 |
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
I would just like to give you guys a headsup: I have PMed DanQ to give me moderator powers in this demogame. Following Googlies resignation, and as I am his assistant, the position does fall to me.
This will be contested by PUT and PEACE. I ask for your solid support on this matter.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Drogue
|
 |
Omnipresent conscience
Oct 2002
time: 05:31
|
|
I have sent this PM to buster:
quote:
Thank you for that. The intention was not actually to backstab, because we did not have an agreement to trade for it. We actually believed it was a gift at first  Indeed, we offered them a tech to make up for the one they had given us.
We cannot reply to PEACEs thread on the main forum, since we do not have all the commlinks. As Tassadar said, that does give just one side of the argument. In order to be able to defend ourselves, we must do it by PM. Therefore, I have prepared a statement in our defense. I would be very much obliged if you could forward it to the Hive and PUT (if you have met them), and make it public on your forum. I have sent it to your CGN email address as I did not want to use two PMs again
Thank you very much for your understanding.
Yours
Drogue |
And here is the email I mentioned to be published:
quote:
Seeing as I cannot reply on the forum page, I am trying to get this PM passed around all the factions, since we do not have the commlinks for all factions. This is in answer to what Flubber posted on the main forum.
quote:
A recent ruling by googlie suprised me. We had pre-accepted a tech to the cycon with a note in the commlinks to look for a message from me. I sent a PM to the person the cycon had listed as their ambassador, 2 to 3 days before the cycon got the turn setting out turns and stating explicitly that the tech should not be accepted unless a deal was reached. |
I did not see this until after I had played the turn. We had mentioned in an earlier PM that DBTS, our External Affairs Function, was not the most active member of our faction, and to please send all communiqués to both him and myself, so that I got them before I played the turn. We were surprised when we got the turn to see it offered, so Maniac, our Second Function, acting as EAF while DBTS was not online, sent a PM to Flubber asking why they had offered it. During relations with PEACE, which have been rocky since the start, we have had to delay our turn on 3 occasions, and our research for a few turns, so that we could iron out a deal, with them usually waiting until just before our time limit to ask for some extra ec as a sweetener, or the deal wouldn’t go through. I will elaborate later on. Knowing that if I didn’t play then, due to RL commitments, I would not be able to play within the 48 hours, I decided that I was not going to wait for another round of extremely stressful diplomacy, and played the turn, accepting the tech.
quote:
( and break pact with us on the same turn but thats another story and pretty much irrelevant except for some roleplaying to come). |
This had been polled days earlier, and was already decided, before we knew anything about them offering a tech.
quote:
They checked with googlie beforehand and googlie ruled that it violated no rule to accept a tech in the diplobox regardless of any conditions attached. He considered it unsavory and backstabbing behavior but not a cheat. |
We did not know of any conditions, nor did Googlie say to us it was "unsavoury and backstabbing". Firstly, since we owed them a tech from an earlier deal, and our next research was the tech that they asked for in return, we thought it was a gift to get the tech they wanted earlier. We had a few doubts, given their previous conduct, but we believed it was a strong possibility. Secondly, since non of the CyCon are regular PBEM players, we did not know of any unwritten rule regarding pre-accepting techs. I believed that accepting anything in the diplo box is accepting what is on the table, as the game mechanics is set up. Therefore I thought both parties accepted what was on the table. If we had a deal before send it pre-accepted, as our first deal with PEACE went, then we would have happily held to that deal. There was no deal, nor any communication as far as the CyCon turn players were concerned.
quote:
I have played a lot of PBEMS and never ever thought it would be acceptable to take a tech from the commlinks and ignore any conditions contained in the offer. Perhaps I was naive. |
While I would consider this a backstab, and not a cheating, I would not intend to do that anyway. If we had known of the conditions attached, we would have thought twice about accepting the tech.
While I admit we were probably too hasty in accepting it without getting confirmation, but you have to look at our past diplomacy with PEACE:
The relationship was already extremely rocky from the start, as mentioned above. We know they are out to win, and accepted that, but still we felt how they acted earlier was no way to treat a pact mate. However we still saw them as allies and did not intend any harm or any backstabbing whatsoever. Then later, in negotiations, one of their members accused me of planting viruses on their computers, and started a personal attack against me. As Maniac said in that thread, this stressed me enough to seriously consider leaving the DG, and soured relations greatly. We tried to work through this, but found both sides had lost trust too much, and decided to reduce relations to a treaty. Then this came up. To try to sort it out, we offered a tech, to make up for the one we accepted. However they were obviously still angry at us, so did not mention it in their reply.
- To be fair, it is not like we were model pact mates either. Due to an error, when DBTS, who is not particularly active, played the turn while I was away, and choose the wrong tech to research, meaning we could not pay PEACE back the tech we intended to. And I will admit, after the incident mentioned, we were less friendly, and did end up trading with another faction once instead of PEACE, because they asked for more ec. We are far from blameless ourselves.
I do not wish to mudsling. I admit we have done wrong, mostly without knowing it, but I have tried to explain some of the reasoning behind our actions. Accepting that tech could easily be considered relatively unsportsmanlike behaviour, and it would be a commonly held belief that we should have waited for a reply, but to be honest, with the way we feel we have been treated by PEACE, we did not feel like being particularly sportsmanlike.
Sorry for the long PM, but I though I needed to explain why we did what we did.
Prime Function Drogue Beta-8 |
Sorry I didn't post here first, I thought it was pretty much the same as the one I sent to buster earlier.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drogue
|
|
Omnipresent conscience
Oct 2002
time: 05:31
|
|
I have used a few tacts here.
Firstly, I wanted to push that not only is what we did not against the rules, but that we did not know of any unwritten rules which it is also against. I want us to seem like less knowledgable PBEMers who may have mistakenly done something wrong. However busters reply to my earlier PM states that we did nothing against the commonly held rules.
Secondly, I wanted to say that we didn't intend to backstab them, but that we genuinely did not know what the tech was there for. I also wanted to explain why, though we could have done more to accertain why it was there, we accepted it quickly. If I could do that while making us seem like an aggreived party too, then all the better. The bit about us not being perfect is supposed to make it seem less biased than PEACEs, admitting we have some faults. Basically, it is all plausable, but is looking at it in the best light for us.
I hope it works. Has anyone but PEACE met the PUT? Does it say in the old saves, being that we can get the Hive information too?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drogue
|
|
Omnipresent conscience
Oct 2002
time: 05:31
|
|
And can we please stop responding to Flubber's thread. Not only does it keep it near the top and skirts the edge of the rules, you are agreeing with Archaic, who's post states quote:
You are certainly a very poor loser if you can't take a little backstabbing |
which implies we were backstabbing and they can't take it, whereas I'm trying to make it seem like we didn't backstab, or at least that we are justified in doing it.
We've made the point that they are writing in a place where we cannot reply to explain ourselves. PMs have been sent. Hopefully it will get round the factions.
PEACE have lost a lot with Googlie's (hopefully almost) resignation. I think we can capitalize, but let us let sleeping threads lie.
Last edited by Drogue on 15-10-2003 at 03:51
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
15-10-2003 00:48
DanQ will probably ask for confirmation by GeneralTacticus though. But since GT told before he has internet problems, he may agree. 
|