Home World Forum
Stars! AutoHost web forums

 Jump to Stars! AutoHost

 
 
Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Bar » NAP Violation
Re: NAP Violation Thu, 12 May 2011 19:07 Go to previous message
nmid

 
Commander

Messages: 1608
Registered: January 2011
Location: GMT +5.5
Scorpius wrote on Fri, 13 May 2011 01:14

I feel that I need to defend my honour. I'm not interested in a mud-slinging match so this will be my only post.


Ah.. well, for your free-time reading then..

[quote title=Scorpius wrote on Fri, 13 May 2011 01:14]
The NAP states in clause 1a that "3 years notice must be given before hostilities can begin". Note that there has been no definition of "hostilities". (Although the NAP does then goes on to define "aggressive actions" in clause 2.)
[quote]
It also speaks about not canceling the NAP for 10 years.

Scorpius wrote on Fri, 13 May 2011 01:14


We are interpreting an (admittedly unsuccessful) attack on our ships as "hostilities". As such, we consider Grendal to have breached the terms of the NAP. As LittleEddie points out, fleets will only sweep minefields if they have orders to attack the owners. We had (and still have) no minefields in the region. If we had, we might have reached a different conclusion. Also, if this were the first offence I think we would all agree that it was an accident.


Did your ships arrive at the scene or did his?
Tough to understand how someone can initiate "hostilities" by staying in orbit of a planet.

Scorpius wrote on Fri, 13 May 2011 01:14


Whilst we agree that events previous to the initiation of the NAP should not be taken into account, it is hard not to when Grendal had previously initiated an identical incident (when we had an informal agreement). As Jagophile states, it was Grendal who requested that we set each other to neutral and set battle orders to attack enemies only. We complied and he did not. We assumed that this was an accident.

These are excerpts from the discussions that follow the first incident (and I believe that this is the "offensive" bit):

Jagophile: In future I will pip you to a planet. Then what? Pretend that you didn't see the 50K people on the ground?

Grendal: This statement implies implicitly that you think I am a dishonest player and that I can't be trusted.  


Confused.
What's the point you are tying to make here?

Scorpius wrote on Fri, 13 May 2011 01:14


Anyway, Grendal assured us that his battle orders had been corrected (we believed him) and a couple of years later we entered into the NAP. Two gens after this, a similar incident occurs in which Grendal's ships engage ours and his ship is shot down. I accept that Grendal hadn't submitted a turn, but we are still left to assume that Grendal has altered his battle orders so that his ships attacks us. (Just think, if he had submitted, he may have made a successful attack!)

Just think, if we both play the same game, I'll remember that you think a lot !! Wink
.. and don't believe in NAP exit clauses Razz

Scorpius wrote on Fri, 13 May 2011 01:14


On seeing his turn, Jagophile sent the following message (quoting the above conversation).

Jagophile: It is always the dishonest who protest most strongly their trustworthiness. Unless you have another explanation for your ships engaging mine at <planet name>?

Now, personally, I wouldn't find this offensive but each to their own. The reply we get from Grendal is:

Grendal: You know what?  You have always accused me of being dishonest in every statement you made... There is a very good explanation but you seem to point the finger first and blame then ask questions later... so I am not going to bother... F*CK YOU

To prevent offending people I have removed the U... Anyway, this email was swiftly followed by another email to all members of the NAP:

Grendal: Hi All, Adam is a total pr*ck... but for your benefit here is what happened. <explanation follows>

(*=i, obviously.) It is worth noting that (to Grendal's credit) we later received an apology for the above emails.



So he fired off 2 offensive mails in a duration of 10 mins.
Which he has admitted was "stupid/moronical/etc etc".

What's more is that he sent it only to the NAP members.. not to all the players.

Scorpius wrote
 ...

[ Show the rest of the message ]


I know my minefields.. but I'm a chaff sweeper.
I used to curse when I got stuck in traffic... till I realised I AM traffic.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: lol Mac cheats
Next Topic: Mac cheats
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Jun 19 15:42:40 EDT 2024
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.3.
Copyright ©2001-2011 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software