Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in a language that all opponents understand. Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating attacks.
Night Strike wrote:Actually DM, you're wrong. Rule #2 states:Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in a language that all opponents understand. Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating attacks.
This means that even discussing your moves via PM breaks the rule.
nick11, since Aesop never actually entered the alliance, HE was the one in the right, not you. You brought forward the obvious intent to break the rules, and Aesop was 100% correct in both of his actions: to deny you and to post here.
Night Strike wrote:Blake, why do you blame Twill for everything?? This is lack's site after all. Besides, I want to say it was actually Andy who proposed that wording change. All the admins work together on things, so it's not like Twill is a maverick out to bend everything to his way.
nick11 wrote:actually not for me. A secret collusion was never made. Yes I made the offer but someone is not guilty of a crime until the law is broken. What pisses me off is that someone like Aseop runs to the forum to yell that I'm a cheater when the truth is that I've never cheated in this game, never! If me and another player had made a secret agreement against him or another player and he posted it then that would be different. But he runs to the forum 2 seconds after I made the request in a PM really irritates the piss out of me. I seriously think he thinks it makes him look like some hero. I don't appreciate the fact that he ran to post what he did only to damage my character without any rule actually being broken.
The only thing i can do is add him to my foe list.
Nick
Night Strike wrote:Actually DM, you're wrong... tedious rule-loving droning etc
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
lancehoch wrote:I have no say in the matter. However, the first time an action like this is reported it usually gets noted to give the accused the benefit of the doubt.
nick11 wrote: If me and a buddy talk about robbing a bank, does that make us guilty of committing a bank robbery?
I wasn't aiming for humour there, more for appropriateness of message and rebuke. As such your criticism is somewhat off point.SlayerQC wrote:And, DM: if you think that pic is humorous, well, you are right, it was 5 years ago...
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
Dancing Mustard wrote:Night Strike wrote:Actually DM, you're wrong... tedious rule-loving droning etc
And you appear to have absolutely no sense of humour.
Remember kids:
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
Dancing Mustard wrote:Man, did Aesop drop the ball here or what?
Clearly the best thing to do in this situation was to reply to Nick's PM with a "Yeah, let's bust this punkass together man". Then in gamechat say "Hey Nick, let's cut each other some slack here, you dig me?", to which Nick would reply "Yeah dog, I feel that". Then you could have secretly shared positions all you liked, because you'd have announced an alliance of sorts in the gamechat and your collusion would no longer have been 'secret'. You could then have used your combined knowledge to crush the puny hu-man who was winning and have bigstyle points fo' real.
Don't screw it up next time, m'kay?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users