Goblin Squad Member
|
2: No one from Aeternum who voted in LR1 voted for LR2. Rule not broken.
Again, to be very, very clear. If anyone can find any evidence contrary to that, bring it to our attention immediately. This was never misinterpreted on our part. That has always been crystal clear for us.
I will not allow that accusation to stand uncontested.
Edit: Within 5 minutes of checking our forums, I got these three posts. I can get more. Again, this accusation will not stand:
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Whether or not Pax Gaming should be treated as a guild for the purposes of the landrush is a grey area in terms of community opinion, but it also doesn't matter what the community opinion is because GW's decision is that what Pax is doing is permissible. That's that.
This business about the votes...none of this is worth having everyone pissed off and attacking each other when the end result isn't going to change.
I understand that people have taken some things personally, some personal attacks have been launched, and that the integrity of various individuals has been questioned on both sides. But at this point it's just not worth continuing beyond agreeing to disagree.
Someone has to "be the better man" at some point, as tempting as it is to continue defending yourselves. Believe me, I give in to that just as easily as anyone.
As always, just my personal opinion.
It's been a minute. That counts as a forfeit! Another brutal controversy resolved by the Cleavster.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This business about the votes...none of this is worth having everyone pissed off and attacking each other when the end result isn't going to change.
No. We will not let someone as prominent in the community as Nihimon slander us. Not any more.
Again, substantiate it, or publicly retract it. Now.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
the Pax/UNC position that it's okay to do anything we can get away with as long as there's not an explicit rule against it that's clearly defined by Goblinworks.Nihimon, I think it may be a little premature to claim that this is an actual position of their whole group. We've had a single instance so far that exists in that gray area. It does not seem to be enough to make a trend. If you feel they have acted as such in this event, you have every right to speak up as you have been for this one event, but I think it would only be appropriate to allow a bit more time to pass and more examples of behavior to make a judgement call on their company-wide policy. They may not come out spotless, but they may look better than you see them to be at the moment in this one issue.A prominent member of Pax Gaming and of this community for whom I have a lot of respect - especially because of the extremely civil tone he used in his Private Message to me - asked me about this same thing. Being who I am, I wanted to make sure I was remembering correctly, and could back up what I'm about to say with proof before I said anything.
Ryan placed three restrictions on us:
1. If you, as a Guild, won a Settlement in LR1, don't create a second entry for LR2;
2. If you, as a Player, voted for a Guild that won a Settlement in LR1, don't vote for a different Guild in LR2; and
3. If you, as a Player, intend to play as part of a Guild that won a Setttlement in LR1, don't vote for a different Guild in LR2.Pax Gaming violated of those requests.
I understand folks might look at any one violation and say there were special circumstances, or it was an honest mistake. But when all three are violated, I think it's clearly a matter of policy. I won't rehash requests 1 or 3, but I think some folks may be under the impression that Pax Gaming didn't violate the 2nd request. In fact, they did.
We are losing 3 votes from Golgotha because they are locked into Aeturnum.They were "locked into Aeternum" because those players had already cast their votes for Pax Aeternum in LR1.
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is policy.
I believe this makes it abundantly clear that Pax Gaming has a deliberate policy to violate any "rule" they think they can get away with if it gives them an advantage over others.
None of this would have come to light had some members of the community not insisted that Pax Gaming answer for what appeared to be a flagrant violation of the rules. Pax Golgotha would still have votes that had already been cast for Pax Aeternum in LR1 and Pax Gaming would still be encouraging new members of Pax Aeternum to vote for Pax Golgotha.
You may think I'm impolite for bringing this up, or for refusing to let it go, but I don't think it's fair to suggest I'm being anything but scrupulously honest. Principles matter.
I'm going to have to agree with Nihimon here.
Pax gaming is a merger that broke itself into parts and they entered into the Land Rush, when only ONE entry is allowed, Hence they are breaking the Rules set out by GoblinWorksReading the Recruitment PM. I got from them shows me the group's fractured nature.
The Pax guild is made from TWO groups; Kingdom of Aeternum and the Golgothan Empire.
They want to sub-divide into 3 settlements each one doing a different job and caring for a different group.
They got Callambea (the first in their plans), and oddly enough Golgotha was the next one on their settlement list.
The Empire of Xeilias is a nation level alliance initially created by the merger of the Kingdom of Aeternum and the Golgothan Empire(including the Crimson Guard, Maelstrom, and The Bloody Hand). For its part, Pax intends to establish three settlements, prioritized in the following order, as recruitment and resources allow: Lawful Neutral Callambea, Lawful Evil Golgotha, and Lawful Good Fidelis.
That said, Xeilias is not a Pax nation. True, it is founded by Pax, but Pax governed settlement votes on imperial matters will each be weighted the same as any other settlements within the Empire. After all, the Xeilian Empire is owned by the citizens under its banner, as represented by the settlement leaders who vote on its councils, whether they be Pax Gaming members or not. The only difference in voting power that will exist are limited veto rights built in as a fail safe for dissolution.
To this end, the Xeilian Empire is actively pursuing new settlements wishing to become equal members. Likewise, individual companies seeking sponsorship by one of our settlements are strongly encouraged to apply. Upon acceptance, company leaders will gain the authority to represent their company's concerns on the legislative council of the Empire of Xeilias. Private Companies wishing not to tie themselves to the Empire as a whole but still wishing to establish a business in a settlement of the Empire can do so and will still have a collective voice on the legislative council.
Pax Divisions & Future Settlements
Pax has been planning a presence in PFO for well over a year. Our latest iteration, The Xeilian Empire, consists of three varied alignments. These alignments are represented within Pax by three distinct leadership structures known as Divisions. While separate, they are bound together by pragmatic choice. The first division, Aeternum, will found the settlement Callambea which will be the Lawful Neutral trade hub of the empire. All things mercantile, from raw materials and finished goods to every manner of contract will be carefully measured and weighed like the coin that will flow through Callambea's gates. Creating an overwhelming military machine is the objective of Xeilias' second division - Lawful Evil Golgotha. By conventional armies or operations more covert, Golgotha will bring peace, at home and abroad, through strength of arms. The final member of this triumvirate, Lawful Good Fidelis, is the compassionate conscience of Xeilias. With plans on establishing a LG settlement, Fidelis will be focusing on community. Whether through public outreach initiatives, operation of social hubs such as shrines and inns, protecting the empire from monstrous escalations, or providing for homeland defense, Fidelis will be the counterbalance to its sister, Golgotha. By spanning the spectrum of lawful alignments, Xeilias promises a rule of law for its citizens and settlements, the likes of which provides the greatest chance for prosperity, while at the same time, allowing its players the widest range of roles.
....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This business about the votes...none of this is worth having everyone pissed off and attacking each other when the end result isn't going to change.No. We will not let someone as prominent in the community as Nihimon slander us. Not any more.
Again, substantiate it, or publicly retract it. Now.
I think it's quite possible that Nihimon has made a mistake here. I mean, the quote was about Golgothans voting for Aeturnum in Land Rush 1, and those same Golgothans voting for Aeturnum in Land Rush 2, which is what Rule 2 in his list prescribes.
Nihimon hasn't made any factually incorrect statements until now as far as I know, let's not brand him as a serial slanderer simply because he has an opinion you disagree with; it was made clear that many people from diverse organizations had various opinions on the subject (well, except for those that posted from Pax, I think).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
All I know is that I'm going to Cookout tonight, and I'm going to get a double hamburger with bacon, lettuce and tomato. Fries and chili for my sides, and a Mint Oreo Milkshake.
Because that's what I want.
We'll probably settle for fast food - we're playing Pathfinder tabletop tonight.
the Pax/UNC position that it's okay to do anything we can get away with as long as there's not an explicit rule against it that's clearly defined by Goblinworks.Nihimon, I think it may be a little premature to claim that this is an actual position of their whole group. We've had a single instance so far that exists in that gray area. It does not seem to be enough to make a trend. If you feel they have acted as such in this event, you have every right to speak up as you have been for this one event, but I think it would only be appropriate to allow a bit more time to pass and more examples of behavior to make a judgement call on their company-wide policy. They may not come out spotless, but they may look better than you see them to be at the moment in this one issue.A prominent member of Pax Gaming and of this community for whom I have a lot of respect - especially because of the extremely civil tone he used in his Private Message to me - asked me about this same thing. Being who I am, I wanted to make sure I was remembering correctly, and could back up what I'm about to say with proof before I said anything.
Ryan placed three restrictions on us:
1. If you, as a Guild, won a Settlement in LR1, don't create a second entry for LR2;
2. If you, as a Player, voted for a Guild that won a Settlement in LR1, don't vote for a different Guild in LR2; and
3. If you, as a Player, intend to play as part of a Guild that won a Setttlement in LR1, don't vote for a different Guild in LR2.Pax Gaming violated of those requests.
I understand folks might look at any one violation and say there were special circumstances, or it was an honest mistake. But when all three are violated, I think it's clearly a matter of policy. I won't rehash requests 1 or 3, but I think some folks may be under the impression that Pax Gaming didn't violate the 2nd request. In fact, they did....
Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?
Is that the smoke of war I smell?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?
This is obviously ridiculous and I think you are smart enough to know that, which means stop trolling. Nihimon doesn't speak for me or anyone else.
Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?
Is that the smoke of war I smell?
Can you declare war on the delusional? I'm sure thats in bad taste, even for an evil character.
It's being put on the Roseblood Accord because Nihimon, unlike myself, clearly fears making new threads. Here, Nihimon, I'll show you how it's done.
I think that the accusation does need to be substantiated, as it is extremely serious and the primary basis for Nihimon's statement about general Pax policy. That quote does not seem like an indication of wrongdoing.
Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?This is obviously ridiculous and I think you are smart enough to know that, which means stop trolling. Nihimon doesn't speak for me or anyone else.
Then why post it here, in this thread dedicated to the accord? Why did the op post it and not PM people like he said in the Pax thread he would? Why even post unless he was wanting to rub salt into the wounds?
It's being put on the Roseblood Accord because Nihimon, unlike myself, clearly fears making new threads. Here, Nihimon, I'll show you how it's done.
I think that the accusation does need to be substantiated, as it is extremely serious and the primary basis for Nihimon's statement about general Pax policy. That quote does not seem like an indication of wrongdoing.
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?This is obviously ridiculous and I think you are smart enough to know that, which means stop trolling. Nihimon doesn't speak for me or anyone else.
hmm, and labeling someone a troll for asking questions isn't very positive. You best unsubscribe from the accord.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Then why post it here, in this thread dedicated to the accord? Why did the op post it and not PM people like he said in the Pax thread he would? Why even post unless he was wanting to rub salt into the wounds?Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?This is obviously ridiculous and I think you are smart enough to know that, which means stop trolling. Nihimon doesn't speak for me or anyone else.
I don't know, ask him. I think he was responding to what someone from TEO said in this thread, so he responded in this thread. I don't think being the OP in a thread makes you lord and master over all who enter, though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The RA doesn't have any way of issuing a wardec.
There is no 'government' of the RA. The RA exists only insomuch as the members/leaders continue to talk to eachother on teamspeak.
We don't even have an 'Emprah!'
Members are not required to come to eachother's aid. Members are not required not to war with eachother (as far as I know, at least).
In my estimation, having never listened in on the TS chats or spoken to anybody in the RA, the only requirements are that members engage in PvP and other behaviors that are regarded as 'positive gameplay,' the general definition of which we share, and to help other members realize this goal.
That's not to say that our shared goals haven't formed strong bonds of friendship. Each individual guild will decide for themselves which other individual guilds they will support in wartime and under what circumstances.
I don't know, ask him. I think he was responding to what someone from TEO said in this thread, so he responded in this thread. I don't think being the OP in a thread makes you lord and master over all who enter, though.Then why post it here, in this thread dedicated to the accord? Why did the op post it and not PM people like he said in the Pax thread he would? Why even post unless he was wanting to rub salt into the wounds?Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?This is obviously ridiculous and I think you are smart enough to know that, which means stop trolling. Nihimon doesn't speak for me or anyone else.
So you have no idea why he posted or what his thoughts are and you 'think' he was responding to someone else, yet you leaped to his defense and labeled me a troll. Interesting indications of positive gameplay at work.
As Nihimon stated in the Pax thread, he made a mistake last time he did something like this publicly and should have done it via PM. I guess two days makes you forget those ideals.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is too important to NOT repeat....Don't you see? The most important time to stay true to your principles is when it looks like you're the only one who is. The Seventh Veil will never adopt the Pax/UNC position that it's okay to do anything we can get away with as long as there's not an explicit rule against it that's clearly defined by Goblinworks.
Not doing everything not prohibited in is not same as not doing anything that is not explicitly allowed. But what is the grey space between Nihimon's principles and the explicit rules?
Once again, labels based on lies. Positive gameplay at its finest.
I asked a question in the thread about the Roseblood Accord that the OP made. I see there is also another Roseblood thread no up. Since Nihimon was the OP in that also, maybe I'll go there and ask.
The RA doesn't have any way of issuing a wardec.
There is no 'government' of the RA. The RA exists only insomuch as the members/leaders continue to talk to eachother on teamspeak.
We don't even have an 'Emprah!'
Members are not required to come to eachother's aid. Members are not required not to war with eachother (as far as I know, at least).
In my estimation, having never listened in on the TS chats or spoken to anybody in the RA, the only requirements are that members engage in PvP and other behaviors that are regarded as 'positive gameplay,' the general definition of which we share, and to help other members realize this goal.
That's not to say that our shared goals haven't formed strong bonds of friendship. Each individual guild will decide for themselves which other individual guilds they will support in wartime and under what circumstances.
So if one member of the accord decides another settlement has 'cheated' and not engaged in positive gameplay, would they ask the other members to engage them in war or take sanctions against them?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Once again, labels based on lies. Positive gameplay at its finest.
I asked a question in the thread about the Roseblood Accord that the OP made. I see there is also another Roseblood thread no up. Since Nihimon was the OP in that also, maybe I'll go there and ask.
I already answered your question. You also said basically the same thing in the Pax thread, though I had the discipline to ignore you there. Now instead of engaging me here, you'd rather run to a 3rd thread.
You said you're NOT a troll, right?I answered your question. Nihimon doesn't speak for me or the Accord. I don't agree with everything he said and I would not have made that post. What further questions do you have?
Once again, labels based on lies. Positive gameplay at its finest.
I asked a question in the thread about the Roseblood Accord that the OP made. I see there is also another Roseblood thread no up. Since Nihimon was the OP in that also, maybe I'll go there and ask.
I already answered your question. You also said basically the same thing in the Pax thread, though I had the discipline to ignore you there. Now instead of engaging me here, you'd rather run to a 3rd thread.
You said you're NOT a troll, right?I answered your question. Nihimon doesn't speak for me or the Accord. I don't agree with everything he said and I would not have made that post. What further questions do you have?
You didn't answer my question. You called me a troll. Here is the question again:
Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?
Still waiting for that whole put up or shut up thing.
Careful, you might be labeled a troll for asking questions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?
Ok. My apologies if you are being genuine, you did not deserve to be called a troll if that is the case.
Unfortunately I can't answer your question, since I'm not Nihimon. I am fairly confident however that his post has nothing to do with the Accord, and even if it did, no one else in the Accord has any obligation to agree with him or support his opinion. Like I said, I do not agree with everything he said, and I do not think he will cast me down as the enemy for saying so.Edit: However your continued 1-liner smartass comments don't help your claim that you aren't a troll.
Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?
Ok. My apologies if you are being genuine, you did not deserve to be called a troll if that is the case.
Unfortunately I can't answer your question, since I'm not Nihimon. I am fairly confident however that his post has nothing to do with the Accord, and even if it did, no one else in the Accord has any obligation to agree with him or support his opinion. Like I said, I do not agree with everything he said, and I do not think he will cast me down as the enemy for saying so.
Edit: However your continued 1-liner smartass comments don't help your claim that you aren't a troll.
Thanks. I am being genuine. While I am an UNC member, I (and others in the UNC) promote positive gameplay, especially no griefing. We are unable to sign up to the accord because of the 'no preying on members' caveat that inhibits the bandit style of play. I am however interested to see what the results are of all this.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So if one member of the accord decides another settlement has 'cheated' and not engaged in positive gameplay, would they ask the other members to engage them in war or take sanctions against them?The RA doesn't have any way of issuing a wardec.
There is no 'government' of the RA. The RA exists only insomuch as the members/leaders continue to talk to eachother on teamspeak.
We don't even have an 'Emprah!'
Members are not required to come to eachother's aid. Members are not required not to war with eachother (as far as I know, at least).
In my estimation, having never listened in on the TS chats or spoken to anybody in the RA, the only requirements are that members engage in PvP and other behaviors that are regarded as 'positive gameplay,' the general definition of which we share, and to help other members realize this goal.
That's not to say that our shared goals haven't formed strong bonds of friendship. Each individual guild will decide for themselves which other individual guilds they will support in wartime and under what circumstances.
I don't see how that question makes any sense based on what you quoted from me. Nobody has any control over what Roseblood Accord members do. There is no governing body.
Also, I haven't seen any evidence that any Roseblood Accord member group believes that theirs is the only valid opinion of what 'positive gameplay' is; they simply share the same general idea of what it means.
Again, if a group within the Roseblood Accord wants to go to war, it's up to other individual groups to decide if they will join them. Is there something ambiguous about this that I can clarify?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thanks. I am being genuine. While I am an UNC member, I (and others in the UNC) promote positive gameplay, especially no griefing. We are unable to sign up to the accord because of the 'no preying on members' caveat that inhibits the bandit style of play. I am however interested to see what the results are of all this.Since this is posted by the op of this thread and this is the official Roseblood accord thread, I take it Pax is being called out as not playing to the standards required by the accord?
Ok. My apologies if you are being genuine, you did not deserve to be called a troll if that is the case.
Unfortunately I can't answer your question, since I'm not Nihimon. I am fairly confident however that his post has nothing to do with the Accord, and even if it did, no one else in the Accord has any obligation to agree with him or support his opinion. Like I said, I do not agree with everything he said, and I do not think he will cast me down as the enemy for saying so.
Edit: However your continued 1-liner smartass comments don't help your claim that you aren't a troll.
Yeah, once Xeen and Bludd realized, in this thread, that their group did not share the same idea of what 'positive gameplay' is, they said "what's the point of us joining?" and stopped asking to be admitted. I think that was a pretty rational response; they would lose a lot of income by agreeing not to attack members of the RA for free... outside of the Roseblood Accord, they stand to make a pretty penny in pay-offs and banditry from it's members =P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thanks. I am being genuine. While I am an UNC member, I (and others in the UNC) promote positive gameplay, especially no griefing. We are unable to sign up to the accord because of the 'no preying on members' caveat that inhibits the bandit style of play. I am however interested to see what the results are of all this.
Well, if you look back through the thread, you'll see that I said I'm OK with UNC signing on because, like I've been saying, this isn't some grand formal alliance. While I'm not convinced that all members of the UNC actually do care about positive gameplay, I'm willing to be proven wrong.
Again, my personal opinion is that you can play the villain and still care about positive gameplay...and to me it is mutually beneficial when we all play with that in mind.But, also like I've been saying, we all have our own minds here and when pressed, UNC decided they were no longer interested in the Accord. Fine. No big deal.
The moral of this story should be that we are not of one mind and we all have our own opinions. And hell - there are probably Roseblood members looking at my answer, going "I DONT AGREE WITH THAT!"
Yep! Exactly the point.
Again - my bad for calling you a troll if your question was genuine. We all give in to posting things we maybe shouldn't have from time to time - even minutes after posting a plea for everyone not to :P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
the Pax/UNC position that it's okay to do anything we can get away with as long as there's not an explicit rule against it that's clearly defined by Goblinworks.Nihimon, I think it may be a little premature to claim that this is an actual position of their whole group. We've had a single instance so far that exists in that gray area. It does not seem to be enough to make a trend. If you feel they have acted as such in this event, you have every right to speak up as you have been for this one event, but I think it would only be appropriate to allow a bit more time to pass and more examples of behavior to make a judgement call on their company-wide policy. They may not come out spotless, but they may look better than you see them to be at the moment in this one issue.A prominent member of Pax Gaming and of this community for whom I have a lot of respect - especially because of the extremely civil tone he used in his Private Message to me - asked me about this same thing. Being who I am, I wanted to make sure I was remembering correctly, and could back up what I'm about to say with proof before I said anything.
Ryan placed three restrictions on us:
1. If you, as a Guild, won a Settlement in LR1, don't create a second entry for LR2;
2. If you, as a Player, voted for a Guild that won a Settlement in LR1, don't vote for a different Guild in LR2; and
3. If you, as a Player, intend to play as part of a Guild that won a Setttlement in LR1, don't vote for a different Guild in LR2.Pax Gaming violated of those requests.
I understand folks might look at any one violation and say there were special circumstances, or it was an honest mistake. But when all three are violated, I think it's clearly a matter of policy. I won't rehash requests 1 or 3, but I think some folks may be under the impression that Pax Gaming didn't violate the 2nd request. In fact, they did....
Ok, Nihimon, lets break this down for you.
1) It was never established that Pax is one guild. People asserted it was, people asserted it wasn't. The issue isn't decided, and you claiming it was is not a fact in evidence. So, you're wrong there.
2) They had 3 members of Golgotha previously vote for Aeturnum in LR1, and as such they are effectively losing 3 votes from Golgotha now. That is basic logic and took me about 5 seconds to figure out. Retract your statement, or I will lose all respect for you.
3) Lee posted something to the contrary. Pax believed the most recent information. When corrected, they fixed the issue. That's what people do. They made a mistake. That doesn't mean evil intent.
I've spent days running cover for you, and I'm getting tired of it. Stop your quest against Pax, because you are burning bridges that don't need to be burned and won't actually gain you anything besides mortal enemies and angry allies.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yeah, I joined T7V because of the focus on letting players be, when the few other organizations tended towards a less democratic leadership structure and a focus on the membership working for the good of the whole. When I first saw the Roseblood Accord (one of the first things I saw when I came back to the forum), I was wholly against it. I did some research before posting my concerns too loudly and I was satisfied with the result:
It seems to me that the Roseblood Accord is simply a bunch of individual member groups that hope to foster a certain style of play in their areas. They believe that this style of play is important to the enjoyment of their membership, and will help other members have fun. I don't think that precludes warring on each other, or necessitates common defense.
So, joining the Roseblood Accord through T7V doesn't change anything about my experience in T7V, because T7V was already planning on adhering to this principle. T7V will still do what T7V wants to do, like every other member of the Roseblood Accord.
Also please note that my personal views of PvP are such that I would be completely comfortable in a group like UNC... Those who remember my posts from long ago when the PvP debate was raging will remember that I was almost uniformly against further restrictions/penalties on PvP/RPKing.
I simply joined T7V when I did because I respected the people that first joined it (and I am happy to say that we continue to recruit the same caliber members and allies!).
Again, my opinion on what the Accord is should be highly discounted if anybody posts differently, because I was simply thrown into this as a member of T7V and have not had any discussion about this with anybody, except having read this thread =P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This isn't going away. What Nihimon said was an extremely serious allegation. Accusing us of a mistake is one thing, especially when we were at fault. Accusing us of purposefully breaking the rules is an entirely different thing.
Substantiate it, or publicly retract it.
Ehh, give him time. He might be out handling stuff IRL. I know Golgotha can be patient, this might be one of those times to embrace that feature.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
2: No one from Aeternum who voted in LR1 voted for LR2. Rule not broken.Again, to be very, very clear. If anyone can find any evidence contrary to that, bring it to our attention immediately. This was never misinterpreted on our part. That has always been crystal clear for us.
I will not allow that accusation to stand uncontested.
Edit: Within 5 minutes of checking our forums, I got these three posts. I can get more. Again, this accusation will not stand:
Who were the three votes that you "lost"?
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
This isn't going away. What Nihimon said was an extremely serious allegation. Accusing us of a mistake is one thing, especially when we were at fault. Accusing us of purposefully breaking the rules is an entirely different thing.
Substantiate it, or publicly retract it.
And get on your purple leaders to make it a policy statement not to cheat.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Unlike T7V I don't have to remind Golgothans to be upstanding individuals.
I can understand Gol Morbis. But his ...hm... aggressive behavior in some posts in various threads makes me worry he might have an aneurysm caused by his anger. Perhaps as Lord Regent, you should advise him to calm down some.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Who were the three votes that you "lost"?2: No one from Aeternum who voted in LR1 voted for LR2. Rule not broken.Again, to be very, very clear. If anyone can find any evidence contrary to that, bring it to our attention immediately. This was never misinterpreted on our part. That has always been crystal clear for us.
I will not allow that accusation to stand uncontested.
Edit: Within 5 minutes of checking our forums, I got these three posts. I can get more. Again, this accusation will not stand:
I know that I am one of them. Uffda. Zeyvian.
Uffda and I are currently on Aeturnums landrush roster. Zeyvian was very temporarily on Golgothas, however he was removed as soon as we saw the mistake (a matter of hours). As far as I am aware, he has not yet applied back into Aeturnums.
There may be more, I am not the best person to ask about rosters. What I know for certain that is if there are more, they are where their LR1 vote determines that they should be. I can tap the officer of Golgotha that knows best if you want an exact list.