Farewell

[DeletedUser]

I am leaving the forum. This whole we can interpret the rules however we see fit is stupid for me. I like clear cut rules, and not just "well I think that violates a rule so I am closing it".

How did that last thread violate any rules? I thought it was something clever I did when I was extremely bored. I stayed in character the whole time! I am sure I won't get an explanation, but rather this thread will be closed or deleted. No wonder the forum has died

Ohh and instead of closing my thread you should of spent time getting me the gold your staff promised and the title for the forum.

 

[DeletedUser]

I agree. I had a little chuckle at that. no need for someone who doesn't know the world to come in and do as they please.
It was P&P marked. It discriminated in game, not personal attack. and it did not violate any rules mentioned in the P&P section.

 

[DeletedUser14937]

Since I've just seen this know thought I would explain why Sapph locked the thread in more detail.

Well sling no further than Seriously Enlightened! We accept all players of all levels of skill! Don't want to play fair? NO PROBLEM! We have no ethics code! Just look at a few of our top five!



So you might say: "Hey Devils I am tired of playing with people who have honor and integrity! What should I do?NO PROBLEM! That's when I tell them to look no further than the greatest alliance on Epsilon based off of total points! You guessed it Seriously Enlightened!"

"no integrity" "honor" "we have no ethics code" and to top it all off you made sure you directly pointed fingers at "their top five"

Now unless I'm mistaken and have little understanding of English, this is all a nice big chunk of cheating references, then you capped it all off with the brilliant (and I really do mean brilliant) metaphor "Can't climb the BP charts without bending some slings". No you didn't "say" cheating but it was clearly implied in the entire post. PnP rules say you can happily make fun of others but it does not mean that you are exempt from the normal rules about the ban discussions and cheating accusations.

Now unless I'm severly mistaken you can happily explain what you meant to me and I will reopen the thread .

As for the gold and title, I'll will ask and re-ask about that again.

 

[DeletedUser]

for a start. "Can't climb the BP charts without bending some slings" my refer to internal troop killing. which, in the rules, is not cheating.

Looking at those mentioned names (Illuminatio, salikh) Yes, they are banned, but there was no ban discussion. That was stating fact, in a sarcastic way. which, in stating fact is absurd to say it is an accusation of Cheating when it is black and white truth.

 

[DeletedUser]

seems unfair to me

 

[DeletedUser6029]

I took it to mean that the two players named were jerks. Ran off at the mouth and showed nothing for it. I took it to mean that SE would invite just about anyone....and they would kill off others troops without hurting their own. I didn't see any obvious issues with cheating as there was no discussion of the acts but rather the kind of people they invite.

Even if they did cheat and get banned, it is a known fact...and the fact that both were in SE is common knowledge. To close a thread because SE is being ridiculed for the types of players they invite is stupid at best, and mod god lording at worst. The rules state we can't discuss bans, it doesn't say we can't laugh and poke the alliances who seem to have a pattern of inviting such players. Therefore the post was well within the "legal" definition of a PnP. We can infer anything....we can't come right out and say it. If your going to penalize a player for skirting some "presumed" rule.....well I can go search the forums for other examples.

oh but I guess this rule could fall under the mods can do whatever they want clause.....after all.....just saying

 

[DeletedUser14937]

Saying people are banned is "fact" and of course attacking each others slings is all good (I have done so myself in specific circumstances) , but accusing the cheaters of only being in one alliance is against the rules and a decent reason for the thread to be closed. I'm not ingame mod, but I am pretty sure that the only apparent "cheaters" in the game don't come from one alliance?.......

 

[DeletedUser6029]

you miss the point....KB had a habit of turtling his cities. Lying to the forum, causing drama etc. THAT was the point that DK was refering to about integrity etc.

KB would put his friends troops out there to save his own. He'd talk so much smack our faces were bruised.

That was a great tongue and cheek comment about the two faced players perceived to be in SE.....not about cheating.

I'm not ingame mod, but I am pretty sure that the only apparent "cheaters" in the game don't come from one alliance?.......

Well of course they don't. I know for a fact that other alliances have them...HELLo...I know of one that has 3....your point?

 

[DeletedUser14937]

you miss the point....KB had a habit of turtling his cities. Lying to the forum, causing drama etc. THAT was the point that DK was refering to about integrity etc.

And all I'm asking is for him to say this fact himself...

 

[DeletedUser]

But for PnP terms, it is to discriminate the alliance/player that is in question. So by Pnp rules, it is fine.

 

[DeletedUser14937]

But for PnP terms, it is to discriminate the alliance/player that is in question. So by Pnp rules, it is fine.

PnP does not exempt it from ban discussions and cheating accusation rules.

 

[DeletedUser]

But as it has been established, you new main point for locking it was that he should have made a disclosure about it not just being SE who have banned players. But what would the point in a PnP if we had to do that with all thing?

"Sarissa is full of noobs, but it is not the only one, we were all full of noobs at some point as we were all new at some point" kinda negates the whole PnP effect

 

[DeletedUser14937]

Because calling alliances noob is not the same as calling them cheaters.

 

[DeletedUser]

If we look once more at the thread.

Do you want to play Grepolis in a large alliance?

Do you want to be insignificant because even with your numbers you can't achieve anything?

Well sling no further than Seriously Enlightened! We accept all players of all levels of skill! Don't want to play fair? NO PROBLEM! We have no ethics code! Just look at a few of our top five!



So you might say: "Hey Devils I am tired of playing with people who have honor and integrity! What should I do?NO PROBLEM! That's when I tell them to look no further than the greatest alliance on Epsilon based off of total points! You guessed it Seriously Enlightened!

We do not see cheater. your interpretation is cheater. Both these players could just have some dirty ways of playing ( I do not know salik so I cannot comment) but assuming the obvious that they were banned is jumping to conclusions. That's what your whole argument is based on. Assumption. you would make a very bad Atheist .
But even if it was referring to being banned. this was neither discussed, nor were accusations made. just that what they did had no honour or integrity. Which cheating does not have. So you are right to jump to conclusions, but even so. it is calling the act of being banned wrong. not discussing it or accusing people of it as it has been recognised by the modding team of grepolis. and using this to discriminate an alliance is not against the rules.

 

[DeletedUser14937]

Thread re-opened !

this one closed though. not needed anymore