 |
|  |
 |
|
Drogue
|
 |
Omnipresent conscience
Oct 2002 time: 05:31
|
|
Googlie ruled that since PEACE have all the commlinks, they are allowed to post this. However the CyCon do not, and therefore are unable to reply, as would all other factions who do not have all the commlinks be. Therefore as Prime Function of the CyCon, I will PM all the heads of factions that we have the commlink for to offer our side of the story.
Last edited by Drogue on 15-10-2003 at 01:23
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
I believe the second half of your post does go past this rule.
And I will review the Pirate save file to ensure their compliance with the rules.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
I have reviewed the save file, and PEACE is in compliance with the commlinks rule.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
I thank you for your concern Honghu.
The second half does allude to an in-game action which, although it was mentioned by PEACE, I believe should not have been said.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
Honghu, I would need PEACE cooperation on this matter to investigate it.
Meaning, I would need to be authorized into their forums.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
CyCon may give info only to factions it has commlinks with. These factions can then, of course, give the info to other factions they have commlinks with.
However, no contact shall be made between two factions unless they have a commlink.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:31
|
|
Googlie
To answer your question
I agree that whenever you bargain for future consideration there is the chance of a backstab and this is NOT a cheat.
It may seem a marginal distinction but in my PBEMs there is often the practice of offering a tech preaccepted ( particularly if the opponent is about to complete researching it) so that a tech trade can be complete that other wise could not be ( since they would discover the tech if it were not preaccepted to them)-- I have NEVER before had a problem with this issue in about a hundred PBEMs. Everyone I played with seemed to consider it normal practice.
I consider that your ruling makes it impossible for people to avail of the preaccepted trade tactic without throwing themselves open to a possible backstab. Thats why I think its a bad ruling . . . it prevents a method of trading to be securely completed. The trading mechanism is clunky in this game so IMHO anything that inhibits it is wrong
Note if a party accepts a deal and goes back on it later thats duplicitous only. For a party to accept a tech in the inbox when preaccepting is the only means to complete a deal should be a cheat IMHO
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:31
|
|
Also googlie
last I checked you had erased all of your posts in our private forum so I can't pull out the bits where it clearly seemed you did not deny foreknowledge of cycon plans. personally I think that is a minor matter anyway as we would likely come up with the trade idea ourselves.
The date of the actual offer was not relevant since I had mentioned days earlier the possibility of trading the tech so plans could have been made in the event it was offered. .. .
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Snowflake
|
 |
falling, once again
Apr 2003 time: 23:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Honghu, I would need PEACE cooperation on this matter to investigate it.
Meaning, I would need to be authorized into their forums. |
The two points that Flubber offered are:
1. quote: Personally I don't agree with the ruling and think it is the wrong way to run a PBEM. |
2. quote: I also think that Googlie made an error in mentioning a trade when he knew the other side had plans to renege. |
For the first point, I believe we need a poll to see if the rules need to be amended.
For the second point, I think perhaps Comrade Tass could determine by reading CC's forum when GooglieGod is made aware of CC's plan.
I would also like to comment on Captain Flubbers wording of his second point. He did not make accusations that GooglieGod intentionally aided any cheating, and he also stated that Googlie had not encouraged the tech trade. I think we should all adopt such neutral tone in discussing the issue and try to avoid any overemotional accusations.
Last edited by Snowflake on 15-10-2003 at 01:37
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by HongHu
My opinion on this issue is as follows:
1. We should pursuade GooglieGod to continue serve as our CMN. |
I agree wholeheartedly
quote: Originally posted by HongHu
2. GooglieGod's judgement call should be accepted by the involving parties. |
I also agree. I don't think it is the right call but I intend to abide by it. I just don't know how you do a tech leapfrog but perhaps someone else can work out a way
quote: Originally posted by HongHu
3. A poll could be started aiming to decide whether we should amend our rules regarding backstabbing in tech exchanges. |
Not a bad idea but rulechanges mid stream seem somehow odd to me
quote: Originally posted by HongHu
4. Comrade Tass should investigate whether GooglieGod has any prior knowledge of the possible backstabbing and report to the public. I'm with hope that Tass would find evidence that would clear Googlie and alleviate PEACE's concerns. |
I only speak personally on this but I don't see the need. Just like any judge, I may not always agree with all the decisions but I can respect the institution. I find this point to be minor . . . I don't doubt googlie's impartiality but do think that googlie would have been better advised not to make the comment . . . I , again personally, don't think it made one whit of difference in how we played our turn and would have offered the tech trade in any event
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
I'd also like to remind everyone that the ruling made by the CMN is final, as he is/was the CMN of our game. Respectful complaints should be addressed to him in private, not publickly as has now been decided.
|
a complaint was made privately since I was genuine in my belief that the cyborg action was a cheat. Howver I wanted to publicize this:
1. so other factions aren't caught out by not understanding how the rules work here-- I didn't know this rule nor did any of our other players AFAIK
2. since something had to be said to explain what is happening with this googlie resignation thing
3. as part of the roleplay ( although that will come mainly later )
--------------------------
Edit changed the fifth word to privately
Last edited by Flubber on 15-10-2003 at 02:06
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by HongHu
It is not realistic if as long as two factions are doing tech leapfroging the pact will never be allowed to expire. |
All I am saying is that it would make for freer flowing diplomacy if the diplmacy box was used as I suggest. Game mechanics do not permit an accepted deal on each side in a tech leapfrog situation . . . Someone has to proffer the tech pre-accepted . . . Under these rules there is NO secure way to do the trade.
I have seen that buster has weighed in . . . given his opinion on this I can see that there are VERY experiennced players that see nothing wrong with googlies ruling
To be clear . . . I don't like the ruling and I think it has the effect of making the game more difficult to play-- The opposite ruling would
1. allow secure tech leapfrogs
2. allow preaccepted deals to avoid missed trade opportunities and speed diplomatic interchange
3. Still permit backstabs and failure to pay later
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Maniac
Personally I don't see the need to change the rules of this game. This situation could have been avoided by a simple precaution of PEACE: contacting the faction you want to give a tech to well in time instead of on the last minute and while you still have the turn, and not a day after you sent the turn. That way all miscommunications and stress could be easily avoided, and deals wouldn't have to be rushed, with all the resulting mess and inclarity afterwards. Besides, I'm sure Googlie would have allowed to keep the turn longer a bit longer than 48 hours if very crucial negotiations were going on. |
BULL
I personally PM ed the guy you told me was your ambassador a full two days before you guys got the turn.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31. Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|