Gregory House 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. No. Its saying here's my pee, test it. But actually giving them someone else's pee. Prove him guilty or he isn't. There isn't anything more to be said on this subject. If you cannot positively prove him guilty, then he isn't. He need not prove his innocence. Also, giving them someone else's pee doesn't mean you took drugs, it just means you didn't give them your pee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Prove him guilty or he isn't. There isn't anything more to be said on this subject. If you cannot positively prove him guilty, then he isn't. He need not prove his innocence. Also, giving them someone else's pee doesn't mean you took drugs, it just means you didn't give them your pee. Proof isn't possible on either side anymore, so all the matters is his guilt In the eyes of the community. Dunno about you, but if I heard someone avoided a drugs test by giving the tester someone else's pee, I'd presume they took drugs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Proof isn't possible on either side anymore, so all the matters is his guilt In the eyes of the community. Dunno about you, but if I heard someone avoided a drugs test by giving the tester someone else's pee, I'd presume they took drugs. But it'd be just that, a presumption. Again, it's all conjecture at this point. Basically, it's back to whatever opinion you want to have of the GPA. You've always been free to formulate your own opinion of us, good or bad, approving or disapproving. But the accusation is no more than gossip now, and to elevate it to some factually-relevant position would be unreasonable and unjustifiable. EDIT: I'm off to bed, so I won't reply for a few hours. Edited January 12, 2015 by Gregory House Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niklaus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Prove him guilty or he isn't. There isn't anything more to be said on this subject. If you cannot positively prove him guilty, then he isn't. He need not prove his innocence. Also, giving them someone else's pee doesn't mean you took drugs, it just means you didn't give them your pee. >.> Yeah because one'd obviously feel like giving away his friend's pee instead of his own for giggles right? I mean one could not possibly be trying to evade the drug test itself. How silly of phiney to think that! 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) But it'd be just that, a presumption. Again, it's all conjecture at this point. Basically, it's back to whatever opinion you want to have of the GPA. You've always been free to formulate your own opinion of us, good or bad, approving or disapproving. But the accusation is no more than gossip now, and to elevate it to some factually-relevant position would be unreasonable and unjustifiable. EDIT: I'm off to bed, so I won't reply for a few hours. That's the thing. Bel cannot be definitely called guilty, just suspected of it. And it is upto belsarious to prove otherwise as PB can't since her test was never actually taken or people would make assumptions. Ergo, the burden of proof lies with him. 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...
Prefontaine Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Therefore the accusation is meaningless and without substance. I can throw out any wild accusation I want, but without proving it, it's meaningless. Unfortunately this is not a court of law, it's a court of public opinion. GPA has thrown around comments like "the burden of proof is on PB", "Innocent until proven guilty", and things of that tone. Simply because you cannot prove something does not mean public opinion won't fall one way or another. It also doesn't make it meaningless. This is why I asked about motive earlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyrositor Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Eight pages later and all we've accomplished is to antagonize each other. In my opinion, both sides are guilty of acerbating the issue; as a GPA member, however, I'm divided in my position. While I have tremendous respect for Belisarius, and trust his word that he did not spy on Princess Bubblegum, I believe that he failed to do the right thing by executing the incorrect spy operation, serving only to raise suspicions and turn what should have been a simple matter into a circular argument which I think can only serve as a detriment to the Agency, each side re-stating their position with increasing vehemence over and over. Neither do I support or agree with some of the counter-accusations/counter-arguments thrown around by some of my alliance mates. On the other hand, I take great offence in that what is essentially a personal dispute between two players has, yet again, been subverted by some with anti-neutral agendas to further their cause. Think of Belisarius or Princess Bubblegum what you wish, but please do not take this to mean that the GPA would tolerate such actions, were they definitively proven to have taken place. I also believe that this is not the place for ad hominem attacks which do nothing to further the discussion. Finally, Princess Bubblegum, while I can say that some members of GPA from the speed round still hold some vague animosity towards you, I cannot for one second believe that Belisarius would choose to soil both his reputation and the reputation of an alliance he has worked so hard for, just for such a childish act; we have been fighting many rogues lately (business as usual, I guess), and have sent out many spies to deal with them (as an aside, I was the one who led the spy operation Belisarius linked to much earlier in the thread), so I do not think it is a stretch to believe Belisarius initiated an attack against a rogue's spies that happened to coincide with the attack on your nation. And now I hope I haven't aggravated the situation even more by posting this message. Edited January 12, 2015 by Lyrositor 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I think that's some good points, lyrositor, but since bel is gov, it does reflect on the whole alliance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niklaus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Nm double post 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...
Niklaus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Unfortunately this is not a court of law, it's a court of public opinion. GPA has thrown around comments like "the burden of proof is on PB", "Innocent until proven guilty", and things of that tone. Simply because you cannot prove something does not mean public opinion won't fall one way or another. It also doesn't make it meaningless. This is why I asked about motive earlier. This. Suspicion is all that matters here and right now, Bel is appearing to be guilty. It'd make sense to expect him to prove his innocence. Quote Blood of a king. Heart of a lion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grillick Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 This thread is still hilarious. Let's assume you've made your case that Belisarius used a spy operation to kill Princess Bubblegum's spies. To that I respond, who cares? Princess Bubblegum besmirches Orbis by willfully exploiting an error in the game mechanics to keep himself well below retribution for his raiding tactics. Furthermore, any hostile action against Princess Bubblegum is not a violation of the Agency's neutrality. Our Declaration of Neutrality, which can be viewed here, states "Aside from the instances where Article 3 applies, GPA member nations are forbidden to initiate (or cause another nation to initiate) hostile action against other nations." Here Princess Bubblegum might say, "Ah ha! Belisarius initiated a hostile action against me! After all, that same document defines hostile action as "An actual, attempted, or threatened attack, invasion, or endeavor to inflict harm upon another nation or its property." Not so, however, because in the case of Princess Bubblegum, Article 3 applies. Article 3 states, "GPA member nations shall remain neutral in any conflict, except in the following incidences: (i) where a Belligerent has taken hostile action against a GPA member nation or the alliance's interests; (ii) in the defense against any actual or perceived attack upon the Green sphere and/or Neutrality; (iii) in instances of Roguery within the green sphere." Here, we have a "nation," the Candy Kingdom, which has 30 tanks for every citizen, 681 soldiers for every citizen, 2 aircraft and a spy, while maintaining a population of 10. This is not a nation - it is an army. Its existence is a threat to all civilized nations, and any action taken in opposition to it is justified by the rules of war. Take your populist rhetoric and get out, Princess Bubblegum. 1 Quote "It's hard to be a team player when you're omnipotent." - Q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 This is the kind of response I expected right away. However, instead bel just made himself look bad, and that is now out in the public for all to see. Whilst it essentially doesn't matter about the whole neutral thing, it has shown bel, a member of gpa gov, as untrustworthy and a liar, furthermore others backed him up and I can only presume you all knew he wasnt telling the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grillick Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 And in other news, that spy you just lost, Princess? That was me. 2 Quote "It's hard to be a team player when you're omnipotent." - Q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Well this is an interesting turn of events. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grillick Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 This is the kind of response I expected right away. However, instead bel just made himself look bad, and that is now out in the public for all to see. Whilst it essentially doesn't matter about the whole neutral thing, it has shown bel, a member of gpa gov, as untrustworthy and a liar, furthermore others backed him up and I can only presume you all knew he wasnt telling the truth. There's a reason we don't let him handle foreign affairs. Quote "It's hard to be a team player when you're omnipotent." - Q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Sterling Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 whoa whoa whoa timeout. Now I have no clue what is going on. So at first everyone was defending belisarius saying he didn't spy, and now from what I'm getting from what Grillick is saying he did spy, but are just trying to justify it. If I'm wrong please correct me because at the point I have no clue what people are even trying to argue. Quote Genesis, best band NA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grillick Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 whoa whoa whoa timeout. Now I have no clue what is going on. So at first everyone was defending belisarius saying he didn't spy, and now from what I'm getting from what Grillick is saying he did spy, but are just trying to justify it. If I'm wrong please correct me because at the point I have no clue what people are even trying to argue.I don't know if Belisarius spied Princess Bubblegum, and I don't care. Princess Bubblegum isn't a nation, and isn't protected by our Declaration of Neutrality. Quote "It's hard to be a team player when you're omnipotent." - Q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niklaus Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 ...k Quote Blood of a king. Heart of a lion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 ... Well at least this post has ACE'S AWARD FOR THE HOTTEST TOPIC OF 2015 JANUARY! Quote ~ " Fighting through the Storm " ~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aisha Greyjoy Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I am afraid I am going to have to start looking at GPA nations in a different light now. 1 Quote Duke of House Greyjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyrositor Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 And in other news, that spy you just lost, Princess? That was me. I am a GPA member, and I oppose this course of action, as well as the reasoning behind it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aphelion Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 ... Well at least this post has ACE'S AWARD FOR THE HOTTEST TOPIC OF 2015 JANUARY! Too early to tell, there's still 19 days to go for something spicier to come up. But yeah, this also got me like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegoz Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So GPA is neutral in the sense of the definition of neutral being whatever they define it? Also wonderful FA 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...
Clarke Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So GPA is neutral in the sense of the definition of neutral being whatever they define it? Also wonderful FA Personally I think this is fantastic, I love it that it turned out to be this. The alternative is so much more boring. The best part is Princess not being a nation, LOL WAT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naTia Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Neutrality by force. 1 Quote Resident DJ @ Club Orbis Founder of The Warehouse 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.