colo dispute

[Gornall]

[Clausewitz]

EXALT!

Now tell me how you did that, I spent the last 10 minutes tinkering with it trying to figure it out

[Gornall]

Hahah, upload it at tinypic.com

It gives you a forum code so you just copy and paste that into the forum. Works a treat

[Pose]

GRRRRRRR!! I HATE IK.COM'S REPORT FORMAT!!!

what I have been trying to get for the last day or so is an exact time of this supposed cata attack by C_D, as it is now clear that the window of oppurtunity for this to have taken place is slim...and to be honest I dont think it happened.

Through PM's I have found this to be the stated chain of events on the [digg] side

"Colo attempt, also sent from 32:37:17 -*** lands 2.5 hours after cat attack***, 37 minutes after IGM about recalling colo from AeroS (out of range, and I wasn't online at the time) - NB: MH wasn't taken down"

Now this does not fit with the known fact from aeros..


Main house a LVL10

Aeros's catta attack(call that 0 hour)

>THIS IS THE ONLY TIME C_D COULD HAVE CATTAD WITHOUT A REPORT SHOWING IN AEROS' INBOX, OR CLAIMING THE MH DAMAGE.<

Aeros' Collo attack +1:10 hour
Aeros PMs C_D +1:15 hour
C_D's collo attack +1:35 hour

Given that all of this happened within 8n/miles any collo could have been recalled due to the full w/tower on C_D's launch isle, but more importantly C_D's supposed catta attack would have landed at ~MINUS 01:00

Im not the best at maths, and have had to change my approach at this at least 3 times due to them dodging, but can anyone else see how this could be explained away?

[Pose]

I feel I have made my point, and have sent a final(?) PM to 35mm stating my position and the resolution I am seeking...

If this falls on deaf ears, how far will we go on this one?


to 35mm:

"I concede that the isle was cleared by your player, but I am unable to accept that this clearance constitutes a sole right to claim the isle for time immemorial.

Nor can it -given the time frame- even be considered a mark of intent to take the isle... it was simply a farm, the proceeds of which have gone into recouping any losses taken clearing the isle.

It is clear to see that your player had no intention of taking the MH down, but simply taking it from the player that HAD taken the M/H down, thus only sending enough catas to ensure taking it from its new owner.

The extent, to which your player would go to gain/keep this isle, was made all too clear when he stoner dropped mid discussion.

I feel that we have been made to jump through hoops to prove my initial assertion that this isle was unjustly taken, even though your internal investigation should have made this apparent much sooner.

I am now asking that the isle is cleared of stoners and that C_D liases with AeroS Re: the retaking of the isle.

Regards

POSE"


I will post the reply.

[Gornall]

Good work mate, we being tearing him apart for a good 3 days now.

Hopefully he ready to concede.

[Pose]

After further tussles I recieve this:



35mm wrote:
----------


Here is my summery. C_D cleared the island. C_D has rights. There is no precedence that these rights expire. The island belongs to C_D.


To which I reply:

TO 35mm
0 minutes ago
RE: RE: Summing up...
Hi, I am sorry for not getting back to you sooner.

although I dont play at home, I couldn't resist taking a look at your latest replies.

I shall reply to each of your points in turn, but to be honest have been up to my neck in work (R/L) today and havn't been able to give it the thought it deserves.


But in the meantime.... if we are in the rhelms of precedence setting, and declairing that timeframes mean nothing, I have doug out several incidents of late between our alliances that would fit into your "E cleared it E should av it" model quite nicely, assuming you wont be wanting to move the goal posts again, Im sure I can talk AeroS into dropping the C_D dispute in favour of your new policy as it would see him gain an isle now worth 800 points, and have 3 other members of our alli receive an unexpected windfall too.

;D


To which I have had no reply, lol

Although {digg} admins have sent the fillowing to gornall(why not me ??):

Hi,
I have read the correspondence between yourself and and 35mm. I'm taking over this issue.

I am prepared to offer you the island if another agreement cannot be reached on account of 35mm's sub-optimal negotiation. Would you and AeroS be interested in another island near one of his clusters?

BTW, I notice the poem in your profile is by a British author. Are you from the UK? Also, very interesting to have an anti-war poem in a wargame.

loafnut (temporarily fhloop)....


so i supPOSE the question is,
-do we accept their climbdown, and take the 'new isle'
or
-Ask that the original isle be cleared/returned on a point of principal....and a gold star for the diplo team!! yay

[Clausewitz]

I may or may not have dropped Loafnut a note about 35mm screwing the pooch as a Diplo-wannabe a few days ago...

Loaf acknowledges 35mm was an arrogant little prick.

[AeroS]

They offered an island. It is similar in size but it is 4 hours from any of my other islands. I have asked if they can provide a different island(even if its smaller) that is closer to me but if this is not possible I am willing to take the offered isle. It's better than nothing and I could use the resources it would provide.

[Gornall]

Got a new list in your igm mate. Not much better in truth but at least they trying.

Yeh Loafnut/fhloop wern't too impressed. Said he in training and was very unimpressed at how he was handling such a close pacted alliance member!

[Clausewitz]

My philosophy was always "treat Pact mates in colo disputes as you would if it was strictly internal". I'll drop Loafnut a reminder about that approach...

[Gornall]

Nah Clause mate he has being great to be honest. Alot more helpful than 35mm.

Doing his damn best to keep us happy

[AeroS]

Some one may recieve a mail from fhloop about me. I sent him a mail about the real lack of pact mate respect from his side of the table. It wasn't insulting but I did display some frustration with the whole process. Cluase may want to inquire about it but the end result is the same. I will treat DIGG disputes that I am involved in with much higher scrutiny/aggression.

[Gornall]

Goes with out saying. The whole treat those as you wish to be treated.

Any other disputes I will ask to speak to fhloop, seems very level headed and gets stuff done.