The Third Court

[Zoot Zoot]

Simple, and no its not a good reason, but its down to my own idiocy.
It didnt dawn on me until tonight, how illegitimate his actions were and how dishonest they were.

It just clicked he would of needed to traverse English and Irish airspace to get to the Islands.

Ontop of that we are having construction work done in the house at the minute, hardline broadband is off and my laptops playing up atm so online time is limited due to patchy internets. RL Stuff such as college/work also in the way. Yes im on IRC most nights but im not AT the lappy unfortunately, its just sort of on lurking like Sumer does.

[Executive Minister]

At the moment I am questioning Ty's actions... while I have made it clear in the past that I prefer IC resolutions over OOC GM actions (less work for me), Ty's movements ARE questionable, regardless of Zoot's motives in approaching the GMs after IC actions is irrelevent at the moment. I will deal with one ass hat at a time, thank you.

EDIT: Appeasing Sargun. Thou art a cruel, and aaaangry god.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Executive Minister

[Sargun II]

So despite you pointing out ICly that you have RADAR stations covering the Irish sea, meaning you [b]knew[/b] you were able to see him coming, you did nothing. Instead of asking Ty to move his actions to the war thread, instead of pointing out these actions, instead you accepted them ICly over a period of several days, despite knowing you were able to do something about it. And the "no time" excuse is !@#$%^&*, because you had time to start handling it ICly but not time to send a note to a GM that there was a problem? It takes less time to copy and paste a link and say "this is bull" than it is to to write up an IC reply. While perhaps your internet was patchy, you were on long enough to make multiple posts.

I also find it odd that you would approach a GM only [b]after[/b] Ty rejected your IC demands.

@EM: You do not speak for me. "We" will not handle one thing at a time, you will.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Sargun

[Executive Minister]

[quote]@EM: You do not speak for me. "We" will not handle one thing at a time, you will.[/quote]

Of course, the 'we' was supposed to be an 'I'.

That being said, I do not want the message that what Ty did was questionable be swallowed up by a witch hunt. Just calling my targets... wouldn't wanna have one GM trying to supercede the other you can of course persue whatever you wish.

EDIT: Wrong quote.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Executive Minister

[Zoot Zoot]

As I said, its patchy, I didnt say it was completly down.
Also, his two posts are 11 hours apart, happen to be my college, and sleeping hours.
I wasnt given a chance to respond to them.
And for reference, I mentioned it to EM just before 4.17am when I made my first response because he brought it to my attention (his second post when he landed troops)

Moreover, ive also stated this is down to my own idiocy and RL timetable.

[Sargun II]

[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1289415192' post='2509500']
That being said, I do not want the message that what Ty did was questionable be swallowed up by a witch hunt. Just calling my targets... wouldn't wanna have one GM trying to supercede the other you can of course persue whatever you wish.
[/quote]
I'm not trying to supercede you in any way, only trying to get what Zoot did straightened out as well.

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1289415934' post='2509511']
As I said, its patchy, I didnt say it was completly down.
Also, his two posts are 11 hours apart, happen to be my college, and sleeping hours.
I wasnt given a chance to respond to them.
And for reference, I mentioned it to EM just before 4.17am when I made my first response because he brought it to my attention (his second post when he landed troops)

Moreover, ive also stated this is down to my own idiocy and RL timetable.
[/quote]

It was patchy enough that you could make IC replies, and multiple posts over several days. Point moot. And regardless of the posts being 11 hours apart, you could have made an OOC objection and said "that's too fast", but instead did nothing and engaged him ICly. Your point there is moot as well, including the next one. And you mentioned it to EM days after the fact.

I cannot read your mind and I cannot simply believe you when you said it is your "idiocy".

[Zoot Zoot]

Well the fact of the matter is, that is exactly what it is.
Sargun, stop being a stubborn barsteward, Patchy doesnt mean its been OFF, it means its been hard to get onto, not impossible, I do have friends with working internet aswell as college computers in my frees when im not busy if I use a proxy to get past the firewall.

And wrong, I mentioned it to EM on the night he did it but I went to bed as far as I remember given the time it was and I had college the next day, it was only today it occured to me I had raised an objection and that Ide continued to ICly engage him. Christ, your berating me for admitting its my fault because of my own idiocy, what the $%&@ more do you want me to say Sargun?
If you dont like my !@#$@#$ explanation then dont !@#$@#$ read it.

[Sargun II]

When a man is suspected of a crime and questioned and his answers make no sense, the police will not just "not !@#$@#$ listen to it", they'll point out the huge flaws (you say your bad internet was an issue [b]despite the evidence proving exactly otherwise,[/b] for example) they see. They'll look at the man with even more suspicion. That you responded IC at first and then OOC is, at least to me, entirely unacceptable as there was nothing in between your IC response and your OOC crying that would justify it other than "my idiocy" which means absolutely nothing.

By the way, EM may have been the one you went to but any GM can respond and the GMs are free to make group decisions. That you think I'm biased against you is hilarious, because I'm biased against [b]everyone[/b] and that you think only EM can respond to something because you only went to him is lulz, because as Ty explained it's not true.

[Zoot Zoot]

When did I say I thought you were biased against me?
Youve ruled in my favour more times than against it so that makes no sense.

I went to EM because he raised the issue to my attention to start with.
Regardless, ide like a wipe or a retcon for Tys actions.

as per these two threads, GM's have wiped actions before, even after a response has been given.

[b]Complaint[/b]
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=62869&view=findpost&p=2343349
[b]Ruling[/b]
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=62869&view=findpost&p=2343588

Tys actions were military actions as they involved military personal and aircraft.
His flights take him through English/Irish airspace or both.
He goes through an active warzone.
He flies over a naval battlefield with combat aircraft operating in the area.
Hes using 84 transports and 14 fighters
He has a carrier within range of the Isle of Man, which implies he is within range of all combatants naval and air forces.

He did not make any of us aware of his actions, nor did he post in a location we would see it and be able to give a response right off the bat. He left little to no time to respond given the timezones the combatants operate in. It was a dishonest way to gain land and if you take into account the above shens, I believe it warrents a wipe or a retcon back to a different point in time.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Zoot Zoot

[Sargun II]

Never did anyone say that it would not be wiped or retconned, I only said that I find it suspicious of your time and way of reporting. Two wrongs don't make a right, man.

[Zoot Zoot]

You know what im like, reliability, tact and sense of realisation isnt as sharp as most people... im like the white crayon

[Sargun II]

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1289426118' post='2509658']
You know what im like, reliability, tact and sense of realisation isnt as sharp as most people... im like the white crayon
[/quote]

At least the white crayon is of pure race. Something we can't say about you

[Zoot Zoot]

OHNSNAP!

Anyhow, back on topic, may the GM's come to a decision over the matter at hand?
Matters of my race can wait until the Klan meet... oh sorry, thats tomorrow in the swamps.

[Franz Ferdinand]

[img]http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/2649/gpscrack.png[/img]

I require 4 rolls for my [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=94457&view=findpost&p=2509730"]RP spy attempt[/url].

[King Timmy]

[quote name='Franz Ferdinand' timestamp='1289431390' post='2509732']
[img]http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/2649/gpscrack.png[/img]

I require 4 rolls for my [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=94457&view=findpost&p=2509730"]RP spy attempt[/url].
[/quote]

I was requesting a wipe of said RP changed my mind though. I won't be accepting it unless it has significant RP behind it. I would also like to know what ship he's trying to steal.

Edited November 11, 2010 by King Timmy

[Sargun II]

Franz must fulfill the RP requirements for the roll, mainly a plausible explanation for his his spy got onboard.

[Californian]

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1289427112' post='2509668']
Anyhow, back on topic, may the GM's come to a decision over the matter at hand?
[/quote]

Yes, let's have the GMs quickly come to a decision before the other side notices. I'm glad to know you're a fan of allowing things to happen even when others don't have the time to respond

I think this disagreement boils down to two factors: 1) the RP was never contested and 2) Zoot RPed accepting what had happened.

There was an 18 hour gap between both my posts. I received no objection from any participant during that period nor afterwords. I posted in my news thread (which seems like a rather logical place to me) as well as the more prominent Map Thread. Whether people accepted what had happened or didn't care enough to look, I think it's obvious I wasn't trying to ninja-steal land without informing others. Contrary to what Zoot believes, I was under no requirement to post in the war thread. I have maintained a neutral stance in the war and am not involved in any way, hence I did not feel it was necessary to post in that particular thread.

Perhaps most importantly, the person arguing for the wipe was the one combatant that actually accepted what I had done. He RPed the acceptance that I possessed the land in question, he was the once to discuss with me on IRC about how England would deal with it. Yes, Zoot was actually the one to propose an RP solution about it, not the other way around.

It seems the feasibility of my actions is also in question. For starters, the numbers that Zoot provides are actually completely false, perhaps in an attempt to bolster his chances of taking the land for himself. Contrary to his statement that I had 84 transports and 14 fighters, my post actually says several squadrons of transports as well as a dozen fighters. With a fair assumption that several means 2-4, its easy to see the amount of planes is far less than he stated. As for my navy being in a war zone, I would have to disagree. Nowhere in my post does it imply I anchored my aircraft carrier off the shore of Ireland, rather they were at a distance where planes could fly to the Isle of Man. The fleet was easily hundreds of miles from the fighting. It should be noted that Zoot's fleet was being resupplied and wouldn't have engaged my fleet regardless.

As for flying the planes through to the Isle of Man, I think everyone will have a different opinion on the matter. The sky is a rather large place and my pilots weren't aiming to go into the middle of all the action. It's fair to say they would have stayed as far away as possible from the fighting and they simply replied to every hail that they were delivering humanitarian aid. It should be reiterated once again, that no one objected to this at all.

In conclusion, I can admit I should have made the knowledge of my action more known. However in my defense, I didn't expect it to be such a big deal considering the claiming of white space is a fairly commonplace and mundane action in CNRP. I believe I RPed appropriately and in good faith and as such the RP should not be retconned or wiped. I do not wish to ad hominem attack Zoot however I think it's clear to all parties involved that Zoot simply wants the land for himself and is attempting to do everything in his power to reverse something he has ALREADY accepted ICly.

Thank you, and God Bless America.

[maicke]

[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1289413941' post='2509483']
EDIT: Appeasing Sargun. Thou art a cruel, and aaaangry god.
[/quote]
You just referenced my avatar

[Zoot Zoot]

[quote name='Californian' timestamp='1289442160' post='2509909']
Yes, let's have the GMs quickly come to a decision before the other side notices. I'm glad to know you're a fan of allowing things to happen even when others don't have the time to respond

I think this disagreement boils down to two factors: 1) the RP was never contested and 2) Zoot RPed accepting what had happened.

There was an 18 hour gap between both my posts. I received no objection from any participant during that period nor afterwords. I posted in my news thread (which seems like a rather logical place to me) as well as the more prominent Map Thread. Whether people accepted what had happened or didn't care enough to look, I think it's obvious I wasn't trying to ninja-steal land without informing others. Contrary to what Zoot believes, I was under no requirement to post in the war thread. I have maintained a neutral stance in the war and am not involved in any way, hence I did not feel it was necessary to post in that particular thread.

Perhaps most importantly, the person arguing for the wipe was the one combatant that actually accepted what I had done. He RPed the acceptance that I possessed the land in question, he was the once to discuss with me on IRC about how England would deal with it. Yes, Zoot was actually the one to propose an RP solution about it, not the other way around.

It seems the feasibility of my actions is also in question. For starters, the numbers that Zoot provides are actually completely false, perhaps in an attempt to bolster his chances of taking the land for himself. Contrary to his statement that I had 84 transports and 14 fighters, my post actually says several squadrons of transports as well as a dozen fighters. With a fair assumption that several means 2-4, its easy to see the amount of planes is far less than he stated. As for my navy being in a war zone, I would have to disagree. Nowhere in my post does it imply I anchored my aircraft carrier off the shore of Ireland, rather they were at a distance where planes could fly to the Isle of Man. The fleet was easily hundreds of miles from the fighting. It should be noted that Zoot's fleet was being resupplied and wouldn't have engaged my fleet regardless.

As for flying the planes through to the Isle of Man, I think everyone will have a different opinion on the matter. The sky is a rather large place and my pilots weren't aiming to go into the middle of all the action. It's fair to say they would have stayed as far away as possible from the fighting and they simply replied to every hail that they were delivering humanitarian aid. It should be reiterated once again, that no one objected to this at all.

In conclusion, I can admit I should have made the knowledge of my action more known. However in my defense, I didn't expect it to be such a big deal considering the claiming of white space is a fairly commonplace and mundane action in CNRP. I believe I RPed appropriately and in good faith and as such the RP should not be retconned or wiped. I do not wish to ad hominem attack Zoot however I think it's clear to all parties involved that Zoot simply wants the land for himself and is attempting to do everything in his power to reverse something he has ALREADY accepted ICly.

Thank you, and God Bless America.
[/quote]


Well as you can see, its not nice when people do that is it? no?.
Back on topic, as ive already prooven, actions accepted and repsonded to ICly have been retconned/wiped by the GM's afterwards so your main two boiled down points, are moot.

Several may mean 2-4 for you, but its anywhere between 5 and 7 for me. Even at two, its still 24 transport aircraft and 12 fighter jets seeing as a dozen means 12, see [url="http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&source=hp&biw=1308&bih=571&q=dozen&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=fa01854bd49f75e6"]here[/url]

Regards to the questionable posting location, yes, your news thread would have sufficed when the region in question was not involved in a, by that point, nuclear war. However, it was in war, and the area would have been going to hell.
Yes I did propose an RP solution, however, as ive said more than several times now, this is my own fault for not realising just how illegal your moves are.

If your figter jets are in range of the Isle of Man, then they are in range of all combatants navies, and your wrong, Ive got three fleets, only one of which was being resupplied, the other two where on station near lands end in the English Channel as specified in several posts and two threads.

Nobody retaliated to your move because nobody was aware of it taking place Californian, the very fact, military aircraft are escorting you, and a marine detachment is onboard the aircraft, makes it a military matter. Which falls under the war option when you transgress airspace,which is what you did, so you HAVE to give us times to respond. If you wanna push the boat out, what you did was equal to an autoadvance.

I'll admit, I want the Island, and the RP was accepted as I did not realise my own mistake in a failing of reading comprehension. Now ive noticed the godmod which you undertook, It gives me a solid case in getting it either retconned back, or wiped all together.

Thankyou and God Save the Queen

[Sargun II]

Unfortunately, zoot, your precedent involved an OOC impossibility, whereas this current case involves an IC lapse. Your example was a case of somebody trying to do the impossible whereas this is a case of someone trying to do something brazen and foolish and getting away with it. As it is, this is not an OOC issue in any way other than questionable posting location - so your point about his points being moot are moot. He has clarified what his squadrons meant, so that argument is over with as well.

As for the "nobody retaliated because nobody was aware of it", that is patently false. [b]You[/b] were well aware of what he did, seeing as you [i]posted in his thread[/i], and you know just as well as anyone that if you feel someone is moving too fast you can voice your opinion on it. Ty did not commit a Godmod, he simply went from point A for point B. This is not something a GM can retcon or wipe without good reason, and "I was an idiot" is not a good reason.

Executiveminister was set on handling this but he left last night before I could get to him so I'll say this now: I am in extreme favor of saying no to your request for a retcon but establishing a rule saying that claiming land in the middle of a war zone, even if done in an area unaffeted by the fighting, must be posted in the responsible threads. While I won't do this and thus supercede him, I'm putting it out here for him, and Subtle, to look at.

[Sargun II]

Well, since EM doesn't seem to want to finish this:

[b]GM DECISION[/b]
Zoot's request is rejected.

[Subtleknifewielder]

Can't say I like doing it, but I agree with this decision. The only case where a retcon was approved was where players tried doing something blatantly impossible, blatant godmodding, or all the players affected mutually agreed to one.

Edited November 13, 2010 by Subtleknifewielder

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Sargun' timestamp='1289680467' post='2512053']
Well, since EM doesn't seem to want to finish this:

[b]GM DECISION[/b]
Zoot's request is rejected.
[/quote]

Sorry, was a bit busy.

I'll endorse Sargun's decision, however, and for one reason only.

Previously, there was no official rule against claiming inactive land so close to a warzone being subject to any extra terms or conditions due to the war. Such cases fell under a common-sensical understanding. While it is clear that the saying 'common sense is not common' has been proven true yet again, Ty is technically in the right. Even if he was wrong, we cannot enforce a newly created rule unto him, only to other proceeding cases. Furthermore, there is no official rule stating that such important IC moves like land claiming should be placed in threads or otherwise made known to CNRP at large. While we would prefer that people do not squirrel away troop movements at the bottom of posts in obscure nations' news threads, it is not illegal. Ty is in the right, and we cannot enforce a new rule unto him.

I would recommend Zoot continue on with the IC resolutions he was persuing in the first place, prior to getting Ty's RP wiped. Its not as if it would be a shock to the rest of CNRP if his coalition made some stupid CB and declared Monacco to be simply opportunist and claiming the land while other, more worthy owners were preoccupied. As i've stated many times before

IC>>>>>>> OOC GM actions

[Zoot Zoot]

The speedy decision making it seems was not worth the wait.
Thanks Gents for taking the time to consider it anyway.

[Sargun II]

[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1289707385' post='2512500']
Sorry, was a bit busy.
[/quote]
I didn't know how long you'd be, apologies. You summed up my feelings for the most part in your ruling anyway.