This is ludacris. There is no arguing about a fact. Does the rule say that a strategic secession is based off intent? Yes, thus it is. Thats a fact, not an opinion or an argument. You can't just exclude parts of a rule because you feel like it. "Well the rule stated you can not do x, but I excluded the not part because I don't like that so now I can do x" is obviously illogical and what is being stated in a different by seemingly all those who wish for the secession to be punished in some way or another already. As well, last I checked its innocent until proven guilty so Riombara does not need to prove its innocence, those who are prosecuting Riombara/the specific player need to prove guilt. (The magistrates should be somewhat prosecutors though as they are more or less the detectives as well since regulars players are the equal of citizens, not having the power to investigate.)
Penchant that is MY reading of the rules as well. I was answering in regards to using the football analogy that boiled down to, well in football the handball rule does not take into account intent, thus NO rules in things completely unrelated to football must take intent into account. If intent wasn't important in the world, we wouldn't have man slaughter everything would be judges as murder, nor would we need to prove pre meditation. Obviously there are rules were we are meant to judge intent, I believe the wording of this rule implies this is one of them. I'm willing to be wrong, though I have spoken English my entire life it is not my first language nor the language I predominately think in.
