AwakenedLands Forums

Zen, please ban that idiot Tommi too. Pretty please!

Yeah. Hurry up and ban that imposter, Tommi, before he gets on my nerves.

you just had an argument against your clients conrad it says ignorance is not a good excuse and they say didnt know and used it anyways that is ignorence there fore they broke that rule and should be punished

(2009.Jun.18 04:24 PM)renkotsu Wrote: [ -> ]you just had an argument against your clients conrad it says ignorance is not a good excuse and they say didnt know and used it anyways that is ignorence there fore they broke that rule and should be punished

No. Maybe basic reading comprehension would help. The rule says that ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the rules. If that was the only rule broken, then they broke no other rules, and the rule does not apply.

But what rule did they break? Where's Tommi with his flawed logic when you need him?

The court room took a recess and I went to take a leak. While I was in the bathroom Conrad was at the urinal next to me and was starring at my giant thingy with a smile of amazement, then tried to touch it. Bad lawyer C, bad lawyer!

---

(2009.Jun.18 04:25 PM)Accipender Wrote: [ -> ]

(2009.Jun.18 04:24 PM)renkotsu Wrote: [ -> ]you just had an argument against your clients conrad it says ignorance is not a good excuse and they say didnt know and used it anyways that is ignorence there fore they broke that rule and should be punished

No. Maybe basic reading comprehension would help. The rule says that ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the rules. If that was the only rule broken, then they broke no other rules, and the rule does not apply.

Says you and 7 laws.

they used what was not theirs to use in the first place is that not stealing ?

Says the lack of rules presented that were broken, along with sufficient evidence. Or so that Tommi prick would say.

Your honor may I bring your attention to the following rules of the game that the defendant's attorney has not included in his line of questioning? The ignorance rule has already been sighted so I will not further that line of argument.

To quote:

"Any issue not specified in this list of rules doesn't mean it is fair game. These unforeseen issues fall under our "spirit of the game" rule. If something goes against the "spirit of the game", then it is against the rules."

and

"This is a game of criminals, but scamming other players by using game mechanics to your advantage is not tolerated. "

The prosecution argues that defendants broke the "spirit of the game" rule by utilzing faulty game mechanics to create a wealth of credits that were not paid for by hard currency and then allowing other members to benefit from said exploit.

The prosecution asserts the defendants also broke the "scamming other players" rule by taking advantage of said exploit thereby nullifying a fare advantage in wealth/stats that other players rightly paid for.

What says the defense?

GUILTY!

7 DAYS FOR THE 7 LAWS!!