>
> The once venerable Eric the Seahawk has brought serious charges
against
> me and has accused me in person of venal conduct. This is unacceptable. The
> web is an insecure medium in which many are prowling with sordid motives
> indeed. It is anyone's rseponsibility, not excluding the Seahawk, to think
> through the potential consequences of one's actions and demonstrate the
> decency to properly address in-play characters. Had EtS brought these
charges
> against me in public he would have found himself to be the defendant in a
> libel-suit in which he would, in any courthouse in the western world, have
> been condemned for slander.
>
Oh yeah, you're coming off looking really good here.....
>
> I still have a copy of a mail that I sent Eric some 6 Olympian years
> ago. The mail was a reply to Eric , functioning then as TIB foreign
affairs
> minister , who had demanded of me , a rookie, in a rather haughty tone to
> provide certain information. To paraphrase the tonesetting of his mail was
> like this: "Hey You, I dont know who you are but etc." In my reply I signed
> with Perceval (Parcifal is the Dutch equivalent as the LoTC will attest),
> Prince of Llangollen. I added that he could also call me Peter , provided
his
>
"an email sent 6 Olympian years ago" ???
What is that, 48 turns? That's 48 weeks? 4 months??
You sent me one email 4 months ago singed Perceval, and another 4 days ago
signed Peter. When I want to respond to the most recent email it is my
responsibility to look back over 3 years of Olympia mail to see if I've ever
talked to you before and if you ever used a different name? Are you insane?
You sent me an email on Saturday signed Peter.
On Monday I replied to it by referring to you as Peter.
This is the stupidest thing I've ever discussed in this game......
> Moreover Eric has a counting problem . In the events leading up to
Eric
> making his accusations public I have sent him exactly 2 mails (not 4 as he
> maintains) and a copy of a mail addressed to another faction.
I fail to see why the number of emails used to blackmail me is important.
But fine Cosimo, you win. I thought you sent me 4 email, but instead you
sent me 3. (2 to me and a copy of a 3rd). Point - Cosimo. Although I fail
to see the importance.
> That copy was
> signed Cosimo di Bicci, etc.
You sent 3 emails. 2 addressed to me signed Peter. 1 addressed to another
player and copied to me signed Cosimo. The emails that contained the
blackmail was signed Peter. That was the email I was responding to.
> Now Eric maintains that I go under the character
> name of Mordred. Is this a figment of his vivid imagination or did he
borrow
> it from his friend Sir Codric who, without hesitation, rushed to his
support.
For the record, MANY people "rushed to my support".
In several of the emails I received from people ref you, you were referred to
as "Mordred". (whether or not this is the case in the email I got from Codric
I'm not sure...although I know it was more than one email from more than one
source). Also, for anybody that cares to look, Cosimo's email address is
mordred@ibm.net Considering this information I began using Mordred to
refer to Peter's game character.
Christ Peter, I'm sorry that you were not referred to by the proper in game
name. But you have admitted in this email that you have signed emails with
the name "Perceval", with the name "Cosimo" and in recent emails to me
"Peter". Several other players referred to you as "Mordred" which appears to
be a shorthand for you email address. Might I suggest that you choose a
name and stick with it? And if you want all game referances to be to a
single name, then use that name in all your game emails? Holy Carp, why is
this even an issue??
As for your defense of your actions, I'm not going to bother to respond point
by point. I will just offer the following:
My plan was to wage political war against you (as that is my forte) and do
whatever I could to damage your future plans. This I freely admit. To that
end I was planning an extensive information gathering campaign so I would
know just who I was dealing with. It was my assumption that this would take
a couple of weeks after which time I would assess the situation and see what
the best course of action would be to thwart your plans. Imagine my surprise
when by simply publicly declaring you my enemy the emails came pouring in. I
received email from every major alliance in the game offering information,
and looking for more info to tie in with what they already knew. Within 24
hours I realized that my planned information gathering campaign was complete,
and that I didn't even have to undertake phase two of my plan. Several major
alliances declared you an enemy of their nation in the first email to me...I
never even got a chance to soil your reputation! It came presoiled!
As for convincing other nations to back me, I would hardly call the task
difficult. All I have done over the last 48 hours is become a storehouse of
information about you. I've merely collected information from many far flung
sources....many of whom would never speak to each other directly because of
other game conflicts....and connected the dots. Everything I have said about
this topic was known by at least one other person in the game...they just
didn't know all the other bits of info. When they are all put together, the
picture on the puzzle becomes much clearer. I didn't make the pieces, I just
put them together.
I'm sorry that it has come to this, and I'm sorry that (if my mailbox is to
be believed) your game has suddenly taken a turn from "future power broker"
to "fugitive on the lam". But I did not create this situation, and I did
not plant the seeds of your destruction across the Olympian landscape over
the last 50 turns. Only you know who has done this, and only he is to blame.
Eric the Seehawk
Speaking for the Freehold