Announcement

**Googlie** · October 14, 2003, 18:20

Originally posted by Drogue
or they've spoken to Chaunk

As he may have broken an (implied?) 'defection rule', Chaunk should tell you what he's told PEACE (I could relay it, but would only do so as a last resort, to clear any further suspicion against me)

G.

**Drogue** · October 14, 2003, 18:32

So Chaunk has defected

That is sad. I can understand him leaving, but that goes to far. Is there a rule against it? I would rather not confront him, since he has chosen, and it would just seem spiteful. However doesn't this spoil the whole point of being in a faction. Not only did he not speak up, he then decides to relay information to PEACE

"If you don't vote, don't complain about who's elected."

If he has told them about the latest deals, I can kind of understand, since he was unhappy with them. However if he has told about the impending war, or anything else that doesn't involve the latest deal, I will not be happy. This is a big part of our game plan - surprise, and for him to do that is awful IMHO. He should have spoken up, but deciding not to, leaving, and then speaking up to them about it is too much IMHO.

**Corellion** · October 14, 2003, 18:42

I thought we did put a no-defection rule into place after the whole Tassadar scandal?

And has Chaunk really relayed information to PEACE? I don't want to think so...

**Corellion** · October 14, 2003, 19:11

Has anybody PMed Chaunk and asked yet?

**Drogue** · October 14, 2003, 19:22

Nope. Not yet. Should I?

And there is a no-defection rule, in the sense that you cannot leave one faction and join another. However you can leave one faction and inform the other, without joining them, going on the letter of the law IIRC.

**Googlie** · October 14, 2003, 19:36

Let me clarify:

Chaunk has not defected to PEACE - he simply passed on information to them while being (resigning from) Cycon.

But no strategic plans were divulged. I wish I could reproduce his message to Flubber (which Flubber posted with Chaunk's permission in the PEACE forum) to allay your fears on that regard.

Suffice it to say that as his reasion for leaving he cited his dissatisfaction with the CyCon tactic of (excerpts taken from his PM to Flubber, and paraphrased)

several deals were made ....... ..... and the discussion reflected the fact that we had no intention of following up on the deal ...... the final straw was the acceptance of Doc:Ini.

But it is from that source that Flubber is posting "BULL" to your D and M's explanations of the situation.

G.

**Corellion** · October 14, 2003, 19:37

I can't believe Chaunk would have done that... but you'd better ask anyway. I hate it when things like this happen.

**Drogue** · October 14, 2003, 19:45

Oh well, it seems legit. It is easily refuted, since how is Chaunk to know the intentions of the other members? When we struck those deals, I did have the intention of repaying them. I just lost that when I realised we had more to be gained by war. Flubber can post Bull he wants, when he brings in Chaunks message, if allowed (which I doubt) we can easily say that wasn't our intention. Chaunk was not the most active member of our forum, nor the DG, and may have missed much. Of course there will be people in our faction screaming for PEACE blood. They will have too. However that does not make it the factions opinion.

**Corellion** · October 14, 2003, 23:32

Aa! I just noticed that Googlie posted before me, confirming.

This is quite saddening, even though it's legitimate. If he doesn't agree, fine, but he should not inform PEACE of our plans in leaving... especially because he never voiced any objection to it (whether because of inactivity or not). At least he didn't reveal our plans... we can recover.

**Impaler[WrG]** · October 15, 2003, 07:46

An interesting development, this is indeed an interesting time to be a Cycon.

So it seems we may be involved in a lbit of Machiavelian sceaming which we discuise with with a claim of ignorance of PBEM's unspoken rules. I my self have never played PBEM so I can easily tow the faction line when it comes to acting inocent.

If you look at it from a roleplaying sense we are emotionless cyborgs so machiavelian sceaming should be a favorite tactic of ours. We will cold and methodicaly turn on our alies when ever we calculate it is whith in our best interest. Trust, Honor and Duty are fical human emotions that we have moved beyond, their is only logic and self advancment.

This defection is unfortunate but in the grander scheem of things it adds to the "META-GAME" whitch is the whole point after all.

**Drogue** · October 15, 2003, 08:15

Exactly Impaler

Anyway, sorry I forgot to do the PM explaining our situation. It will be written and sent tonight (in about 6 hours). Sorry for the delay, was way to much going on yesterday

**Impaler[WrG]** · October 15, 2003, 08:28

Thanks, I have opened up te turn 2141 and referencing it to all your discussions so that I can tell how things have developed over the last few turns. I still need to get a better sense of our relationships with other factions and on our long turm planing (adsactly how long term do you plan?) If its more conveniet you could make a post of the forum as everyone could read this and make coments.

**Phenix** · October 15, 2003, 11:04

Do we really have a long-term plan...cool

**Googlie** · October 15, 2003, 11:19

LOL, Phenix

**DeathByTheSword** · October 15, 2003, 12:15

we want to be absloute rulers of chiron dont we?

Announcement

Chaunk's departure

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment