[WiZ] Please stop saying 'Small and Insignificant'

[WiZ]

Why did a head of state order a small and insignificant tree be planted in the small and insignificant yard of a small and insignificant man?

True story. Caveat earlispoilor.

[Earnest]

Can we assume modern tines? Religion relevant?

Relevant which state? Head of a state = HAF? HAM? Head of the state = prime minister? King/queen? Others? Pope? Relevant?
Did the gesture become memorable? A symbol of something? War times relevant? Was the tree planted for practical reasons? Political reasons? As a sign of piece (e.g. the house was a the borders)? Relevant which type of tree? Were in the yard was it put? In the middle? In one of the corners? Others? Did it happen in the desert?

Relevant who was the small and insignificant man? The head? Relevant their relationship? Was the man alive/present when the tree was planted? Did the tree represent a tomb? Had the tree a meaning for the nation? For the men? For someone? Had the yard other trees? Had it been a huge tree, would the puzzle still have worked? Did the tree sustain something (e.g. the roof of the house)? Hide something? Is it the first time a tree is planted in a yard for order of the head of the state?

Was the teee planted for the first time? Relevant the man's job? Christmas tree relevant? Was the tree a tree that could give fruit? Relevant? Is agriculture relevant? Type of ground in which it was planted? Oasis? Was it a metropolis and a certain amount of green must be present?

Could the tree have been planted somewhere else equivalently? Did the man exploit the tree somehow? Shadow relevant? Does the presence of the tree indicate something relevant? Was the tree a trace? Was the tree planted in the yard of a citizen of the state of which the politician is the head? If so, colonialism relevant? African countries/India/Australia? Depuration of a river? Did they want to see if the tree was able to grow?

[GalFisk]

Would any of the mentioned small and insignificant thing eventually become large? Significant? Was this the only tree planting he ordered? Relevant who performed it? Did he do it for a good reason? Bad reason? Evil? Stupid? Was it a mistake? Based on a mistake?

[WiZ]

Can we assume modern tines? no Religion relevant? no

Relevant which state? yes Head of a state = HAF? HAM? this Head of the state = prime minister? King thisish; no to rest/queen? Others? Pope? Relevant? Perhaps if you wanted to guess who they were, but their specific title isn't relevant
Did the gesture become memorable? not particularly A symbol of something? yope - it wasn't strictly symbolic War times relevant? yes Was the tree planted for practical reasons? no Political reasons? yesish As a sign of piece (e.g. the house was a the borders)? no Relevant which type of tree? the type of tree was chosen carefully, but the specific tree is irrelevant to the solution Were in the yard was it put? as above In the middle? In one of the corners? Others? specifics here are irrelevant Did it happen in the desert? yes (but irrelevant)

Relevant who was the small and insignificant man? no, hence his insignificance The head? yes if you wanted to play this as a history quiz, otherwise no Relevant their relationship? no Was the man alive/present when the tree was planted? yes Did the tree represent a tomb? no Had the tree a meaning for the nation? no For the men? yes, but a different meaning for both For someone? yes (see above) Had the yard other trees? yes, but irrelevant Had it been a huge tree, would the puzzle still have worked? yes, although the scenario would be much less likely to arise Did the tree sustain something (e.g. the roof of the house)? no(t relevantly) Hide something? no Is it the first time a tree is planted in a yard for order of the head of the state? no

Was the teee planted for the first time? this one was, yes Relevant the man's job? no Christmas tree relevant? no Was the tree a tree that could give fruit? irrelevant Relevant? Is agriculture relevant? no Type of ground in which it was planted? no Oasis? Was it a metropolis and a certain amount of green must be present? no

Could the tree have been planted somewhere else equivalently? not to the same effect Did the man exploit the tree somehow? no(t relevantly) Shadow relevant? no Does the presence of the tree indicate something relevant? yope Was the tree a trace? Please define 'trace' Was the tree planted in the yard of a citizen of the state of which the politician is the head? yes If so, colonialism relevant? no, but explore African countries/India/Australia? no to these Depuration of a river? no Did they want to see if the tree was able to grow? no

GalFisk

Would any of the mentioned small and insignificant thing eventually become large? Significant? no to both Was this the only tree planting he ordered? in the grander scheme of things, no Relevant who performed it? no Did he do it for a good reason? Bad reason? Evil? Stupid? yope to all Was it a mistake? arguably yes Based on a mistake? no

[GalFisk]

Was he tricked into doing it? Forced? Coerced? Bribed? Did he do it in order to trick someone? Coerce someone? Bribe someone?

[Earnest]

Relevant that the man was small and insignificant? That the tree was small and insignificant? Did the king wanted it? If so in order to save resources? In order to let the enemy understand that the ground was not fertile?

Was the tree relevantly taller than the man? Was the tree planted above something? In order to impede something from happening? To confuse enemies? To attract enemies? Did he plant several trees? If so, one next to the other? At a relevant distance one to the other?

To be sure: was a tree in fact planted in the yard of the man? Was the yard then considered exclusive property of the man? (Or maybe the tree allowed the king to exploit the yard somehow?) Did it happen within the borders of the king's kindom? In a country that is separate from the main "body" of the kindom? (E.g. a colony)

Did the head intend to burn the tree? To make it grow? To use it for executions? To reach a certain number of planted trees? To say that he was not just king of the sand? Did he expect the tree to grow? If not, relevantly not? Did he expect the man to take care of the tree? Techniques to plant trees relevant? Was it a way to give food to the citizens (e.g. fruit of the tree)?
If war times relevant, did the king expect the yard to be conquered by the enemy soon? Or maybe he conquered it recently?

To be sure again: he planted the tree using seeds right? Was the man aware that a tree had been planted? Did he expect something else to grow?

[WiZ]

GalFisk

Was he tricked into doing it? Forced? Coerced? Bribed? no to all Did he do it in order to trick someone? Coerce someone? Bribe someone? no to all

Earnest

Relevant that the man was small and insignificant? That the tree was small and insignificant? yes to both Did the king wanted it? yes If so in order to save resources? no In order to let the enemy understand that the ground was not fertile? no

Was the tree relevantly taller than the man? no Was the tree planted above something? irrelevant In order to impede something from happening? no To confuse enemies? no, but somewhat ORT To attract enemies? no Did he plant several trees? not relevantly If so, one next to the other? At a relevant distance one to the other? n/a to both

To be sure: was a tree in fact planted in the yard of the man? yes Was the yard then considered exclusive property of the man? yes, at least to the degree it was before the tree was planted (Or maybe the tree allowed the king to exploit the yard somehow?) although yesish to this too Did it happen within the borders of the king's kindom? yes In a country that is separate from the main "body" of the kindom? (E.g. a colony) no

Did the head intend to burn the tree? no To make it grow? yes To use it for executions? no To reach a certain number of planted trees? no, in the sense of meeting some sort of official quota To say that he was not just king of the sand? no Did he expect the tree to grow? yes If not, relevantly not? n/a Did he expect the man to take care of the tree? yes Techniques to plant trees relevant? no Was it a way to give food to the citizens (e.g. fruit of the tree)? not relevantly
If war times relevant, did the king expect the yard to be conquered by the enemy soon? no Or maybe he conquered it recently? yes, relatively

To be sure again: he planted the tree using seeds right? no, he would have planted a grown tree Was the man aware that a tree had been planted? yes Did he expect something else to grow? no

[Earnest]

War times relevant --> was the man a soldier? Did he fight in the war (was a war in act? Or maybe the war was ended and peace was made? A war was about to start?) Had the insignificant man a relevant part in the war?, had his yard? Recruitment relevant? Was the head winning/won the war? Losing/lost? Is geography relevant? (E.g. he planted a lot of trees creating an alternative street that was not there before); taking care of subjects relevant? Was the head the most important and powerful man in the state? Was him subject relevantly to someone else? Does the insignificant man belong to a different culture than the man? Jesus relevant (e.g. the tree was an olive)?

Do enemies burn trees? Venerate trees? Have yards with trees? Does the king want to give a "message" to the people of the enemies? E.g. being the yard on the borders, the enemies could see what happens on the yard of the man. They also know that he was small and insignificant. So when they saw the deed of the king they were convinced that he was a good king.
Does the act classify the head as a good king? Relevant the king's reputation among subjects? Among enemies?

Do birds or other animals relevantly go under/on the tree? Does the king want the man to be occupied in making the tree grown? Would the king have gone and visit the man again? If so in order to see how the tree has grown? Relevant that the man was small because the tree would have been proportionated to him? Insignificant = not important? He did not have done something relevant in his life? He was alike many other people in the kindom? He was a normal person?other? Insignificant with respect to something relevant? (E.g. w.r.t the war?) There was no relevant reason why the tree was planted in his yard rather than other yards?

Was the tree imported from another country? (e.g. of a species belonging to another country so that enemies thought that the king had a foreign ally?)

[Earnest]

Had the man a relevant occupation without the tree? Would the man have been noticed? Did the king want to attract the attention on the uard of the man? On the man? Did he want to distract enemies? Relevant where the man took the water to make the tree grow? (E.g. it was a way to take resources from the enemy)

[WiZ]

Earnest

War times relevant --> was the man a soldier? no Did he fight in the war irrel (was a war in act? Or maybe the war was ended this and peace was made? debatable; it is likely there was, at the very least, a ceasefire A war was about to start? no) Had the insignificant man a relevant part in the war?, had his yard? no, although both were affected by the war Recruitment relevant? no Was the head winning/won the war? yes, he had won Losing/lost? no Is geography relevant? (E.g. he planted a lot of trees creating an alternative street that was not there before); no, to go by your example taking care of subjects relevant? yope Was the head the most important and powerful man in the state? yes Was him subject relevantly to someone else? no Does the insignificant man belong to a different culture than the man? yes! Jesus relevant (e.g. the tree was an olive)? not to this puzzle; as to his general relevance, that's a discussion for another forum!

Do enemies burn trees? Venerate trees? not relevantly to both Have yards with trees? yes Does the king want to give a "message" to the people of the enemies? yes E.g. being the yard on the borders, the enemies could see what happens on the yard of the man. They also know that he was small and insignificant. So when they saw the deed of the king they were convinced that he was a good king. but not in this vein
Does the act classify the head as a good king? as in kind/compassionate? no Relevant the king's reputation among subjects? not really Among enemies? yes, more importantly

Do birds or other animals relevantly go under/on the tree? no Does the king want the man to be occupied in making the tree grown? no Would the king have gone and visit the man again? most probably not If so in order to see how the tree has grown? n/a (although, if he did visit the man again, this is what he'd be asking about) Relevant that the man was small because the tree would have been proportionated to him? no Insignificant = not important? correct He did not have done something relevant in his life? also correct He was alike many other people in the kindom? also correct He was a normal person? also correct other? no, you've covered it very well Insignificant with respect to something relevant? no (E.g. w.r.t the war?) There was no relevant reason why the tree was planted in his yard rather than other yards? Incorrect; this was a reasoned decision on behalf of the king-ish

Was the tree imported from another country? Not necessarily, but this could be a relevant factor (e.g. of a species belonging to another country so that enemies thought that the king had a foreign ally?) this thinking is somewhat ORT

[Earnest]

Do enemies have a tree in yard because: they love swings? They believed in reincarnation? They recognize their cultural belonging through the tree? They venerate nature? They recover resources from that tree? It was a symbol of prestige among them (in desert who had the highest tree, maybe was considered more powerful having access to more water resources...I mean the tree grew bigger thanks to the water supply of the owner which were higher the taller the tree...hope to have been clear xD)

Does the king want to signal to the new subjects that he cares about their traditions? That he noticed how their houses were made and wanted to reconstruct them?
Did he plant a tree belonging to the enemy side? Belonging to the flag of the enemy side?

King's reputation among enemies = a bad reputation? Of a conquerer? Of a distructor? Of a dictator? A good reputation? Reputation of a person that, when conquering a country, does not even allow grass to grow...hence, by planting a tree he simply counterproved this absurd fear?

[WiZ]

Do enemies have a tree in yard because: they love swings? They believed in reincarnation? They recognize their cultural belonging through the tree? They venerate nature? They recover resources from that tree? It was a symbol of prestige among them (in desert who had the highest tree, maybe was considered more powerful having access to more water resources...I mean the tree grew bigger thanks to the water supply of the owner which were higher the taller the tree...hope to have been clear xD) no or irrel to all

Does the king want to signal to the new subjects that he cares about their traditions? noish That he noticed how their houses were made and wanted to reconstruct them? yesish
Did he plant a tree belonging to the enemy side? yes Belonging to the flag of the enemy side? no

King's reputation among enemies = a bad reputation? yope Of a conquerer? this most relevantly, no to rest Of a distructor? Of a dictator? A good reputation? yope Reputation of a person that, when conquering a country, does not even allow grass to grow...hence, by planting a tree he simply counterproved this absurd fear? no

[Earnest]

Respect of traditions relevant? Taking care of people? Sign of piece? Was the insignificant person supposed to be condamned/to be killed? Did he lost relatives due to war? Did he ask for a tree in the yard? Did he need one?

Did enemies expect the king to plant trees in the yard of the man? In the yards of the conquered people? Did this allow the war not to continue? The enemies to surrend voluntarily? Were the enemies subject to another king? A bad one? A conqueror as well? A king that escaped leaving them in the hands of the other king? A king that instead tortured the enemies conquered?

Are profecies relevant? Is planting a tree mainly a sign of power under the enemies'eyes? A sign of benevolence? A sign of peace? Was the house of the man destryed by the war? Is house reconstruction relevant ? (E.g. first thing to build is the yard) is tree a main part of the house?

Do people belonging to the king's nation (not the enemies) have tree in the yard? The same tree planted to the enemy yard? If so, was it a sign of parity among old subjects and enemies

[WiZ]

Respect of traditions relevant? yesish Taking care of people? yope to yesish Sign of piece? not really Was the insignificant person supposed to be condamned/to be killed? no Did he lost relatives due to war? irrel Did he ask for a tree in the yard? yes Did he need one? no

Did enemies expect the king to plant trees in the yard of the man? no In the yards of the conquered people? no Did this allow the war not to continue? no The enemies to surrend voluntarily? no Were the enemies subject to another king? at the time of the war? yes, but irrel A bad one? A conqueror as well? A king that escaped leaving them in the hands of the other king? A king that instead tortured the enemies conquered? none of this is relevant

Are profecies relevant? no Is planting a tree mainly a sign of power under the enemies'eyes? A sign of benevolence? A sign of peace? no to all Was the house of the man destryed by the war? not necessarily, but explore Is house reconstruction relevant ? yesish! (E.g. first thing to build is the yard) no to the example is tree a main part of the house? The small and insignificant man considered it an important part of his estate

Do people belonging to the king's nation (not the enemies) have tree in the yard? The same tree planted to the enemy yard? irrelevant to both If so, was it a sign of parity among old subjects and enemies no

[Earnest]

Was the tree considered an important part of the house by all the enemies? Also by the subjects of the king? Do also the subjects of the king need their house to be reconstructed? Did they have the priority over the enemies'houses? If not, relevant? Was the fa.ily of the man been killed? Was him relevantly alone?
Did the man live in a tend (lying on one or more than one trees)? Had the yard this only tree? Also others but maybe this one was the central one?

Did the man have a tree before the war? Is any hierarchical connection with the tree? (E.g. only people having power could have a tree in the yard. The wise king, knowing that the small and insignificant man was loyal to him and ignorant, designated him a chief of the enemy side in order to better control them) Are weapons relevant at all? Do other people relevantly see the tree? Relevantly came to the house of the small and insignificant man?

Important part because: it was part of the house's structure? Just a matter of culture (e.g. good omen if it grows well) ? Was it the center of the house (the house was build around the tree)? Gave him the right/possibility to do something relevant? Gave him some sort of protection?
Is the tree considered an important part of the house once grown? Even if small and insignificant?wood for the fire in winter relevant? Climbing the tree?

[WiZ]

Was the tree considered an important part of the house by all the enemies? no, most of them would not know about it Also by the subjects of the king? as above Do also the subjects of the king need their house to be reconstructed? no Did they have the priority over the enemies'houses? in this context, no If not, relevant? very Was the fa.ily of the man been killed? irrel Was him relevantly alone? no
Did the man live in a tend (lying on one or more than one trees)? no Had the yard this only tree? no Also others but maybe this one was the central one? yesish - the tree was conspicuous enough for the insignificant man to notice it

Did the man have a tree before the war? yes Is any hierarchical connection with the tree? (E.g. only people having power could have a tree in the yard. The wise king, knowing that the small and insignificant man was loyal to him and ignorant, designated him a chief of the enemy side in order to better control them) no Are weapons relevant at all? no Do other people relevantly see the tree? no - it could be that the tree was important to the insignificant man alone Relevantly came to the house of the small and insignificant man? no

Important part because: it was part of the house's structure? Just a matter of culture (e.g. good omen if it grows well) ? no to both Was it the center of the house (the house was build around the tree)? no Gave him the right/possibility to do something relevant? Gave him some sort of protection? no
Is the tree considered an important part of the house once grown? to the S.I.M. it would be, yes. Even if small and insignificant?wood for the fire in winter relevant? Climbing the tree? no to these

[Earnest]

Is the man blind? Does the tree constitute a sort of orientation point for the man? A foothold?
Relevant the man's profession? His devotion to nature? Does he climb the tree? Put something on it? Use it somehow?does someone else?

[invisiblemimsy]

Is there relevance to a battle, or a famous proclamation, or a book? Had the man or his family? How old was the tree when this took place? Was the man's task to tend the land and make it survive? Did the tree actually survive?

[WiZ]

Earnest

Is the man blind? ⠝ ⠕ Does the tree constitute a sort of orientation point for the man? A foothold? no to both
Relevant the man's profession? no His devotion to nature? no, outside of this particular tree Does he climb the tree? Put something on it? Use it somehow? irrel to all does someone else? no

InvisibleMimsy

Is there relevance to a battle this happened in the aftermath of an historic battle, or a famous proclamation, or a book? no to these Had the man or his family? Had they what? How old was the tree when this took place? this is speculation, but I suspect it was adult Was the man's task to tend the land and make it survive? no Did the tree actually survive? irrel; assume yes

[trebor]

Just so I’m clear, the SIM asked for a tree to be planted in his yard? Did he ask for a specific type of tree? A specific tree? Perhaps one that had cultural or military importance to him? Did the king give him what he wanted?

Was the king’s act towards the man kind? Malevolent? Will the tree eventually damage the house?

[Earnest]

Tree decorations relevant? Is the tree planted with the will of the king more important than the tree he had before? Or do they have the same importance in the eyes of the S.I.M.? If they don't, is the second tree more important because it has been planted forunder king's request?

Does the tree define the borders of his house? Without the tree would the house result incomplete? Has the rest of the house been already reconstructed? If so by the king (the subjects of the king)? By the man alone? Did the tree support something? Is the tree carved? Used as a target? (E.g. a) messages received through arrows; b) the man was a soldier that wanted to shoot arrows) Used as a shelter by animals? By animals that he grew (e.g. birds...)? Was the tree used also by others? Gather around the tree relevant? Did he hang something on it? Tie something/someone?

[WiZ]

Trebor

Just so I’m clear, the SIM asked for a tree to be planted in his yard? yope Did he [yopishly] ask for a specific type of tree? A specific tree? yesish to both Perhaps one that had cultural or military importance to him? no Did the king give him what he wanted? yes

Was the king’s act towards the man kind? somewhat Malevolent? no Will the tree eventually damage the house? no

Earnest

Tree decorations relevant? no Is the tree planted with the will of the king more important than the tree he had before? no Or do they have the same importance in the eyes of the S.I.M.? yes If they don't, is the second tree more important because it has been planted forunder king's request? no

Does the tree define the borders of his house? no Without the tree would the house result incomplete? no - or perhaps incomplete only in the eyes of the SIM Has the rest of the house been already reconstructed? yes! If so by the king not personally, but... (the subjects of the king ...yes )? By the man alone? no Did the tree support something? not relevantly Is the tree carved? Used as a target? (E.g. a) messages received through arrows; b) the man was a soldier that wanted to shoot arrows) Used as a shelter by animals? By animals that he grew (e.g. birds...)? no/irrel to all Was the tree used also by others? no Gather around the tree relevant? no Did he hang something on it? Tie something/someone? no to both

[Earnest]

Was the rest of the house in wood? Reconstructed by cutting trees? House borders relevant? Privacy?
If not, is the tree just there because it resembled his old house? Was the reconstructed house identical to the previous one he had? Better? Can we assume he would not have groen any other tree/plant near the one planted? Was the house reconstructed in the exact same place of the old one? Was the tree planted with seeds of the old tree? Did the reconstruction include also the tree? (E.g. the king promised to reconstruct every single piece of the houses)
Had the tree not been planted, would a hole have remained in place of the old one? Had the old tree been uprooted? Cut? Bombarded? Relevant? Accidentally uprooted? Voluntarily cut by soldiers?

Did he ask the tree to be planted before the reconstruction of the house? After? Relevant? Were other houses relevantly reconstructed with his house? Did they have a tree in the yard? Did tree spot the houses of new subjects? The houses to be reconstructed?

[Earnest]

Was the rest of the house in wood? Reconstructed by cutting trees? House borders relevant? Privacy?
If not, is the tree just there because it resembled his old house? Was the reconstructed house identical to the previous one he had? Better? Can we assume he would not have groen any other tree/plant near the one planted? Was the house reconstructed in the exact same place of the old one? Was the tree planted with seeds of the old tree? Did the reconstruction include also the tree? (E.g. the king promised to reconstruct every single piece of the houses)
Had the tree not been planted, would a hole have remained in place of the old one? Had the old tree been uprooted? Cut? Bombarded? Relevant? Accidentally uprooted? Voluntarily cut by soldiers?

Did he ask the tree to be planted before the reconstruction of the house? After? Relevant? Were other houses relevantly reconstructed with his house? Did they have a tree in the yard? Did tree spot the houses of new subjects? The houses to be reconstructed?

[WiZ]

Was the rest of the house in wood? Reconstructed by cutting trees? irrel to both House borders relevant? Privacy? no to both
If not, is the tree just there because it resembled his old house? Yes, and the SIM missed it Was the reconstructed house identical to the previous one he had? yes, after the tree was planted Better? no Can we assume he would not have groen any other tree/plant near the one planted? no, he would have been free to do so Was the house reconstructed in the exact same place of the old one? no! Was the tree planted with seeds of the old tree? no Did the reconstruction include also the tree? at first, no, but... (E.g. the king promised to reconstruct every single piece of the houses) this is very much ORT
Had the tree not been planted, would a hole have remained in place of the old one? no Had the old tree been uprooted? Cut? Bombarded? irrel to all Relevant? no Accidentally uprooted? Voluntarily cut by soldiers? irrel to all

Did he ask the tree to be planted before the reconstruction of the house? no After? yes Relevant? yes Were other houses relevantly reconstructed with his house? yes Did they have a tree in the yard? irrel Did tree spot the houses of new subjects? The houses to be reconstructed? irrel to both

[Earnest]

Relevant the reason why the new house was build in a new place? The old place was completely destroyed? It remained under the enemy's power after peace treaties? (And maybe the king promised to those at the boundaries that could decide to choose one side or the other, to give them the exact same conditions of before the war)

Did the king want to demonstrate that he wanted people to live exactly as before? To cancel every single trace of the war? To live their lives with everything they got before? To fully tolerate everything they had before? That he admire/respect the new subjects? That he is ready to satisfy the requests of every new subject?
Did he reconstruct every single house for each subject expecting them to come and live there? Or he did it under request of the new subjects? Were they all convinced to go and live there? Have they got another choice?

[WiZ]

Relevant the reason why the new house was build in a new place? yes The old place was completely destroyed? assume yes It remained under the enemy's power after peace treaties? (And maybe the king promised to those at the boundaries that could decide to choose one side or the other, to give them the exact same conditions of before the war) no to this

Did the king want to demonstrate that he wanted people to live exactly as before? yesish To cancel every single trace of the war? no To live their lives with everything they got before? yesish To fully tolerate everything they had before? no That he admire/respect the new subjects? yope to yesish That he is ready to satisfy the requests of every new subject? no
Did he reconstruct every single house for each subject expecting them to come and live there? yes, more or less Or he did it under request of the new subjects? no Were they all convinced to go and live there? see next Have they got another choice? no

[Earnest]

Did the king feel responsible for the distruction of their houses? Did he intend civil people to be involved in the war? Did his soldiers relevantly rape/abuse civil people belonging to the enemy side? Did the king consider new subjects: slaves? Having equal rights of old subjects? Having less rights than old subjects but not slaves? Having more right than them? Relevant?

Did the king use some of the destryed material in order to reconstruct the new subjects' houses? Did he found a new city? Did he want that other populations join him? Did he want to rebuild exactly the enemies city? If so, to make other people believe that he did not touch civil people? That his subjects are a priority for him?
Was a hierarchical system in use for the subjects (e.g. the SIM was subject to a nobil man)? Did the king believe that had he given all what the new subjects request for the reconstruction, he would have saved a lot more in other terms (e.g. he would have avoided a civil war and have gained more labor force? He would have gained more in taxes?)?
Are taxes relevant? (E.g. exactly reproducing the old accomodations was very comfortable because a census and a tax system had been already designed) Is geographical position (the new subjects would have been the first one to be attacked? Maybe the king was afraid of a revenge)?

[trebor]

Is it relevant why the subject asked for the tree? Did it have sentimental value to him? Did he or his family use it for reaction? (Swinging, tree climbing, etc.?)

Had this subject always been a subject of this king, or of the kingdom he represented?

[WiZ]

Earnest

Did the king feel responsible for the distruction of their houses? He was responsible, but this didn't make him feel guilty or indebted Did he intend civil people to be involved in the war? please rephrase Did his soldiers relevantly rape/abuse civil people belonging to the enemy side? no Did the king consider new subjects: slaves? Having equal rights of old subjects? this, more or less. No to rest Having less rights than old subjects but not slaves? Having more right than them? Relevant? somewhat

Did the king use some of the destryed material in order to reconstruct the new subjects' houses? not relevantly Did he found a new city? Yes! Did he want that other populations join him? yes Did he want to rebuild exactly the enemies city? Yes!! If so, to make other people believe that he did not touch civil people? no That his subjects are a priority for him? not really
Was a hierarchical system in use for the subjects (e.g. the SIM was subject to a nobil man)? not relevantly Did the king believe that had he given all what the new subjects request for the reconstruction, he would have saved a lot more in other terms (e.g. he would have avoided a civil war and have gained more labor force? He would have gained more in taxes?)? no, these were not his concerns
Are taxes relevant? no (E.g. exactly reproducing the old accomodations was very comfortable because a census and a tax system had been already designed) Is geographical position (the new subjects would have been the first one to be attacked? no Maybe the king was afraid of a revenge)? no, he was fairly self-assured

Trebor

Is it relevant why the subject asked for the tree? yes Did it have sentimental value to him? yes; no further details are relevant Did he or his family use it for reaction? (Swinging, tree climbing, etc.?)

Had this subject always been a subject of this king, or of the kingdom he represented? no!

[WiZ]

***** HINT/RECAP *****

The S.I.M requested the tree, which he missed due to its having sentimental value for him.

The S.I.M was a recent subject of the king

The King-ish had founded a new city, with a view to a population joining his kindgom-ish. It was to be an exact replica of the enemy's city, the former city of the S.I.M.

The King's motivation to order the tree planted was mostly self-serving. Not altogether kind, but not malevolent either. The king was concerned about his reputation, to some end.

So, what was the motivation?

[trebor]

Would it be helpful to figure out what kingdom this was, and/or what war had taken place? Is it relevant whether the new city was in the same location as the old one?

Was the motivation that he thought that if new subjects were granted sentimental requests that they were more likely to show fealty to him?

[WiZ]

Would it be helpful to figure out what kingdom this was, and/or what war had taken place? no Is it relevant whether the new city was in the same location as the old one? It was in a new location, within the king-ish's own kindgom-ish

Was the motivation that he thought that if new subjects were granted sentimental requests that they were more likely to show fealty to him? no (although he would consider it a good side-effect)

[invisiblemimsy]

Rather than a king, was he something like a president, prime minister, company director, tribe leader etc? Relevant?

Had the 'king' decided to establish a city/cities as a series of things? As one might make a company into franchises of the same model?

[WiZ]

Rather than a king, was he something like a president, prime minister, company director, tribe leader etc? Relevant? 'King' is closer than all of the above. It is highly unlikely that any of the above except 'tribe leader' would do this, and unlikely that a tribe leader would have the resources to pull it off.

Had the 'king' decided to establish a city/cities as a series of things? As one might make a company into franchises of the same model? no

[trebor]

I can't find it now, but I thought we'd established that these were fictional people. Is this all from an existing work of fiction?

Did the man live in the tree that used to be there?

Was keeping the layout of the new city the same the main goal? Was keeping it the same relevant for mapping? Strategic reasons? Being able to keep tabs on things using information acquired about the city during the war?

[WiZ]

I can't find it now, but I thought we'd established that these were fictional people We haven't. This is a true story, as per the opening post

Did the man live in the tree that used to be there? no

Was keeping the layout of the new city the same the main goal? It went beyond just 'the layout' Was keeping it the same relevant for mapping? Strategic reasons? Being able to keep tabs on things using information acquired about the city during the war? no to all

[GalFisk]

Was a city destroyed? In war? Did the king want to remake it for the people who had been living there?

[WiZ]

Was a city destroyed? At least partly, yes In war? yes Did the king want to remake it for the people who had been living there? yes, although he wasn't driven entirely (or even largely) by altruism

[Balin]

Did the king want to establish some form of ownership in that land?

[WiZ]

Did the king want to establish some form of ownership in that land? Assuming you mean his enemy's land (and SIM's former land), no

[GalFisk]

Was he driven by pride? Greed? Narcissism? A threat? A promise? Shame? Money? Law? Did he destroy the city? Was it a particularly important city?

[WiZ]

Was he driven by pride? yes Greed? yesish Narcissism? yes A threat? no A promise? Yes, that he made Shame? Money? Law? no to these Did he destroy the city? he damaged it considerably , at least Was it a particularly important city? yes

***** SPOILER *****

When Khosrau I of the Sassanid Empire sacked Antioch, he built an exact, better version of the city just to show off to the conquered Byzantines. So great was his attention to detail, Khosrau asked a random citizen if he was happy to see his house again. The citizen answered Yes, but he would miss a tree he used to have in his courtyard. The tree was planted the very next day.

Congratulations, GalFisk, on the solution, and thank you everyone for playing!