Admin notice: Player warned

[mjolnir]

Here's the "evidence":

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/150/screen759.png
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/3299/screen761.png
http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/8922/screen762.png
http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/6338/screen763.png
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/4428/screen764.png

Against this rule:

5.2 All attacks must be the result of some form of role play. "Engaging" is not sufficient. An attack is any hostile action that drains shields to less than 50%. Being hit with a CD is not considered an attack. If a player is attacked he has a right to defend himself regardless of who is attacking.

The facts seen from the screens:

1. \CS\ Interceptor.Shield writes a one liner that acts as engagement notice
2. [KNF]Kanadzuchi responds with a shorter one liner
3. [KNF]Kanadzuchi flies past Interceptor.Shield
4. Some unknown time later Interceptor.Shield's shields are drained and he has hull damage, Kanadzuchi's shield are also drained.

It is impossible to tell when the last screen is taken, but since one ship that was on the previous screens is not there and 2 new ships are there and Interceptor. Shield is missing all nanobots it ought to be rather long time after.

=> No rule is proven to be broken by any part. Interceptor.Shield writes engagement notice first, but it's impossible to tell who actually "attacked" (drained shield by 50%) first.

So why do we actually have this thread in the first place?

==========================================

Interceptor.Shield uses slighly longer one liner but is the first one to start and using this evidence he is about as much "guilty" of breaking any rules as Kanadzuchi is.
The fact that the last screenshot is taken when Interceptor.Shield is defeated suggests that he plans to report Kanadzuchi as a "revenge" for a lost fight.

"Sanction is a final resort not a goal" ?

---

Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.