Raving Coyotes, ahem - I mean distinguished gentlemen,
 
Well, I put the "don't bother arguing" because the misorder is particularly important.  And having a public argument over the issue was the last thing I wanted, because I'm suspicious that despite all discussion over rules, any vote would ultimately be more on the "does this help me" platform, instead of the rules discussed.  Does a trickle up economy create jobs?  Maybe, but dammit, I'm at the top and deserve that money!  Let me decide where to let it flow!  In the future, PLEASE send these sort of e-mails one-to-one.
 
But since it is public, here was my decision making process.

I just came back from a Dip tournament a few weeks ago where rules were very strict on misorders
I looked at my keyboard and realized that P and E are not close to each other, and so this is not necessarily an erroneous key stroke.
My personal experience is that Dip players are more often than not very careful and a misorder is intentional.  This is not to say this misorder was or was not intentional, but often I have seen GMs "correct" misorders, only to be later "recorrected."  It causes quite a mess.  Better to be too strict and get everyone in line than to be too kind and cause a bigger problem.
Misorders happen in the real world as well as in the game.
Thaesus sounds like a perfectly ancient province and I actually double checked there wasn't some tiny province called Thaesus in that area I hadn't noticed before.
I recently finished a variant map (Versailles) game and always had a blank map (blank of units, not province names) handy to avoid such problems.
 
In addition:
I don't use RealPolitik's ability to insert orders into the program; I'm honestly not sure how to even do that.  I have an overriding paranoia of technology and don't like second level commanding - that is: I like to be as hands on as possible.  I point and click every single order.
Pun to Tha would have been an acceptable order.  But that was not what was written.  And as for the Ven to Rom/Rum issue, if you can't type 3 letters right / be bothered to check your work, then I don't see why I should cut you any slack.
 
So here's what I'm going to do.  The order remains as is.  In the future, if there is an order that I notice is invalid, I will note this when I "recieve" your orders, and you'll have the chance to fix the order (or not, if you so wish).  If I don't notice or don't recieve an updated order by the time of the deadline, too bad.  Let that be more motivation for you to send orders before the deadline starts closing in.
 
I hope that pleases either all parties, or nobody.  Equality for all!
 
Take care, and still waiting on that Greek retreat!
-Maslow
 
 

 
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.com ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email])> wrote:

Maslow,
I hate to be a thorn in your side, but I also agree with Adam on the
Pun -> Tha issue.  In fact, solely because if the order was written as
such, it would have been accepted!
I think part of the problem (and it's a bit of a gripe on my part) is
that the units on the maps sit on top of the names.  So when filling
out orders, I either have to rely on my memory or retrieve an older
map, or find an empty map online.  I had to do that this turn when
remember if "Cilician" was "Silician" or "Cilician".  I even typed
Sicilian at first, but saw that error immediately and fixed it.  "The
reason I typed the entire name was so that if there was a slight typo,
the meaning would be clear."

[Warning:  Slight Rant follows]
I understand that if you are using RealPolitic or other software to
assist in adjudicating, correcting typos is extra work.  On the other
hand, I believe software should be used as described -- to "assist" in
judging, but not be the end-all be-all.  That is the reason *I* choose
to NOT use any software when I GM.  Yes, it takes more time, but it
also keeps me more involved and in touch with the game.  Of course
that is a personal preference and I don't expect anyone else to follow
it.  BUT, I think it may be a better course for most GMs to not rely
entirely on software to rule the game.
[Rant over]

All that being said, whatever your final decision is, we will follow!

Thanks,
Michael
---------
"Shared Pain is lessened, Shared Joy is increased" --- Spider Robinson
"Whenever some act of wondrous power must be performed, Michael is
sent" --- Pope Saint Gregory the Great




On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Adam Martin-Schwarze
<smegdwarf(at)yahoo.com ([email]smegdwarf(at)yahoo.com[/email])> wrote:
[quote:44c1ac6e9d]Alex,

[quote:44c1ac6e9d]All misorders and NMRs were
already double checked, so don't bother arguing.

This almost sounds like a challenge, doesn't it?  I pick up thy gauntlet, oh noble knight.  I apologize if the following is an example of using a cannon to kill a rabbit.

F Punic Sea to Thaesus (No such province)
A Massilia, NMR
F Sparta, NMR
F Athens to Messenian Sea (*Fails*  No unit in
Athens, provinces not connected anyway)

The House Rules are interesting on these misorders.  Clearly, the overriding rule is:

"The GM holds the final say on any in-game dispute."

So, in the end, what you say decides the issue.

I understand the NMR for F Sparta.  I do know GMs who would 'correct' the order, but Sparta is clearly not Athens, and the NMR makes sense to me.

But I confess to scratching my head at F Punic to Thaesus.  True, there is no Thaesus.  But there is a Thapsus, which differs by only one letter from Thaesus.  And Thapsus is right next door to Punic Sea (so, it makes contextual sense).  Furthermore, there is no other province even remotely similar in name to Thaesus.  The *only* (and I use this word full-knowing how categorical it is) logical in-board interpretation of Thaesus is that it should be Thapsus.  If you can show me a plausible ambiguity in interpretation, I will withdraw my challenge.

There are two House Rules sort of pertaining to this misorder, but neither takes it head on.  First:

"In the case of an ambiguous order, the GM may void the move and have the unit stand."

Admittedly, this rule is located amidst a discussion of province abbreviations, but (a) most every set of House Rules has such a blanket provision, and (b) it makes sense that ambiguity should be treated the same whether a player types out full names or whether they use abbreviations.  According to this rule, if a typo causes ambiguity, then the GM may void the order.  But, as argued above, 'Thaesus' did not create ambiguity.

The second House Rule is:

"If there is a typo that leads to an incorrect order, it will be read as-is."

I am assuming that this is the House Rule being used in your interpretation.  Perhaps the rule requires further explication, because the example used in the House Rules is "Ven to Rum" in the place of "Ven to Rom".  So, the context of the rule implies that it applies in instances when the typo significantly change the meaning of the order.  It does not necessarily imply that spelling will be grounds for nullification.

And that is why I am confused by the no-such-province adjudication of:

F Punic Sea to Thaesus

Are you really requiring that we submit our orders with perfect spelling?!?  (Because that's what this boils down to).  I mean to say... Chersonesus is a bugger to spell.  Does it really matter whether I type Chersonesus, Chersenesus, Chersonnesus, etc...?  The intent is crystal clear.  If I want to get really pedantic, I would ask how 'Thaesus' is any less correct than orders I have previously submitted such as 'F Alexandria - Libyan' (there is a Libyan Sea, but not a Libyan).

So, to summarize my point:

When there is no ambiguity in province designation, do you really want spelling to override player intent?

[Yes, I understand that this very possibly could be an 'intentional misorder' on Rome's part, but do you really want to create this precedent in order to enable a misorder?]

Thank you for considering my argument,
 Adam





[/quote:44c1ac6e9d]

[/quote:44c1ac6e9d]


--
"It's like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger they were. and sometimes you didn't want to know the end because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it's only a passing thing. The shadow, even the darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer. Those were the stories that stayed with you - That meant something. Even if you were too small to understand why. But I think, Mr. Frodo, I do understand. I know now. Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back only they didn't. They kept going because they were holding onto something."
"What are we holding onto, Sam?"
"That there's some good in this world, Mr. Frodo. And it's worth fighting for."