TVM - SHARK Conflict

Dungshoveleux wrote: Land Claiming is an integral part of the current "conflict".

1. an advantage of the 10-square rule over free form land claims is that the 10-square rule is reciprocal and self-limiting; that is, it functions on the basis of a game mechanic (the placement of towns) and, on that basis, can be supported in the abstract as a right for all players.
2. a free form land claim may be reasonable or unreasonable to any individual observer, but there is no universal basis on which to judge reasonableness because there is no independent basis for limiting the size of a land claim.
3. for this reason, "land claiming" alliances do not endorse the legitimacy of all land claims based on the principle, they only defend the right of an alliance to make a claim. legitimacy must be demonstrated, potentially through combat, because there is no way inherent to the land claiming process to evaluate the reasonableness of an individual claim.

the land claim "system" depends to some extent on periodic challenges and, as Ricky has correctly pointed out, if SHARK is being honest about its motivations it is doing no more than is asked of it by testing the extent of TVM's claim. i don't see a moral issue here. those that insist on imposing one are either making motive attributions that SHARK has denied, trying to capitalise on the situation for reasons of their own, or both. (i am also slightly amused by the idea that, by steadfastly refusing to recognise a land claim, SHARK has become part of the process of vetting it.)