Gregory House Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I have no idea what Guardian has to do with this, they're a nice alliance. He was using them to make an example. That he used them is a testament to how friendly they are, as the example was made intentionally ridiculous to mirror the allegations OP has made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) I don't claim to speak for the GPA, but from my own perspective, we're guilty of nothing, thus there's nothing we should defend against. To defend against it would lend credence to it. Knowing Belisarius reasonably well, it's utterly preposterous to me that he'd do something like this. Well PB claims his spy kill count went up during a certain time frame. Whether that attack was against PB or not is what's not clear. I know Guardian's also done investigating like that to find out who was spying on us, he does have 9 spy kills so those had to come from some place. EDIT: Also, you're in a tough spot. Defend it may give credence, ignoring it could produce even more negative results. Not a great spot. Damned if you do damned if you don't sort of thing. Edited January 12, 2015 by Prefontaine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Juan Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 And to GPA, what do you have to say to those who claim this shows you as non-neutral? You've missed the window to show Bel didn't already perform a spy action that day and thus we can never have proof really. So all you have now is people deciding for themselves on who to believe. The doubt has been cast with no way to confirm one way or another, so how do you address the doubt besides simply denying it exists?I trust Belisarius completely and I have no doubt whatsoever that he would never do anything which would harm the GPA. He is a lifer. Why shit in your own nest? Now you don't have to believe me, you can believe what you want, but I back Belisarius 100% in this matter and refuse to let him be slandered over a long standing grudge. Those who distrust the GPA are likely going to believe those claims and those that don't will write them off as the unfounded libel they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Bubblegum Posted January 12, 2015 Author Share Posted January 12, 2015 I don't know if anyone has asked this yet, but what do you hope to accomplish by this thread PB? Is your goal to have him removed from gov for committing what you view as a non-neutral act? Are you hoping to unite alliances against GPA because they've showed a willingness to be non-neutral? Is this to slander them? What was the conclusion you were hoping for when you created this thread? I'm not saying you're right, or GPA's right, or anything. I'm simply asking for motive and goal right now. Well let's assume I'm right. Bel kills three of my spies over the course of two nights. I really have no way of responding to Bel since he's 90 times my size and has 50 spies. One form of retribution is public exposure. Maybe that will make him reconsider trying to deprive me of spies. I mean it's pretty clear that GPA is just taking the stance that anything goes with spying. Based on the arguments I've seen, anyone could pretty much spy on GPA, get "caught", and GPA could do nothing about it without denying their own stance of innocent until proven guilty (since we're at an impasse where proof is pretty much forever out of reach with regards to spying and the ability to fake screenshots). Though, I actually thought of something of an exception to that, which would be having someone else log into your account to confirm someone was caught, but that isn't allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Well PB claims his spy kill count went up during a certain time frame. Whether that attack was against PB or not is what's not clear. I know Guardian's also done investigating like that to find out who was spying on us, he does have 9 spy kills so those had to come from some place. EDIT: Also, you're in a tough spot. Defend it may give credence, ignoring it could produce even more negative results. Not a great spot. Damned if you do damned if you don't sort of thing. Considering there is no way to prove PB's claims, the only way in which Belisarius could possibly be seen as guilty is if he were presumed guilty until proven innocent. There is no way to prove if PB is lying or telling the truth, thus any further discussion is merely unsubstantiated conjecture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 No one has addressed what I see as the most damning evidence and enough proof for me. In response to pbs request, bel provided a spy report done with 4 spies and extremely covert. The same 99% odds act could have been done with 12 spies on default costing 90k less. It was clearly not him. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fendon Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Nvm. Can't be bothered with this. Edited January 12, 2015 by Fendon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ataraxis Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I think we can prove a slightly weaker statement: Belisarius must have spied someone unprovoked. If Belisarius did not use his spy action for the day, the rational thing to do would be to take up PB's offer. Next, note the following: Currently, GPA is at war with one rogue (from INTL Anarcho-Communist Front or whatever) who has no spies. The previous GPA war before that was over two weeks ago, so as Belisarius had already used his spy action of the day (no less, increasing the capture count). Thus Belisarius has no reason whatsoever to kill anyone's spies, and this is an unprovoked aggression. 1 Quote #6 in P&W Beta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Juan Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 What if Belisarius was the recipient of a spy attack and killed some in defense? That would do the same. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simmons Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Don't mind me, just enjoying the show. Edited January 12, 2015 by Simmons 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ataraxis Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Then you would know the identity of said nation who spied Belisarius, as well as have a free spy action. The fact that you're dealing with vague hypotheticals means that no such nation exists as, were such a nation to exist, you would immediately provide that as counterproof to PB's accusations. Quote #6 in P&W Beta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Then you would know the identity of said nation who spied Belisarius, as well as have a free spy action. The fact that you're dealing with vague hypotheticals means that no such nation exists as, were such a nation to exist, you would immediately provide that as counterproof to PB's accusations. Counterproof implies there is proof to counter, which there isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Juan Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Because PB has provided all the proof, right? All we have is their word and that's all there is to this thread. Words, empty meaningless accusations and PB dodging the truth for a political play against us. Why someone would target us, a neutral alliance, I will never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegoz Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Because PB has provided all the proof, right? All we have is their word and that's all there is to this thread. Words, empty meaningless accusations and PB dodging the truth for a political play against us. Why someone would target us, a neutral alliance, I will never know. Well they are targeting you because they are questioning that neutrality. I can't deny something is a bit off here, you would have been better off to just prove your innocence because this is actually doing more damage to you the longer this goes on. Anyway up to you, I really don't care too much I have my own problems to deal with Quote [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: But Keegoz is actually bad. [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: He's my favorite bad leader though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niklaus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Because PB has provided all the proof, right? All we have is their word and that's all there is to this thread. Words, empty meaningless accusations and PB dodging the truth for a political play against us. Why someone would target us, a neutral alliance, I will never know. "All we have is their word and your word and that's all there is to this thread." Nobody can dodge the truth because the truth simply cannot be established in this case now, unless GPA offers counter evidence (screenshots or some other proof that Bel did indeed spy a nation other than PB that day). PB's accusation has been rendered unprovable. She cannot prove it from her side since Belsarius refused to do that test. Hence the burden of proof now lies with GPA. All you both can do is go back and forth on this issue. Edited January 12, 2015 by Niklaus Quote Blood of a king. Heart of a lion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 "All we have is their word and your word and that's all there is to this thread." Nobody can dodge the truth because the truth simply cannot be established in this case now, unless GPA offers counter evidence (screenshots or some other proof that Bel did indeed spy a nation other than PB that day). PB's accusation has been rendered unprovable. She cannot prove it from her side since Belsarius refused to do that test. Hence the burden of proof lies with GPA. All you both can do is go back and forth on this issue. Not quite true, bel didn't refuse. He did his own version of it and that is what caused even more suspicion and makes me view him as guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 "All we have is their word and your word and that's all there is to this thread." Nobody can dodge the truth because the truth simply cannot be established in this case now, unless GPA offers counter evidence (screenshots or some other proof that Bel did indeed spy a nation other than PB that day). PB's accusation has been rendered unprovable from her side since Belsarius refused to do that test. Hence the burden of proof lies with GPA. All you both can do is go back and forth on this issue. Therefore the accusation is meaningless and without substance. I can throw out any wild accusation I want, but without proving it, it's meaningless. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niklaus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Not quite true, bel didn't refuse. He did his own version of it and that is what caused even more suspicion and makes me view him as guilty. My mistake. Should not matter much though. Refusing or doing one's own version both lead to same conclusion - the actual test was never taken. Hence, PB's accusation could not be verified for truth from her side. Quote Blood of a king. Heart of a lion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 My mistake. Should not matter much though. Refusing or doing one's own version both lead to same conclusion - the actual test was never taken. Hence, PB's accusation could not be verified for truth from her side. How does this make Belisarius guilty rather than PB's accusations null and void? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niklaus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Anybody could have performed a gather intel op. There would not have been visible effects to verify it was indeed Bel did so in that test. Because Bel changed the test, defeating its purpose, PB could not prove it on her own since her proposed test was never taken. Quote Blood of a king. Heart of a lion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niklaus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) How does this make Belisarius guilty rather than PB's accusations null and void? This implicates him because he did not prove his innocence rather got rid of the means (the actual test) that could be used to verify the truth. Now unless he shows some alternative proof showing that he was innocent, how can anyone from GPA claim that PB is lying? Bel had motive to change the test. Burden of proof lies with him. Edit: I will make it clearer. Earlier it was responsibility of PB to prove her accusations and she proposed a test for that. The test was not taken under the conditions set. Now she has no way from her side, as I see it, to prove it on her own. She only has a suspicion, a quite strong one for that matter. Because Bel changed the test. He will be suspected to be guilty until he proves otherwise. This is not the traditional "innocent till proven guilty scenario". In this particular case, there is solid reason to suspect him of being guilty. So he has to prove his innocence now or let people judge him on their own. Edited January 12, 2015 by Niklaus Quote Blood of a king. Heart of a lion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 This implicates him because he did not prove his innocence rather got rid of the means (the actual test) that could be used to verify the truth. Now unless he shows some alternative proof showing that he was innocent. How can anyone from GPA claim that PB is lying? Bel had motive to change the test. Burden of proof lies on him. The burden of proof lies on PB to prove his guilt. He is innocent until proven guilty, and he has not yet been proven guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niklaus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Clarified further. Read my post again. Quote Blood of a king. Heart of a lion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Clarified further. Read my post again. Even with your clarification, Belisarius isn't remotely guilty of anything. It'd be like saying that, if I refused to let you drug test me, then I have taken some kind of drugs. No, I just didn't let you drug test me, it's really as simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 House you're wrong. Bel shifted the burden onto himself by purposefully pretending to do a 'proof' test that was clearly not actually done by him. This shows guilt and is enough to make him a clear suspect. Even with your clarification, Belisarius isn't remotely guilty of anything. It'd be like saying that, if I refused to let you drug test me, then I have taken some kind of drugs. No, I just didn't let you drug test me, it's really as simple as that. No. Its saying here's my pee, test it. But actually giving them someone else's pee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.