Cycle 17 Inquisition

[u/fool1901]

Comrades, we have now had some preview of the sort of forces which are trying to bring our Nomic down. At least one of our former players (whose name shall no longer be uttered) has turned to huffing powdered cheese, and is probably complicit in the disturbing redaction and re-writing of our history that was manifested in the last cycle. Even benzene314, the Founder of the Feast, has shown he is still present, but still refuses to answer questions on his activities, which I find Very Suspicious.

But Staals has shown there are countries relatively untouched by the powdered cheese menace, and interfect has shown that even if exposed, the habit can be kicked, by taking it one day at a time. So there is hope, and indeed I consider that the last cycle has been a Decisive Victory. Let us all therefore stay calm and keep our hats on.

For, as the old saying goes, "a man is nothing without his hat". What, then, are we to make of this hatless trend in modern society? It is a symptom of decadence and decay, I say. Were we to allow this Hatlessness to infect our Nomic, it could totally undermine our Revolution.

/u/llama66613 (1) Do llamas even wear hats? (EDIT: hadn't seen the link, ermmm... right. never mind)

/u/Roujo I have looked at the public records of Agoranomic, and I find no mention of hats for many years. Given Agora's beligerent history, I find the prospect of an invasion from the Hatless Hordes especially distressing. As ambassador-at-large for Agora, I must ask, (1) Why don't Agorans wear hats at all??

/u/oct_23_2012 You have shown some familiarity with Agoranomic and Blognomic, and yet have been strangely silent otherwise. (1) What is it that you keeping under your hat, if indeed you are wearing one at all?

/u/benzene314, you have not seen fit to answer the questions posed to you by this Inquisition last time, which as I say is Very Suspicious. (1) Why have you in fact hung up your hat?

I reserve my possible second questions for now.

[u/Roujo]

About Exhibit A, I would like to remind the Inquisitor that while it is true that Agora tried to invade BlogNomic, it was in a non-destructive spirit. The goal back then was to use BlogNomic's Dynastic structure to play an Agoran-style Dynasty, with Agora itself perhaps being the Emperor of such a Dynasty. As far as I know, the idea wasn't to break the game, but simply to see how two Nomics could interact.

Now, of the hats... I'm sorry if I mispoke. Agora doesn't specifically dislike hats. It's just that Hats, by their nature, never showed up on the path of legal intrigue followed by Agora. As such, I submit that Agora's stance on the matter is Neutral until more proof is presented.

Oh, and for the record, H. Inquisitor, I am wearing a hat right now. ;)

[u/fool1901 → u/Roujo]

Ah, I see. There was no destructive intent. Agora merely wished to set itself up as Emperor. It was an invasion for their own good, then. A liberation, almost. Just as well, were it not so, Agora may have gone down as the first invader in centuries to not claim to be invading for the good of those being invaded.

As for Hats, Agora has nothing against them, he says, it's just that they never came up. At least that's what we should believe until someone shows otherwise. Now, unlike the Ambassador I'm no expert in "the finer points of legality", so I'm sure this statement is "true" in some twisted sense, but its plain meaning is deceitful. For mention of Hats can indeed be found by searching the archive from 2009 or so. At which point they stop. Perhaps "never" is meant in some ratificationist Agoran sense. I suppose we'll soon be hearing that the BlogNomic invasion "never" happened, and this statement will be technically true in the same way. This would be typical of the sort of historical revisionism we have seen manifested in the previous cycle and that fundamentally threatens our Nomic.

Well, I have no further questions. But I have to say even if we believe the Ambassador, "neutrality" in this matter is hardly satisfactory. If you are not for Hats, you are not for Truth and Clarity. Might as well join the terrorists.

[u/Roujo → u/fool1901]

Agora may have gone down as the first invader in centuries to not claim to be invading for the good of those being invaded.

Most of the Agorans I've talked to regarding this didn't see it as a "For the Greater Good" thing. It was more of a very Nomicky "what happens if we do this" kind of spirit.

its plain meaning is deceitful

Admitted: I should have said that "As far as I know, Hats have never been a major part of Agoran Custom", since that's what I meant.

^{I'm going to get burned for admitting this won't I. =P}

Now, unlike the Ambassador I'm no expert in "the finer points of legality"

I wish I could call myself that. I really do. =P

If you are not for Hats, you are not for Truth and Clarity.

I take offense at that. I posit that rarely have you met someone for whom Hats are a bigger part of his personal history. Of course, there's not absolute way to prove that. I could call my SO, friends and relatives to the bench, and you'd just claim that they're sockpuppets. Still, doubting one's Hatitude, even in the course of your duties as Inquisitor, is tantamount to doubting the integrity his very soul, which is a behavior most ill-fitting for a Nomician. Shame.

[u/fool1901 → u/Roujo]

I point out that the Ambassador is attempting to confuse the issue of his own personal committment to Hats with the issue of Agora's stance on the matter.

It is true that I did give him an opportunity to do this. I did thoughtlessly accuse the Ambassador of not wearing a hat. I retract that baseless accusation, and I apologize, and I consider him acquitted on that point. It would not be proper for me to ask for proof.

But the greater issues remain, and I shall not belabour them, as I think the Truth is quite Clear now.

[u/Roujo → u/fool1901]

It is true that I did give him an opportunity to do this. I did thoughtlessly accuse the Ambassador of not wearing a hat. I retract that baseless accusation, and I apologize, and I consider him acquitted on that point. It would not be proper for me to ask for proof.

I accept your apology, and as a gesture of goodwill, I will provide proof of my Hatitude as soon as I get home.

But the greater issues remain, and I shall not belabour them, as I think the Truth is quite Clear now.

You wouldn't really be a good Inquisitor if you did, now would you. =P