The Court: Who should control North/South Sheepsta

[Drogue]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
It was claimed that they weren't fair becuase they were too fast. Go back and read some of the early comments in the thread.

If it wasn't brought up in court, I cannot use it when ruling. I read all the court posts very carefully, and the main impression I got from Jack_www was that because it was just an RP election, Archaic could post any result he wanted. I recall nothing about them being too hasty. If it came up on Archaic's RP thread, then no, I haven't read all of it (most) and cannot take that into account when ruling anyway.

[Archaic]

Originally posted by Drogue
Since they can poll in their own locality (many pollingn stations) they should not have to go through New Sheepsta to reach a station. Indeed, they can vote via Apolytonet, or even post if need be.

As I stated, these were South Sheepstans who were living in the part of South Sheepsta that is under control of the New Sheepstan regime.

Originally posted by Drogue
New Sheepsta is already under Sheep's control, and that will not change, unless he decides to hold an election. This case is purely about North and South Sheepsta.

Then I believe the scope of the trial was flawed, and that the matter should be looked into further. Otherwise, you're basically stating that anyone could, for example, start a "New Centralis" nation, plank it in the middle of Centralis, and claim everything within it as theirs, just as Sheep did here with planking down his New Sheepsta right in the middle of South Sheepsta, which, regardless of the legality of the situation, was certainly not under his ownership at the time.

[Giovanni Wine]

Sorry if I intervene but:

The court was called on deciding if Alecrast and Bulbagarden taking over of Sheepsta island was legal, not if New Sheepsta proclaiming itself independent was legal.

Those are two very different things, both related to Sheepsta, but with many differences.

If Alecrast feels the need of a new court ruling over the legality of the existance of New Sheepsta, than it should ask for a new trial.

Saluti

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by Archaic

Then I believe the scope of the trial was flawed, and that the matter should be looked into further. Otherwise, you're basically stating that anyone could, for example, start a "New Centralis" nation, plank it in the middle of Centralis, and claim everything within it as theirs, just as Sheep did here with planking down his New Sheepsta right in the middle of South Sheepsta, which, regardless of the legality of the situation, was certainly not under his ownership at the time.

It was your own failer to bring this up during the trail, now you cant do anything about it. New Sheepsta has ever legal right to be a sovern nation as any other nation in Apolyton.

[Archaic]

This trial was "Who should control North/South Sheepsta?", yes? Not "Should Alecrast/Bulbagarden control North/South Sheepsta?". The legality of New Sheepsta is most certainly a part of that issue, and if you'll bother going back to GT's first post, we raised that issue, in RP terms. You never replied to that part of our arguement I noted.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Archaic
This trial was "Who should control North/South Sheepsta?", yes? Not "Should Alecrast/Bulbagarden control North/South Sheepsta?". The legality of New Sheepsta is most certainly a part of that issue.

I disagree. Who should control North/South Sheepsta has nothing to do with the legitimacy of a different nation. New Sheepsta is a seperate issue. We did not call into question the legitimacy of Alecrast rule, simple it's actions concerning North/South Sheepsta. If you wish to bring up a question on the legitimacy of New Sheepsta, then you may, but it was started as a seperate nation. It may be in the boundaries of Old Sheepsta, but he had followers who joined him in creating a new nation.