I had no problem with Cendege's post. Nor Stahl und Stein's. I slightly
disagree with Ming the deCafinated's premise. Once SuS
posted to the g2 list, it became the business of everyone who cared
to make it theirs. I totally disagreed with his tone, but as he has
offered an apology already, its really up to Cendege as to whether
he accepts it or not.
Now to Domme's post...
-----Original Message-----
From: Dominick Vansevenant <domme@dma.be>
To: g2-list@pbm.com <g2-list@pbm.com>
Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: Bounty offered
>Please good people, let us look at the facts.
>
>Stahl und Stein lost a noble, they offered a bounty. The bounty they
decreed
>is:
>
>1) Not on their territory,
So?
>2) Completely illegal, because stahl und stein do not have the rights to
>decree this. They can however contact the ruler of this domain and ask for
>an explanation. This has not happened here. The rightful ruler of this
>domain can then consider if this is a valid reason for sanctioning.
Really? Could you please point out the section in the rules that makes
this an illegal player device?
If we are talking "historical references", many Merchantile Houses
offered rewards for the apprehention of bandits what raided their
factors or trains outside the legal jurisdiction of their "country"
of origin.
It would fall to the bounty hunter to get the proper writs from the
liege of the region wherin the "hunted" is being sought. And to be
quite frank, I doubt if many even bothered. They either stumbled
about and found nothing [or got into trouble themselves for their
trespass, if caught] or were in and out with their prize before anyone
was the wiser.
In the context of this game...anyone seeking to collect this bounty by
traversing LotC lands during war time with out the leave of _all_ the
participants is, quite frankly, going to be nominated to receive the
Olympian equivilent of the Darwin Award.
>3) Completely out of line.
This is your point of view, and you are justified in stating it. I
disagree, and I am equally justified in stating it. Same justification.
We are both paying $2.50 a turn to Rich. So, I imagine, is SuS. And
that, in my book, gives him the justification to do with his game assetts
whatever the rules allow.
>4) A proof that PLATO is once again trying TO DICTATE their laws and ethics
>in other people's territory if STAHL und STEIN is a PLATO member or a
member
>of the PLATO satelite Inner Circle.
By your reckoning, you forget the _other_ PLATO satelite: Harn.
[there, you see, I _warned_ you I couldn't keep totally serious]
You do have a point that the "poor downtrodden independant faction"
routine is not applicable if it turns out SuS is either PLATO, Harn,
or IC. I notice no one accused him of being one of the 135+ nobles
belonging to the EA satelite: LotC. ;-D
Are you saying that if he is your enemy, he can not put a bounty upon your
head? If he _is_ your enemy, you were justified in attacking him.
Suspecting him of being an enemy is justification enough. Neither of
those two conditions in any way denies him the _right_ or _opportunity_
to put a price on the head of the attacker.
>
>Stahl und Stein was DENIED ACCESS to this area. He agreed with us that it
>was a righftul decision seen the current military operations going on in
>this area. Stahl und Stein was thus illegal in this area.
>
>The only thing we need to know is if the Stahl und Stein is a member of one
>of the alliances we are at war with. And Cendage testifies it is.
You are look like you are trying to justify the attack. Again, if it
was a LotC noble what hit him in a warzone, you had all the justifica- tion
you needed. Whomever of the LotC what "did the deed" did a "good"
thing, as far as you and your allies are concerned.
Whomever SuS belongs to, or doesn't belong to, is immaterial. He has
made a _legitimate_ offer. Only two questions remain:
1. Does he have the cash to pay up
and
2. Who has the sand to do the "collecting"
Merlin
>
>We are still waiting for these kinds of information coming from Wyrmswyrd.
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Domme.
>
>
>
>
>
>