Jump to content

AYY LMAO DOW


Smokey1
 Share

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Changeup said:

CoA sure is defensive about an ex-member who was involved in a major cheating scandal. :v

No, they are defensive of a valuable player who was already exposed and "punished" by Alex.
CoA has the right to defend their members from other players. Not from Alex. So, if you want EM punished more, tell Alex and leave CoA alone.
That's my two cents.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

signature_1609462526.png.014e1286830a99c3d7652fe75198c389.png
To whom it may concern, I do not represent The Immortals unless explicitly stated (ergo, never.)
<--- I hardly use the forums anymore, add me on discord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Corpsman said:

No, they are defensive of a valuable player who was already exposed and "punished" by Alex.
CoA has the right to defend their members from other players. Not from Alex. So, if you want EM punished more, tell Alex and leave CoA alone.
That's my two cents.

 

2 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

They are protecting a member, now former member, if you come after one of my members I would publicly back them up too.  (in private is a different story, but you back them up in public, atleast while they are still a member)

Thank you

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

"Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Corpsman said:

No, they are defensive of a valuable player who was already exposed and "punished" by Alex.
CoA has the right to defend their members from other players. Not from Alex. So, if you want EM punished more, tell Alex and leave CoA alone.
That's my two cents.

Nobody, as far as I can tell, has suggested they do not have the right to defend whomever they please. We have suggested that perhaps individuals caught breaking game rules, who escape with laughably little punishment, ought not be defended by alliances of good standing. A radical concept, I know. 

Besides, the whole muh sovereignty thing runs both ways. Just as they have the right to defend EM, we have the right to be critical of it and form our opinion of them based on it. And those in range of EM have the same right, as sovereign nations, to attack him. 

Edited by Mikey
  • Upvote 2

Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mikey said:

Nobody, as far as I can tell, has suggested they do not have the right to defend whomever they please. We have suggested that they ought not to, and that individuals caught breaking game rules should perhaps not be kept as members by alliances of good standing. A radical concept, I know. 

Besides, the whole muh sovereignty thing runs both ways. Just as they have the right to defend EM, we have the right to be critical of it and form our opinion of them based on it. And those in range of EM have the same right, as sovereign nations, to attack him. 

Yes you can have an opinion. Attacking the alliance is still attacking an alliance, and CoA should consider it a Declaration of War. And if that's so, then go right ahead.

And EM was already tried. Alex decided not to punish him. It is not the player base's right to dictate how the rules are enforced.

signature_1609462526.png.014e1286830a99c3d7652fe75198c389.png
To whom it may concern, I do not represent The Immortals unless explicitly stated (ergo, never.)
<--- I hardly use the forums anymore, add me on discord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Corpsman said:

Yes you can have an opinion. Attacking the alliance is still attacking an alliance, and CoA should consider it a Declaration of War. And if that's so, then go right ahead.

And EM was already tried. Alex decided not to punish him. It is not the player base's right to dictate how the rules are enforced.

I just want to know what the conversation between Kim and TEst leadership was when they came up with this marvellous plan...unless of course it was TEst leadership who proposed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Corpsman said:

And EM was already tried. Alex decided not to punish him. It is not the player base's right to dictate how the rules are enforced.

True, we cannot dictate how Alex enforces his game rules. Though we might suggest that he start actually doing so if he cares about the health of the game.  

What is our right, however, is to enforce the norms of the community. The player base can take action for whatever reason it wants, including punishing individuals they feel have wronged the game - or defending them. 

My point is that talk of rights is largely pointless. As long as it is within the game rules, anybody has the right to do anything they want to anybody else - in-game, anyway. Most of the talk, outside the mod thread, has been political in nature - what other players should do, and how everyone else should react to their lack of doing it. 

Edited by Mikey

Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Mikey said:

We cannot dictate how Alex enforces his game rules, though we can certainly suggest that be might want to start actually doing so if he cares about his game. 

What is our right, however, is to enforce the norms of the community. The player base can take action for whatever reason it wants, including punishing individuals they feel have wronged the game, or defending them. 

My point is that talk of rights is largely pointless. As long as it is within the game rules, anybody has the right to do anything they want to anybody else - in-game, anyway. Most of the talk, outside the mod thread, has been about what other players should do, and how everyone else should react to their lack of doing it. 

Okay, but then you must expect CoA to fight back. Along with all their allies.

signature_1609462526.png.014e1286830a99c3d7652fe75198c389.png
To whom it may concern, I do not represent The Immortals unless explicitly stated (ergo, never.)
<--- I hardly use the forums anymore, add me on discord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, namukara said:

So...EM was being a middle man for some ingame cash for rl cash thing, in which, if anything, he was providing the ingame cash.

Unless perhaps you don't think that money should exist, I'm struggling to understand where your anger towards him rather than Nokia or George comes from, because he didn't profit from the transaction ingame. What unfair benefit are you arguing he received?

NR and george both got their nations reset or did it them self. 
"The punishment for real-world transactions for in-game materials will be a complete nation reset upon first offense, and a permanent ban from Politics & War upon a second offense."

2 hours ago, namukara said:

Could you please show me the proof you obviously have that EM gained an ingame benefit from this? If you can, I'll gladly stop arguing what I'm arguing, I'm not too proud to admit I'm wrong if I am. Right now though, I'm seing a dogpile and I'm not a fan of those.

You don't need to have a ingame or irl gain to be guilty, you just need to part-take/be a middle-man/know about it without reporting it to Admin.
 

As it says on the rules page before the rules: The rules for game-play are relatively simple and easy to follow. Be smart, use common sense, and you won't have any issues.
Taking part knowingly in illicit activities withour reporting it is against the rules, so is knowing that someone is cheating and not reporting it.(common sense)

Edited by MonkeyDLegend
  • Upvote 4
32204241a4480364cfebb04c10bf72cfaeb4dce2x696.gif
Former Manager t$ and Director of R&D
Former Director of Finance, Security in e$
Founder of The Prate Syndicate(test server)
luffyt$forum.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, namukara said:

Could you please show me the proof you obviously have that EM gained an ingame benefit from this? If you can, I'll gladly stop arguing what I'm arguing, I'm not too proud to admit I'm wrong if I am. Right now though, I'm seing a dogpile and I'm not a fan of those.

Is this the hill you wish to die on? EM wasn’t just a middle man who pocketed some of the IRL money, he had full intentions of profiting from NR’s and Gorge’s rulebreaking. 
 

6ACrVqj.png

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MonkeyDLegend said:

NR and george both got their nations reset or did it them self. 
"The punishment for real-world transactions for in-game materials will be a complete nation reset upon first offense, and a permanent ban from Politics & War upon a second offense."

You don't need to have a ingame or irl gain to be guilty, you just need to part-take/be a middle-man/know about it without reporting it to Admin.
 

As it says on the rules page before the rules: The rules for game-play are relatively simple and easy to follow. Be smart, use common sense, and you won't have any issues.
Taking part knowingly in illicit activities withour reporting it is against the rules, so is knowing that someone is cheating and not reporting it.(common sense)

So he didn't benefit from it, yet he should be attacked...because he didn't follow the exact letter of the law?

When do you plan on reforming goons?

18 minutes ago, Cypher said:

Is this the hill you wish to die on? EM wasn’t just a middle man who pocketed some of the IRL money, he had full intentions of profiting from NR’s and Gorge’s rulebreaking. 
 

6ACrVqj.png

He made some rl money, big deal. We're all broke rn, I'm sure the rl money served him well.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cypher said:

Is this the hill you wish to die on? EM wasn’t just a middle man who pocketed some of the IRL money, he had full intentions of profiting from NR’s and Gorge’s rulebreaking. 
 

6ACrVqj.png

I don't see your point here. 

signature_1609462526.png.014e1286830a99c3d7652fe75198c389.png
To whom it may concern, I do not represent The Immortals unless explicitly stated (ergo, never.)
<--- I hardly use the forums anymore, add me on discord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, namukara said:

So he didn't benefit from it, yet he should be attacked...because he didn't follow the exact letter of the law?

When do you plan on reforming goons?

He made some rl money, big deal. We're all broke rn, I'm sure the rl money served him well.

You're really bad at this.

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 4

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

You're really bad at this.

At speaking my mind? Every alliance I'm in thinks I'm way too good at it. Apparently it tends to put them in a bad light

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mikey said:

We have suggested that perhaps individuals caught breaking game rules, who escape with laughably little punishment, ought not be defended by alliances of good standing.

I eagerly anticipate your petition for Nokia to be expelled from CK to face their music.

Worst Poster Ever (2011)
zapdos.jpg.28ab9e9c974c8dc4fc52998d0e3adf14.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, namukara said:

Could you please show me the proof you obviously have that EM gained an ingame benefit from this? If you can, I'll gladly stop arguing what I'm arguing, I'm not too proud to admit I'm wrong if I am. Right now though, I'm seing a dogpile and I'm not a fan of those.

I wasn't accusing him of anything.  I was asking a question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2020 at 7:53 AM, namukara said:

Right now though, I'm seing a dogpile and I'm not a fan of those.

Pfffffffff no, what you're seeing is someone going rogue and getting justifiably countered.

There's no possible way for someone at 44 cities to be the victim of a 'dogpile' either, that just doesn't make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Avakael said:

If you actually knew how to fight a multi-round war, you'd know that missing out on 2 days of beige timer represents your doom when you leave safety, not a forum clap back.

 

Remove burrito.

I didn't think anybody was gonna tell him, kudos.

  • Upvote 1

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.