When it comes to situations like this they should be clarified more in the rules in my opinion. You could make the argument that because you have to pass the gate owned by another player and it is connecting the entire compound via the fenced in area that makes it so they own the compound. Doom made that argument to me and it does have some logic to it which is why my opinion went from neutral during it to slightly leaning towards that side. But in the end, it is up to the lead team to discuss these types of things so it can be revised and clarified in the future to prevent these situations. If I was in this type of position I would just take the staff word is final and contact a higher up afterward to ask about it so it could be brought up in the future meeting.

When it comes to situations like this they should be clarified more in the rules in my opinion. You could make the argument that because you have to pass the gate owned by another player and it is connecting the entire compound via the fenced in area that makes it so they own the compound. Doom made that argument to me and it does have some logic to it which is why my opinion went from neutral during it to slightly leaning towards that side. But in the end, it is up to the lead team to discuss these types of things so it can be revised and clarified in the future to prevent these situations. If I was in this type of position I would just take the staff word is final and contact a higher up afterward to ask about it so it could be brought up in the future meeting.