Quote Originally Posted by Anri View Post
We will never know if CR had done it or not. If they had, chances had been very high it had backfired and they would have been on the receiving end of a GB. My point is that only AMA and maybe someone else justified that kind of behaviour before, while most think its wrong to play that way. No matter what i think about AMA i had temporary stod by thier side against CR if that had happend. A threat is nothing but a threat, a bluff is nothing but a bluff. Its up to the KD to call the bluff or negotiate out of it. AMA made this mess and they choose to dealbreak, nothing that happend before this can make up for it.
Exactly you are talking about risks, chances and probabilities. AMA choices, to me at least, were:

1) Wave CR early and take the chance that the rest of the T10 wouldn?t action them. And argue that they shouldn?t be auctioned because CRs indication that they would hit them on that date irrespective of anything else was in fact a dealbreak and left them with no choice.

2) Arrange early war with Pyro so as to be in a situation where CR could not notice them as per their terms. This involves taking the chance that CR will indeed not follow through on their claim to wave them no matter what. And further to that if CR do wave them take the chance that the rest of the server will action against a pumped CR that neither AMA or Pyro, who will have both been weakened by hostile and start of war, will be able to contribute as significantly to.

Given those choices I?d pick option 1 every time; particularly given the rather patchy history all of you guys have in terms of ****playing each other and enforcing stuff to best suit your own ends (as some of you, actually much to your credit, have admitted in this thread).

By the way this is not to suggest I?m pro-AMA, I generally think all of those in leadership roles of the T10 are a bunch of narcisstic hypocrites and equally deserving of reaping what they sow. It could have been any of you in this situation, AMA are just unlucky it is them (something the rest of you might bear in mind slightly more).

Resultantly I find much of ?moral grandstanding? that seems to run throughout thread, justifying one thing or another (and this GB particularly), rather perverse.

I do at least applaud the effort to build something better for the future; I just fear you have run out of faith within the community already. Therefore I don?t think they?ll bear with you whilst you?re attempting it. You?ll either get fed-up of trying to do it without appreciation or one of you will fall short of the standards and you?ll all be right back to square one.