Clarification

[Crashlander04]

I believe the clarification necessary wasn't as per what happened after the situation, but what the exact details and reasoning the moderators and players who asked them for the town gave to justify the movement of the town.

Several stories have been given, and it's generally fair to say that either faulty (edit: or lacking) information was given to moderators in order to obtain permission, certain moderators did not inquire as necessary when given vague information, or certain moderators made a very bad judgement.

There is no reasonable scenario in which this should have happened (in Age I to say the least), leaving somebody at fault.

That is not true, the moderators were given accurate information, as is to my knowledge, they came in person then approved Smyhties ownership of the town. No one was mislead up to that point.

In several stories I have heard that the town was believed to have been the property of NLewis and Pwolbart's, and being banned left the town unclaimed. I have also heard the same thing of it being mistaken for Ian's town. Not only was this town blatantly within proximity of Solitude, and therefore should have been assumed as the town's property, but it was ignored that NLewis and Pwolbart's in-game property was handed down to Asdf and Seth as of their banning. However, if a block check had occurred it would have been discovered that only skote had ever built on that structure. In any above case, it should have been realized that the structure was not unclaimed property in which to be dismantled and flown away.

Therefore the information could not have been accurate. To say that it was abandoned, while sitting so closely to such an active town, is ignorant of anybody who claimed so.

As faulty as the judgement of any moderator was in this scenario, regardless of evidence or facts presented, if whomever asked for the moderator's permission can not say (honestly) that they legitimately believed the town to be abandoned, did accurate research into the structure's history, and told the moderators utterly accurate information, then they should be considered responsible for the dilemma.

Simply saying you* were misinformed when you* made no in-depth attempt to find out the applicable information does not relieve you* of responsibility or make you* innocent from all fault.

*When I write 'you', I mean the term as a generalization of perpetration, not specifically Riskae.