An apology would be a simple solution only if it is indisputably clear where the fault lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Band of Horses
As I have said before, we will be happy to write up an apology if RoO is willing to do the same.
Printable View
An apology would be a simple solution only if it is indisputably clear where the fault lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Band of Horses
As I have said before, we will be happy to write up an apology if RoO is willing to do the same.
ROFL! You think it is ambiguous who started this?
LOL!
Your province hits me. I wrote a meanie pants message. She boo hoo hoo "but I am pregnant" boo hoo's. Abi 3x razes me. I retal in the only way open to me. You RK me. I retalliate again. You lie low then Start Razing into us all the while taunting me that you are all buddies with Octo and Korp and can ensure they won't help me (aka, you lie your pants off so that you just vaporize them, no chance of them being on fire). Then you cry that *I* was bullying you!
LOL!! It is almost enough to make a youtube comedy vid out of it. ahahahahahahahahaha.
Jesus, if not for the fact that you type, I would wonder if there was anything north of your medulla oblongata. Check yourself for autonomic functions..... just be safe....
If you're sorry you don't need the other person to agree to apologize in order to say it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
When they first offered you the out via apology, there was nothing for them to apologize for. If they were to accept it now, they would need to apologize to the server for not disbanding you.
But I digress, an apology isn't an EXTREME DEMAND. Fact.
Some would say that the one who posed a probable threat is the one who initiated the aggression. In the court of law, a threat is considered assault, one in which is punishable by the law. I understand that this is an online community where different sets of rule apply but one fact remains clear, that you posed a threat to the well-being of our kingdom and gave us a reason to act upon it. This is Utopia Diplomacy 101 - Don't give a kingdom with the upperhand a reason to justify their aggression on you. Had you simply retaliated the hit, we may have moved on. Had you simply sent a message reprimanding the act (as a veteran to a noob) in good faith, we may have taken it lightly. But when you blackmail us into forcing a CF with a threat to raze into our future wars, you are at the mercy of the kingdom.
Might almost be convincing if you hadn't attacked us into our hostile before we uttered any threat of reprisal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
Don't **** play if you can't take the heat that comes with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
I sincerely hope you don't believe you've got the upper hand on us here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
You hit Sheister first, and then over-retal'd him. Which is fine. You just hit the wrong person. He hasn't got any obligation to baby and coddle you. TBH I don't care about any of the events prior to his arrival in our kingdom. But you really should have caught on after war #2 that Sheister was not a person you could deal with (as in, a kingdom as **** at Utopia & diplomacy as yours is).Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
It's been over a month and I'm still waiting to hear what the **** you idiots thought you might accomplish by razing him again when he'd joined us.
Just don't tag until late age... trollolol or don't tag at all
what is this madness?
Actually no Legaba, assualt is variously defined depending on jurisdiction, but I will avoid your tangent which is as off-point as it is inaccurate.
To argue that I posed a threat belies the statement of your own monarch who told me that I posed no threat at all to your kingdom and needed to be silenced to learn my place. Your monarch did not view me as a threat at all. Nice try though.
Check with your leadership. We took action on your kd only after your monarch/steward came forward with the same threat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillz
There was no **** play nor there was any heat.Quote:
Don't **** play if you can't take the heat that comes with it.
The "upper-hand" was with regards to sheister's old kd vs ours. But it makes no difference as to whom we are referencing.Quote:
I sincerely hope you don't believe you've got the upper hand on us here.
we "over-retal'ed" him once he razed into our wars 10x times on our first war. If that's his way of retaliation, fine. But don't think we'll eat all that up.Quote:
You hit Sheister first, and then over-retal'd him. Which is fine. You just hit the wrong person. He hasn't got any obligation to baby and coddle you. TBH I don't care about any of the events prior to his arrival in our kingdom. But you really should have caught on after war #2 that Sheister was not a person you could deal with (as in, a kingdom as **** at Utopia & diplomacy as yours is).
It's been over a month and I'm still waiting to hear what the **** you idiots thought you might accomplish by razing him again when he'd joined us.
My definition is based on Common Law, which is the basis of the law for every English speaking country in the world. The treatment of the legal consequence may vary but there is a consensus with regards to its definition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Need source on this.Quote:
To argue that I posed a threat belies the statement of your own monarch who told me that I posed no threat at all to your kingdom and needed to be silenced to learn my place. Your monarch did not view me as a threat at all. Nice try though.
1) you hit our kd before we made any promise or threat to raze into your wars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
2) hitting a kd less than half your size into an active hostile is certainly qualifiable as **** play
3) vs. Sheister previously you were not fighting his kingdom. He still owned you. Now you're fighting us. We've already razed into one of your wars despite literally weeks of effort on your part.
You've never had the upper hand since this began with sheister and you don't have it now.
4)You hit him disproportionately before he uttered any threats iirc.
You all suffer from a seriously flawed collective memory, even when events have been laid out chronologically more then once. And you are all serial liars.
Friendly reminder not to insult users
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillz
1) Nope
2) cry me a river.
3) lol
4) it's called punitive damages.
1) sheister was in our kingdom. You hit him. You hit our kingdom. Utopia is not an individually based game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
2) who is crying? It's **** play. Accept it.
3) if laughter helps you cope with your impending demise, so be it.
4) that's the term I'll use when describing the disbanding of DD. We will raze us our summary worth, and your kd disbanding will be punitive damages.
ROFL
Legba, common law is not law except in the absence of statute and only by adoption of the courts of the jurisdiction in which the case is pled. Please, hush before you look even more foolish.
1) That's right. Utopia is not an individually based game. So when sheister did us wrong, your entire kingdom did us wrong whether or not you hit us, which is enough reason to raze you. So why are you keeping bringing up your initial hostile with the Strippers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillz
2) Nope
3) Nope
4) OK
So tell me, which jurisdiction does not consider a threat as an assault?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
I have to assume you are intentionally being ignorant of literally everything in existence to make posts this stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
Sheister had not hit you from our kingdom. Sheister had not hit you for days. Once more, I ask you to explain what you hoped to accomplish by hitting him?
Other points are worthless at this rate you're obviously too far gone to ever have a correct thought in life.
Sheister y u check forum moar then IRC?
Legba,
About half the states in the US.
Pillz,
meh, starting up clients is more than I feel like doing.
^Sheister had not hit us for days because we had just come out of a war. But he hit into our first and second war. He never sent us any message that he'll stop doing what he's doing, so what makes you think that we'll suddenly drop all balls and think sheister had moved on? The fact that he stopped hitting us for days does not relieve him of the 50x something oow razes. So I'm not sure why you, him, or anyone in RoO is surprised by this. We made the proper assumption that Sheister will continue to raze into our wars. Whether or not that HE had moved on is completely irrelevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillz
We expect all players to have this thing called common sense and some level of judgment skills. It's not as simple as "Oh, XYZ kingdom is razing our prov 10x, so XYZ must want to stir up trouble with our entire kd", that thought is more fitting to someone with incapability for awareness, or someone who doesn't know how this game works. If you truly cannot distinguish between a kd-wide wave (which you seem to think this is) and single prov razes, then all these years of gaming have taught you very little. Thinking with common sense means when a prov defects over followed by 10+ razes on him, your first line of thinking should NOT be "oh, that kd wants to interfere with our hostile". If you still fail to see then I'm afraid that you are far behind the normal curve.Quote:
Sheister had not hit you from our kingdom.
Good, now I know that you don't know the first thing about the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
If you want to make legal metaphors here, you started with battery since you hit him first and unprovoked at that time. You would be labeled the instigator for the resulting actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
I hate when these topic go this route, silly rabbits.
It wasn't unprovoked. Sheister's threat in this case provided a probable cause for a provocation for apprehensive action towards our kd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Band of Horses
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
Is DD now denying they hit sheister first????
Roflmao
@ previous post, you hit us unprovoked. You thought we'd be OK with you razing one of ours, we were not. And sheister was under the (apparently misguided) assumption that he and DD had concluded hostilities. As has been explained by sheister in depth.
I mean, I'm actually impressed how far you've backtracked this discussion. You didn't hit us into hostile, didn't hit us unprovoked, Utopia is a province-centric game, you didn't **** play, AND you didn't even hit sheister first....
10/10 m8
Legba,
What can I say, clearly you are just a genius. You cite common law where a statute is proper. You then ignore that law varies among jurisdictions, then state that someone who does know these things does not know the law. Excellent. Clearly you are the man to employ....
"probably cause" for a private actor? Are you serious? lol....
I've figured it out. DD are masochistic - pride war against some of the most nefarious characters left in the game mixed with a pinch of lawyering against Sheister.
Much love for Abi though - you know it babe.
A conditional threat is not an assault. Common law is common only in Commonwealth countries. AFAIK, the United States does not apply common law in its courts, it is only persuasive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Legba
And why should I explain simply because you don't understand? I'm sure that the vast majority of others reading know what it means, therefore your ignorance is not cause for any concern and certainly no reason for me to waste time trying to educate you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
If it bothers you, go look it up. If not, STFU about it.
Have a nice day :)
Apparently misguided belief?? Ok, so if we decide to just walk away now and you don't hit us before EoA.. are we ok to assume it's "dealt with"? And then if you come and raze into a war next age, we can stamp our feet like little children and shout about how "it was all dealt with"??? No.. I didn't think that would be how it worked the other way round.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillz
Grow up Steel.. "One of ours".. like Sheister had been with you all age long or something.
Long and short of it is this.. you got into a fight with Strippers.. knew your only recourse was to raze into their wars, but you were only 4 people.. and you needed more.. so you invited Sheister along, either not realising, or not caring that he'd already been in an age long scrap with another larger kingdom. Then you act all butthurt because you're being hit by two larger kingdoms.
So please do explain again why Sheister misleading you was our fault?
And I love how you try to derail the discussion Steel.. let me recap for you
You didn't hit us into hostile - No, we hit Sheister while you were "hostile" with Strippers (a kingdom several magnitudes larger than yourselves)
You didn't hit us unprovoked - No we didn't. The only hits against any of you other than Sheister were after your threats to raze into war for 2 ages (provocation in anyones book)
Utopia is a province centric game - No, however, Sheisters actions WERE province-centric. Almost every monarch of every kingdom he landed in wanted nothing to do with his games, so he ignored the kingdom aspect in order to play his own brand of FSU.
We didn't hit Sheister first - We have never once argued that the first hit wasn't Tigress on Sheister. Not once. We've admitted it several times, so why are you saying we've done otherwise?
Oh my! And I thought the point of writing was to communicate clearly. I guess not..... I will just assume you are spouting nonsense and have no point (since you never demonstrate any point.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Actually the point of writing is to communicate. The clarity of such communications are very much dependent on the intellect of the individual reader. As I say, the rest of the server understand what I was getting at. The fact that you don't, and the fact that you somehow apportion blame for that on others, only adds to our amusement :)
No dear, I don't they did. I have not seen anyone say they thought you were in the least clear. Most people seem to be saying you make no sense at all. Perhaps your sycophants agree with you, but no one else does.
Oh so because nobody says "Yes I knew what you meant" that means nobody does? People are too busy laughing at you to explain Sheister.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
I'm not here for people to agree with me, unlike some, this isn't some pathetic online popularity contest for us :)
No, you are assuming facts not in evidence is the point dear. You see, when you are having a discussion and trying to persuade people, you have something called the burden of persuasion and you need to explain your positions clearly and with support. When you fail to do that, then you are just a chattering magpie.
So dear, you can try again.
GGQuote:
Originally Posted by Kestrel038
I don't care whether it's a good game or not.
Bart,
You are so sassy-pants I just want to cast you in a Disney film.
<3
oh my.....
Nice!
Ahhh.. I see your error now. You assume I'm here trying to persuade people. I am not attempting to persuade anyone of anything. Therefore I need do nothing other than state the facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Label my posts as you will, it does not detract from the content in any way.
Oh and I should point out that not only is the word "are" in your first sentence completely redundant, it actually makes the sentence read incorrectly.
Don't do this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestrel038
nice false quote you made there, but I would be unlikely to leave such a blatant typo in one of my posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart of Sparta
I should also point out that I never made any case for people agreeing with me. I made a case for people understanding my original reference despite Sheisters ignorance.
Understanding <> Agreement
3 Day Ban (Rule Violation)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop
Do not argue with mod instructions.