Beyond the Pit [Pitboss Diplomacy Game] [Organization Thread V]

[Pitboss Khmer]

Capo, like I said it bothers me that you are not in the game anymore - a compliment. How can that be misunderstood.

Post away I say.

[Pitboss Maya]

I really don't care about this vote. It is the status quo... keep the game going at all costs regardless of what is right or wrong.

An independent vote from a panel of judges would have held alot more weight in my eyes. Guess some people didn't like what they had to say last time.

This is my take on it...

Greece, Rome, and Maya all broke the rule as it was written during the time in which it would have applied. The only correct option would be to reload to the turn in which Greece attacked Maya (the first instance of the rule being broken), and apply the rule as it was written at the time.

Anything less than this and you can count me out of this game. I'm DONE with these constant manipulations of the rules. It is really getting ridiculous and I have better things to do then spend hours arguing a point which should be obvious.

[Robert]

The game has been loaded and continued

[mzprox]

These disputes really getting ridiculous.. the rules are not here because they ad a nice strategic element to the game how to circumvent them, but to give guidance to what should be common sense: for example no double move during wartime.
Ozzy made two mistakes: 1, we were not told about the rule change (not to talk about voting...)
2, it was not clarified enough. When and how to make that agreement about the turn order.
The rule itself is good and i think most of us play in that way anyway. The only exception that the "agreement on turn order" is actually not requiring any talk. it's set by the first round of war.
Btw I don't know what Ozzy meant with it: surely not that we should tell our future victim that we want to declare war on him and ask him wether he wants to move first..

Lets see this current situation:

Rome and Sparta declared war and moved first in the round
Then came Maya and in the next turn again Maya..

Maya doesn't explain why this double move would be justified, instead He says that the rule has been broken:

The rules state:

"Civilizations that are at war must agree to a set turn order that is enforced from the moment war is declared in-game until the war ends in-game "

I demand the game be reloaded to the beginning of the turn in which Greece declared war on me so that (according to the rules) we can "agree to a set turn order".

Lets see if Cyber can follow his own rules this time around...

I don't see why this would change anything., for the sake of the game i don't mind reloading to this point, but it is common sense to let the turn order happen as it did.
As i said above: It is not logical to make the agreement before the declaration of the war and it is not even what the rule said. ( actually it says that from the moment-which is truly only a moment btw..)
So i say: I can acccept to reload till that point you wanted- but can you accept that the only fair way to handle the situation if we keep the turn order as it was? if yes then what is the point of realoading that turn? It would go the same except you shouldnt start the next turn.

[Pitboss Maya]

Mzprox, read up on the infamous "Korea/Greece" double move fiasco then get back to me. Your professional opinion is welcome, but you are missing the same point that Cyber and some others continue to miss.

There is no "spirit of the rule" because your "spirit" may differ from someone elses.

There is no "common sense" because your version of what is common sense may differ from someone elses.

There is no "interpretation" because your interpretation may differ from someone elses.

There is only the rule. It should be followed. If it is not an adequate rule, then it should be rewritten (preferably by someone skilled). It should be clear, concise, little to no room for interpretation, and applied consistently.

THIS is common sense. THIS was the same mindset our panel of independent judges voiced last time this became a problem. THIS is what is STILL being ignored here.

This is why my interest in this rigged sham of a game has dropped to nill. I'm still playing btw, so don't start making plans to divide up Maya or make it AI.

[Pitboss Rome]

I am glad to see that there has been a unanimous vote in favour of continuing from the reloaded position - we all seem to be in agreement that double moves in war are not permitted. I think we all realise the precise wording to cover this in every situation is difficult to arrive at, but that this case was straight-forward.

Otherwise as the one who made the original call for the reload, as the one damaged by the double-move, I would just want to quote my original post:

Lets avoid argument and reciminations. I can understand why Maya is annoyed IG, but that doesn't mean we can abandon our rules.

Lets just reload the beginning of 1758. Maya moved after Rome (and Greece) in 1756 so Rome (and Greece) have their oportunity to mvoe first in 1958.

I know well the sense of outrage when attacked out of the blue, and how that spills over. I hold no ill-feelings towards Maya nor of all people Ozzy. The reload has sorted the issue out of game. Who knows what the in game ramifications will be? Lets play and see ...

[Pitboss Greece]

@Maya: I agree with you that we should get rid of the 'spirit of the rule'.
THis has already been debated but nobody commented when Ozzy and me debated an improved rule set.

BTW, if I do disagree with you that 'spirit of the rule' can't work, it can, but unfortunately not in our game apparently.
The alternative is that we now write lengthy rules that cover everything. In the end that's even worse because there's always maze in every law. (criminals are always looking for mazes and politicians are always trying to remove the mazes).
But it failed in our game, unfortunately.

[Pitboss Rome]

I've no idea from civstats whether I have moved this turn or not - I presume so since I moved after the reload before the pause, but to check I am going to log on and see. Mentioning it here in case some other interpretation can be put on my logging in.

[Pitboss Greece]

A new turn just started, Rome.

@All: Menelaus II can announce that he just (finally) passed his Greek exam!! Now I'm finally able to communicate with my people!

....it's quite embarrishing, they apparently don't like fish at all

[St Jon]

@All: Menelaus II can announce that he just (finally) passed his Greek exam!! Now I'm finally able to communicate with my people!

....it's quite embarrishing, they apparently don't like fish at all

But they are still over fond of goat and sheep!

.....and they still have to supply their women folk with horse and ass to make up for their deficiencies in the bedchamber!

[Pitboss Maya]

I know well the sense of outrage when attacked out of the blue, and how that spills over.

Don't try to minimize my argument by suggesting that I was sore over IG events. That is not the case.

A rule was in place. When I realized Greece had broken the rule, and then Rome, I assumed we were operating with no rules. My double move was on purpose (i think that is fairly obvious) to either; 1. Take advantage of the apparent absence of a enforced rule to try and save my ass (legally mind you), or 2. bring the fact that the rule was ignored to light.

This is still bullchit. The only reason I even continue is to not to leave a power vacuum, which wouldn't be fair to other players. Don't expect to see any story posts from me or vote submissions.

Oh, that and I plan on keeping Greece and Rome in perpetual war till the end of the game. Better start trading for happy resources guys.

[Pitboss Maya]

The alternative is that we now write lengthy rules that cover everything.

Not really necessary. You just need a well thought out simple rule.

[The Capo]

I am completely in awe of how this debate continues despite what should be entirely clear and apparent to everybody. I can not fathom how certain people continue to push for the stupid concept of a "spirit" of the rule, or some ridiculous idea that we need some type of litany of potential ways to break the rule. Its a damn straight-forward rule. Don't double-move during war. I don't know how you can possibly screw this up. I don't know how there could be some "spirit" behind the rule that can result in different interpretations of a double-move, which is evidenced by the different ways a double-move has been handled. To me its extremely apparent that one of two things are happening, and potentially both; (1) there is some sort of double-standard I am not seeing or (2) this game is being intentionally manipulated.

The very fact that Cyber implied that the Maya are reacting based on IG events is hilarious considering that the entire aforementioned Greece/Korea fiasco was, in my mind, based ENTIRELY on Cyber's in-game considerations (the GE, his constant bellowing that he would be disadvantaged by FOLLOWING THE RULE)! I am astounded this is happening, I can not believe any of these comments are being taken seriously by anybody. Its ludicrous that the exact same thing continues to occur when we all should have learned from the numerous examples of how flawed the system has proven to be. I tried my best to deal with this situation as fairly and calmly as possible to Cyber's position on the matter, but the longer this goes on the more ridiculous it truly looks.

The worst part about this entire thing is that way before any of this occured, and on two different occasions Ras and I insisted that the rule be made concise and solid. Both of those times Cyber was the one who said we were wasting time, he deleted posts and even attempted to create a new thread to keep the discussion out of the organization thread. Due to these actions the VERY SAME ISSUE is being discussed months later with the very future of the game in the balance. To me it is quite sad, but honestly deserved.

[Robert]

Seriously, Capo, what are you talking about?

[Pinchak]

Seriously, Capo, what are you talking about?

Makes good sense to me.

Write a rule, follow the rule!

Or...

Don't write a rule, but don't expect people to adhere to some mysterious unspoken rule/law.