Spying rule

MrWhereItsAt · March 10, 2004, 06:02

What the bollocks are you doing Tass? Rule violation? The only rules I found refer to exploits and how long each team can play for. I was chatting with a Hive member. A shrewd one too. We exchanged limited amounts of information, which is what people tend to do in useful diplomatic discussions. There was no military information or specifics exchanged (what is against the rules about that anyway?), we merely shared our views on our respective teams and their relations to each other, in the hope of improving said relations.

You have about 14 hours to put my post back and reopen that thread, or I will do so myself. Don't be an idiot. There is no rule that even approaches restricting faction members from chatting about ANYTHING, and I challenge you to show me otherwise.

Don't be psycho. Reverse your actions and we'll forget this. I don't want any more annoyance in this game than we have all had already. Please sort this out.

laurentius · March 10, 2004, 06:08

I second WIA, nothing illegal has happened. My theory is: Either tass is; A) not serious OR B) too bored with acdg and wants some action

DeathByTheSword · March 10, 2004, 09:37

damn WIA...why so hostile?

laurentius · March 10, 2004, 11:49

Tass is the one who is being hostile here. Actually WIA why being so soft on him?

Illuminatus · March 10, 2004, 14:31

What actually happened? Is exchanging information in chat channels against rules? What has MWIA actually posted about?

GeoModder · March 10, 2004, 14:48

Well, that is the problem, Tass edited the results of that chat, or the posting of MWIA of that chat log, so we don't know.

Drogue · March 10, 2004, 15:37

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
There was no military information or specifics exchanged (what is against the rules about that anyway?), we merely shared our views on our respective teams and their relations to each other, in the hope of improving said relations.

While it would depend on the specifics, if that is the case, it would be legal. However, as CMN, Tass has a duty to investigate anything that may cross over the rules. Therefore, closing your thread and removing the chat log so that it does not affect others is prudent, until he has decided whether or not it contravenes the rules.

The bottom line is, there is a rule about it, and it is up to Tass what he believes is the difference between an informal chat about diplomacy and giving information that should not be, or trying to gain information by underhand means.

Tass said as his comment in that thread that the log has been removed until he makes his decision, as to whether or not it is against the rules. If he decides it is, it remains removed. If he decides it isn't, it will be replaced. From what I've heard, I think it is legal, and I am strongly against that rule anyway, but nevertheless, it is a rule, and we must abide by it. Not only does he have a right to closed a thread he feels breaks the rules, he has a duty to do as such, until a ruling is made, so as to avoid any more improprieties, should they occur.

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
What the bollocks are you doing Tass? Rule violation?

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
There is no rule that even approaches restricting faction members from chatting about ANYTHING, and I challenge you to show me otherwise.

Sadly that isn't true. While personally I am against the rule, it was voted that getting information in informal chats was against the rules, since it could be manipulated. I think it's all part and parcel of diplomacy personally, but the people voted to ban it.

Furthermore, Voltaire, as Chairman of The Hive, has asked that there be no diplomacy whatsoever other than between their official ambassador and the CPU, because of various incidents that have happened with the hive, such as the Jamski and Enigma ones. We did agree to those terms, as a courtesy.

I would ask that Tass post a link in the rules thread to the poll in question, to make clear that it is being enforced.

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Don't be psycho. Reverse your actions and we'll forget this. I don't want any more annoyance in this game than we have all had already. Please sort this out.

He is sorting it out. I know you were not aware of the rule, but there is a rule there. I disagree with it, I think it's a stupid ruling, but it is a ruling, and Tass has a duty to investigate it if he feels it is borderline.

Meanwhile, please do not post it again until Tass has decided if it is legal or not.

Tass: I presume any similar thread by Arnelos has been removed from the Hive forum, should it have been made. Also, could you give us a rough idea of timescale? How long do you think until you make a decision on whether or not it's allowed.

Nubclear · March 10, 2004, 15:39

Thing is: I've already made my ruling, which has been told to both parties.
I would like it to be accepted.

Nubclear · March 10, 2004, 15:40

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=105360

Drogue · March 10, 2004, 16:01

Tass, there is one gaping problem with that poll: it doesn't define spying.

The winning option was:

Quote:

YES, I do believe the action described in the post is SPYING and NO, I DO NOT believe that previous spies should be PARDONED.

Yet there is no action described in that post. Indeed, you went as far as to say:

Quote:

However the term spying has not been defined specifically enough in order to make a determinite ruling.

You also said:

Quote:

The purpose of this poll is to see whether this type of action is considered spying

Yet it was not. The poll decided if that action should be spying, with no mention of what that action was. You have never told us what you consider spying.

Moreover, if you have made your ruling, please remove the comment in the thread you closed saying that you are considering your ruling.

laurentius · March 10, 2004, 16:07

Edited.

Illuminatus · March 10, 2004, 16:15

Hmm, seems we already know it.

Nubclear · March 10, 2004, 20:30

Drogue: Spying is..."once-loyal faction members now giving factional information to foreign factions.", of course, without approval from the faction.

Drogue · March 10, 2004, 20:41

I have a couple of points then. Would you call either MWIA or Arnelos a non longer loyal faction member? Also, this would mean a member playing and posting the turn, while offering a diplomacy deal that had not been cleared by the rest of the faction. Hoever the latter was ruled as an allowable rogue member, by Googlie. Or does this just apply to out of game diplomacy, not in game? That would seem sensible. However I would question that what Arnelos and MWIA did anything against their own factions.

Nubclear · March 10, 2004, 21:14

Fair enough, though I doubt one of the factions involved would have wanted this to happen

I don't see why this is an issue anymore though. I ruled, before this thread was created, that all they would get was a slap on the wrist.

MrWhereItsAt · March 11, 2004, 07:44

Drogue: OK, thanks for clearing that up. I would however be interested in pushing for our rules to be more clearly signposted, as I checked every thread I could find (FAQ etc) in the public forum before posting. Although it really grates on me to hear we can't chat with members of other teams unless we have an official mandate, I will try to work within that system. For the moment, untill it pisses me off too much for passive activity.

So can I please be given a mandate to become an official ambassador for our team? Then chats I have are not informal. I know Arn very well from other DGs and I believe that as he becomes a little more active in the Hive that being able to chat with him about things would go a long way to improving relations between our two factions. It is potentially in everyone's best interests. If you or the team believes that I should not be trusted with such a job, I will accept that, happy or not.

However Tass, I have a bone to continue to pick with you. Since your PMs are full, I will continue here. You have told me I unfairly extracted info from Arn. Not so. I was aware he was a Hiver, he knows full well I am CPU. We have both seen the recent diplomatic clashes in the public channel, and we are both smart. Neither of us offered up sensitive information, merely compared notes about activity, who best to contact in our factions, and on the stances of our faction members.

Where is the harm in that? I do not accept any chastising, nor do I intend to stop chatting with Arn about the game because of your arbitrary ruling. I will refrain for the moment because of Drogue's reservations, but I hope I will be given an official mandate.

Oh, and if we're looking at wordings closely, what factional informations was exchanged? Finding out who the active members of our respective factions are is public info - all you need do is check who the CivGroup members are and see how active those members are on Poly. And how is a personal opinion of someone factional information? I know no more about the location, statistics of the Hive than I did before.

If none of this gets me anywhere it's time to define spying. I don't understand a DG where you can't chat to members of the other factions and if I have to change that myself then dammit I will. We're here to have fun, and personally I think a lot of the *****iness seen in this game so far could be relaxed by having better interpersonal communications between ALL members.

Maniac · March 11, 2004, 09:37

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
So can I please be given a mandate to become an official ambassador for our team?

I hereby declare all CPUers official ambassadors for our faction.

Does that mean MWIA can now post the chat he had?

laurentius · March 11, 2004, 14:28

Good move mani

Nubclear · March 11, 2004, 14:28

Nice loophole

But no.

Quote:

what factional informations was exchanged?

Look at your log (which you are about to send me, I hope!). If you look, you will see the information that I see.

Drogue · March 11, 2004, 21:21

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Although it really grates on me to hear we can't chat with members of other teams unless we have an official mandate, I will try to work within that system.

You can chat, just not about game related things. It is a bit restrictive, but it's what the other factions wanted

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
I hereby declare all CPUers official ambassadors for our faction.

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
So can I please be given a mandate to become an official ambassador for our team? Then chats I have are not informal.

The issue isn't that you were authorised, it is that Arnelos wasn't. Voltaire has asked that all communication been done officially, through him or his Ambassador. Arnelos isn't his Ambassador, this cannot be a source of information.

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
If none of this gets me anywhere it's time to define spying. I don't understand a DG where you can't chat to members of the other factions and if I have to change that myself then dammit I will. We're here to have fun, and personally I think a lot of the *****iness seen in this game so far could be relaxed by having better interpersonal communications between ALL members.

I agree with this.

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
Does that mean MWIA can now post the chat he had?

Nope. Arnelos isn't authorised.

Ouro_827 · March 11, 2004, 21:39

How much is the Ambassador's salary? And the fact that it is now an 'authroized' discussion from our side mean that the Hive can look through the logs, but we can't?

Drogue · March 11, 2004, 21:39

Thread renamed, to reflect topic (and be a little less aggressive). This thread has been asked to be closed. I like to keep it open for the moment, because there could be a useful discussion come out of this, however.

GeoModder · March 11, 2004, 22:14

Tass: Is it possible to see MWIA's side of the conversation then, but leaving Arnelos' responses out? It's not possible to decide on this issue with no info at all!!

MrWhereItsAt · March 12, 2004, 06:36

Well first I want to apologise to Tass and everyone that saw this thread as aggressive. At no point did I feel agressive towards anyone, nor did I inted the thread as such, so sorry if I gave that impression.

However I am going to push my case to the death, if necessary. If I am now considered official for anything, this just means that Arn is not. Let us assume for the time being he will not be granted official status by the Hive. OK, I can't contest that, as the Hive is their own faction. What I CAN do however, is contest the silly idea that only official contacts can exchange any information in chat. CXan I count on some support when I bring this topic up for redebate in the public forum, leading to a repoll?

And to Tass or anyone else - if you could give me a link or bump to the thread/poll that this was decided (I never saw it, let alone voted in it), that would help.

Drogue · March 12, 2004, 16:22

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
CXan I count on some support when I bring this topic up for redebate in the public forum, leading to a repoll?

Yes.

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
And to Tass or anyone else - if you could give me a link or bump to the thread/poll that this was decided (I never saw it, let alone voted in it), that would help.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=105360

Illuminatus · March 12, 2004, 16:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac

I hereby declare all CPUers official ambassadors for our faction.

Cool. I have now been promoted to ambassador. Time to change my sig.

Anyway we can allow MWIA to post his questions without Arnelos answers so that we can see what was the conversation about.

MrWhereItsAt · March 12, 2004, 20:23

Just see me in the chat. This was nothing related to plans made or game details, only relating to the factions, members' statuses and opinions. Nothing concrete there - opinions can be changed, if you get in quick enough.

Besides I need to go pick up my laptop a bit later on to get the log.

Nubclear · March 13, 2004, 00:33

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Just see me in the chat.

No, don't see him in the chat.
MWIA, PM me the full log first.

MrWhereItsAt · March 13, 2004, 23:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar

No, don't see him in the chat.
MWIA, PM me the full log first.

I have better things to do than run around after every whim of a God who is enforcing rules that are not supported by the game members, that are problematic only to Him and that are frankly silly.

I'll get around to it Tass. Need to get the log again on Monday. You could probably ask Maniac for it.

Nubclear · March 14, 2004, 00:34

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
that are not supported by the game members,