternatively, step back and realize how absurd it would be for the MoFA of Athens to randomly pick a nation in FAR and accuse him of being a scammer just for !@#$% and giggles. You also could try to be more polite when you're dealing with a situation like that. Even if you didn't believe Rush, you come off as a jerk.

What could he show you that is 100% proof? Messages? Logs? Or do you want screenshots? You can fake screenshots really easily. If you were convinced that Rush was just making it up, what prevents you from just saying that he edited the html code to make it look like he was scammed?

Since even screenshots rely on you assuming the person who it's from is telling the truth, there can be no absolute 100% proof of a transaction, the only exception being if the slot still exists on the nations foreign aid screen at the time. Thus, you're saying that FAR members can get away with scamming people as long as they delay by enough such that the transactions clear. All that's needed is for them to say that they didn't do it.

You could, alternatively, step back and realize how absurd it would be for the MoFA of Athens to randomly pick a nation in FAR and accuse him of being a scammer just for !@#$% and giggles. You also could try to be more polite when you're dealing with a situation like that. Even if you didn't believe Rush, you come off as a jerk.

This man is wise indeed. Logic is your friend Fernando.

What could he show you that is 100% proof? Messages? Logs? Or do you want screenshots? You can fake screenshots really easily. If you were convinced that Rush was just making it up, what prevents you from just saying that he edited the html code to make it look like he was scammed?

Since even screenshots rely on you assuming the person who it's from is telling the truth, there can be no absolute 100% proof of a transaction, the only exception being if the slot still exists on the nations foreign aid screen at the time. Thus, you're saying that FAR members can get away with scamming people as long as they delay by enough such that the transactions clear. All that's needed is for them to say that they didn't do it.

You could, alternatively, step back and realize how absurd it would be for the MoFA of Athens to randomly pick a nation in FAR and accuse him of being a scammer just for !@#$% and giggles. You also could try to be more polite when you're dealing with a situation like that. Even if you didn't believe Rush, you come off as a jerk.

FAR nations have sold thousands of tech. One tech deal that is up in the air. Great1 had 5 going, why would he just default on one and pay the others?

Like I said, either Rush or Great1 is mistaken here. The horse is deader than dead.

FAR nations have sold thousands of tech. One tech deal that is up in the air. Great1 had 5 going, why would he just default on one and pay the others?

Like I said, either Rush or Great1 is mistaken here. The horse is deader than dead.

How you can reply, and so completely miss his point, and address the concern of his post, is amazing.

What could he show you that is 100% proof? Messages? Logs? Or do you want screenshots? You can fake screenshots really easily. If you were convinced that Rush was just making it up, what prevents you from just saying that he edited the html code to make it look like he was scammed?

Since even screenshots rely on you assuming the person who it's from is telling the truth, there can be no absolute 100% proof of a transaction, the only exception being if the slot still exists on the nations foreign aid screen at the time. Thus, you're saying that FAR members can get away with scamming people as long as they delay by enough such that the transactions clear. All that's needed is for them to say that they didn't do it.

Ok, we aren't that dumb. Rush had a good argument, but the decision was made that he didn't have enough to back it up. I may have said that it wasn't necessary to show me screens at the time, but he still should have taken them before time ran out. When this sort of thing happens, you need proof because you never know who is going to ask for it. Just because the #2 guy believes or offers to solve it in one way, does not mean that the #1 guy agrees. Perhaps if I were available I would not have agreed with Fernando and tried to solve it in a simpler way, because that's how I roll. Not that I look for the easy way out, but to turn something so futile into something so large is just so unnecessary. OR maybe Fernando could have swayed me to his point of view. After the decision was made, I made my own decision that it was too late to turn back and assumed it was finished. Had Rush had screens, we would have supported his argument more than we did. Sure they can be doctored, but if Great1 had not been able to show us otherwise then Rush would have gotten his way. If Great1 had shown otherwise and we had different screens from each person, then further investigation would have been done until it was solved.

My one big mistake was that I took this into my own hands, and failed to inform Fernando who only found out when Rush came seeking military clearance. I was not around last night due to RL, and Fernando made his decisions without me (but with knowledge of what i had said). I have plenty of authority, but when he technically has more power than I. He made his decision and no one fought it.

I thank Rush for being so understanding through this, very few people would take something like this as he did and it is highly respectable. He has proven that he is very fit for his job.

How you can reply, and so completely miss his point, and address the concern of his post, is amazing.

My concern...Great1 says he paid. That is all I need to know. Our active members have all paid their tech, it's just you that seems to say no. Thats the whole point of this topic. Not what people can do with html or logs or whatever.

You say v He says...even split. No one is right no one wrong, one of you is mistaken so just move on and get a new seller. gnite.

Ok, we aren't that dumb. Rush had a good argument, but the decision was made that he didn't have enough to back it up. I may have said that it wasn't necessary to show me screens at the time, but he still should have taken them before time ran out. When this sort of thing happens, you need proof because you never know who is going to ask for it. Just because the #2 guy believes or offers to solve it in one way, does not mean that the #1 guy agrees. Perhaps if I were available I would not have agreed with Fernando and tried to solve it in a simpler way, because that's how I roll. Not that I look for the easy way out, but to turn something so futile into something so large is just so unnecessary. OR maybe Fernando could have swayed me to his point of view. After the decision was made, I made my own decision that it was too late to turn back and assumed it was finished. Had Rush had screens, we would have supported his argument more than we did. Sure they can be doctored, but if Great1 had not been able to show us otherwise then Rush would have gotten his way. If Great1 had shown otherwise and we had different screens from each person, then further investigation would have been done until it was solved.

I think you need to re-read my post. My point was that screenshots are no more, or less, trustworthy than someone's word. Consider the following 2 possible situations:

1) Rush is lying. He says that your member scammed him and provides screenshots.

2) Rush is telling the truth. He says that your member scammed him and provides screenshots.

How do you discriminate between these two situations based on Rush's word and screenshots? If Rush is really going out of his way to slander your member and accuse him of being a tech scammer when that's not the case, then it seems pretty reasonable that he'd also be willing to put in a little additional effort to doctor a screenshot. It literally takes seconds to do and Rush would've had days to do it. Rush could also be telling the truth and not have doctored the screenshot. But you would be taking his word for it and thus are back to having to trust Rush.

Thus, "proof" becomes impossible. You really just have to take someone on their word.

That said, you can choose to simply not believe Rush in this situation which is fine. But your justification of him not having a screenshot is silly. If you don't believe him it's simply because you believe your member over him. But in that case, is there any situation in which you would *not* believe your own member? Because it seems that this standard lets FAR nations tech scam at will and be home free as long as they can clear their transaction history.

Also, do you really think that Rush would make a conspiracy like this to target a random FAR nation?

My concern...Great1 says he paid. That is all I need to know. Our active members have all paid their tech, it's just you that seems to say no. Thats the whole point of this topic. Not what people can do with html or logs or whatever.

You say v He says...even split. No one is right no one wrong, one of you is mistaken so just move on and get a new seller. gnite.

I too am shocked as to how you so completely miss my point. Wow. You really are something else.

I have to question whether FAR would be so aggressively defensive if they didn't have that treaty with NpO to back them up.

I agree that having our nation cleared as a tech spammer and open to attacks is ridiculous. However, I do think that an alternative can be reach and abrasive behaviour and actions aren't needed. We guarantee our tech as Nando has said and this shouldn't have come down this road. Rush, We will give you the tech since it is what you are owed. Proof is important too however, and can not be left out. In saying that tlak to me on IRC and we can work something out.

I stand up for FAR nations too but we don't need to take things to a level that is overly aggressive. Our member is sure that he finished the tech deals but he may be mistaken. We can figure this out in a more subtle method without altercation. I hope we can solve this without any further difficulties.

There were two wrongs committed by FAR nations here. The first wrong was Rush being cheated of his tech. The second wrong was Fernando showing such disrespect and open hostility to Rush, to myself, and to Athens. This is what upset us most, not the scammed tech. Do not mistake our restraint for a sign of weakness or indecision. That we choose not to take military action over this slight in no way suggests that we are unable to do so. But so long as Fernando remains adamant in his disrespect, we WILL remember how he as a leader of FAR regards Rush, and me, and our fair city. And such disrespect is as foolish as it is unjustified.

.............

You are missing the point. You have a tech deal. Tech isn't sent when slot expires-bam screen shot it or go to the government right away and show them the screenshot or better yet have them look at the expired aid slot for either the buyer or seller nation and the fact that no tech has been returned. That is solid proof.

Rush should have done this immediately while the supposed tech was not given to him. Not a month later.

Londo, you are supporting your alliance member and I am supporting mine. Rush came over with military action in mind so he didn't get my friendliest tone. Great1 says he paid. You yourself said to ask him, I did. It seems you will never be satisfied with what Great1 says.

I have to question whether FAR would be so aggressively defensive if they didn't have that treaty with NpO to back them up.

It means never having to say you're sorry, apparently....

By the way, generally if you are sending something as part of a deal or agreement, you are the one who makes the proof, not the person receiving it. In other words, if you're the buyer, you copy or screen the 3M (or whatever other proof you have that it is sent), and if you're the seller, you screen your tech payments. This is because the buyer is never going to say "I DIDN'T SEND YOU 3 MILLION OMG SCAMMER" and the seller is never going to say "I DIDN'T SEND YOU ALL THE TECH OMG SCAMMER." You cover your own back, not the other person's.

IMO, Rush has enough proof to convince me, plus the credibility, plus the way things went down (clearing it with FAR Govt previously). Great1 has...well...nothing. If Rush had come to me about a TFD seller doing the same thing, under the exact same circumstances, this matter would have been done with last week.

I have to question whether FAR would be so aggressively defensive if they didn't have that treaty with NpO to back them up.

We're going to act how ever we feel regardless of our treaty partners.

So to answer your question, yes.

I completely sympathize with your position Rush. I've been in similar situations myself.

Londo, you are supporting your alliance member and I am supporting mine. Rush came over with military action in mind so he didn't get my friendliest tone. Great1 says he paid. You yourself said to ask him, I did. It seems you will never be satisfied with what Great1 says.

I believe you missed the meaning behind what I said.

Man, for what I saw and unless I'm highly mistaken you and your gov turned a simple problem who could be fixed in 3 minutes in a mess. I had found myself in the same Rush Sykes position and it would be solved in the first query, after the nation who got scammed informs you about the problem it's your responsibility fix the matter as fast as possible and one of the reasons of the proof doesn't exist anymore is because you failed to do it.

I disagree with the notion that an alliance should by default pay out for any claim made about tech scamming against any member. The alliance with the accused in my opinion holds no responsibility to fix anything unless evidence of a problem actually existing can and is presented. They lay the claim, now prove or provide evidence for the deal going sour.

Thus, you're saying that FAR members can get away with scamming people as long as they delay by enough such that the transactions clear. All that's needed is for them to say that they didn't do it.

Sounds to me he was just saying so long as it can be properly investigated (hence his complaints about the tech being a month old) then he's willing to work with you. If however it's impossible for him to conduct it due to age and deletion then he doesn't see how one could reasonably expect him to make a decision in the accusers favor. The end effect might be that tech may not be sent but that's because he doesn't see anything to support the claim being made. It's a reasonable position to take even if he hasn't been phrasing it in such a manner. The only reason IMO for this particular mess tech should be paid - despite my believing Rush - is because Panda looked into it earlier and came to the conclusion it was owed. Fernando should have confered with Panda before making the decision. Had Panda not looked into it though then Fernando's decision is the proper one.

You could, alternatively, step back and realize how absurd it would be for the MoFA of Athens to randomly pick a nation in FAR and accuse him of being a scammer just for !@#$% and giggles. You also could try to be more polite when you're dealing with a situation like that. Even if you didn't believe Rush, you come off as a jerk.

More absurd things have happened. Additionally the fact it might be absurd doesn't remove the possibility for mistakes to occur or scams to occur by the person making the accusation or for such an open policy of giving tech out to any one who lays unsupported claim could encourage those who might scam in such a manner. I can think of a number of ways in which someone who claims to be a buyer might do so. Frankly, I don't see why one should assume a position of guilt by the seller when it comes to this.

While it appears this situation has not been resolved, it also appears as if this situation has ended. Caveat emptor! There is no way (nor, it seems) concern on the Alliance's part as to how this bitter taste will linger across the planet. So be it. Backing, blindly it would seem, their member is not a fault of any reputable alliance. It is the choice of that alliance's leadership. They have the right to do so in a way that satisfies them.

Notice has been given, received, and catalogued. What obtains from here is anyone's guess--but it's not much of one.

While it appears this situation has not been resolved, it also appears as if this situation has ended. Caveat emptor! There is no way (nor, it seems) concern on the Alliance's part as to how this bitter taste will linger across the planet. So be it. Backing, blindly it would seem, their member is not a fault of any reputable alliance. It is the choice of that alliance's leadership. They have the right to do so in a way that satisfies them.

Notice has been given, received, and catalogued. What obtains from here is anyone's guess--but it's not much of one.

You sure do love to make grandiose and flowery (yet utterly empty) statements. Do you practice in the mirror?

A statement was made by FAR gov when the evidence was available via aid screen. Whether or not it was specifically checked by said gov at the time is not the responsibility of Rush.

We don't need to be accusing anyone of tech scamming; it's just as reasonable to assume that someone with five tech deals cannot remember that they forgot to send off 1/5 of that tech a month ago.

You sure do love to make grandiose and flowery (yet utterly empty) statements. Do you practice in the mirror?

You sure do love to act like you've got a stick up your $@!. Is criticizing others a hobby for you? Do you practice that in the mirror or does being a pissy princess come naturally?