If you're going to post here, please read the rest of the thread first. If you had done so, you would see that the arguments that "it was all IC" and "if he hadn't responded, then it would have been a violation" have both already been raised and soundly smacked down. The IR do not depend on the actions of anyone except the one violating (or not violating) them, and it does not matter whether it was an entirely IC matter, the IR still apply.
Anaris, I red all posts and arguments I gave are nor already rised, so also not smacked down... read again if you have to, but I will also closely explain.
Arguments that were rised and that are smacked down are including part of the rule that it is no matter is someone threatening or is realizing his threat connected with punishing for any kind of inactivity.
I pointed that duo to Allomere and Fal'Cie were already exchanged several letters that day, Allomere had good reason to asume that Fal'Cie is ON-LINE (or will be on-line to see his orders).
1st case - to simply order someone to be in another region by tomorrow threatening with punishment for disobey to move (that is violation of the rule)
2nd case (our case) - to order someone,
to whom you are just talking with and who is responding to you and who already implicated that he will disobey the order, to move and to be in another region by tomorrow stating that there will be punishment for disobey (that is surely not violation of the rule, but to report it
IS attempt of "gaming the system" to avoid ingame consequences for disobeying direct order from superiors).
See the difference???
