
![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Golgotha is done here. We are leaving the thread. Thank you for those that supported us. Golgothans, no more posting please.
Two-three pages later and you are STILL posting.
Most of those posts have been petty, childish, undignified, immature rants directed at the community as a whole.
You do yourself, your guild and your PAX organization little good.
LET IT GO.

![]() |

Gol Morbis wrote:"We"? Fidelis isn't independent of Golgotha?We moved Fidelus away. Golgotha has only grown from this drama.
Might wanna try a different tact than "See, we convinced some of you!"
And we weren't worried about you. We were never scared of you. We were worried that Dancey might be "capricious and arbitrary" and decide that we were in some way undeserving.
Cue audible sigh.
Yes, Fidelis is independent of Golgotha. Pax Gaming is a community, "we" refers to that community.
Aeternum is not an subset of the UnNamed Company, but "we" have members of UNC that play other games with "us"

![]() |

Yeah, I got bored with that. We just needed to calm down a bit. Maybe I should have conditioned it with "we are done for now". Oh well!
We gave you a week to be childish. I think I might let my people post how they wish for a little bit, now.
Most of those posts have been petty, childish, undignified, immature rants directed at the community as a whole.
k.

![]() |

Yes... in the same sense that most nations on the planet are independent... we would all be considered "earthlings"
Fidelis and Golgotha are both Paxians. So when you see something that doesn't make sense in terms of relationships, just insert the fact that we are speaking as Paxians.
I'm sure that may be a challenge, but I feel you can manage.

![]() |

It is hard to make a sell that a group of folks that has been very deliberately requested to support internal dispute should calm down.
There has been a lot of discussion about political capitol, public relations, and meaningful interaction.
It could be the case that Golgotha no longer has a desire to maintain positive diplomatic ties with those that tried (and failed) to cause internal dispute.
In short if they are ready to jettison that political capitol, I understand where they are coming from. We might be as well, as is our right.

![]() |

Saint Caleth wrote:Welcome to the mud pit! The edge did say "slippery when wet".
This describes 90% of the people in this thread. Everyone should have left long before two-three pages ago, yet here we are. What is your point?
Yep, little did I know...
That's a lie. I totally should have known better.

![]() |

T7V Avari wrote:Saint Caleth wrote:Welcome to the mud pit! The edge did say "slippery when wet".
This describes 90% of the people in this thread. Everyone should have left long before two-three pages ago, yet here we are. What is your point?Yep, little did I know...
That's a lie. I totally should have known better.
A "pox on both houses" only works when you die after you say it ;p

![]() |

you misunderstand me. I'm not upset. I'm amused.
Were you amused when I told you that Pax was a de factor Guild, based on your specific descriptions of specific Inner Sanctum powers and authority? Were you amused when you asked me my opinion on the key issue and got the response that you didn't want?
Does it amuse you now that I ask you to make a Pax Gaming policy statement that violating the intent [i]or[/] letter of any rule violates the Charter of Pax Gaming. I don't expect that everyone will agree on what the intent of a rule is, but I think it's reasonable to ask if a particular interpretation is reasonable or not. I also think that a policy statement explicitly encouraging people who dissent from the official interpretation to bring the issue up privately would have prevented the spark from forming in the tinder.

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Saint Caleth wrote:A "pox on both houses" only works when you die after you say it ;pT7V Avari wrote:Saint Caleth wrote:Welcome to the mud pit! The edge did say "slippery when wet".
This describes 90% of the people in this thread. Everyone should have left long before two-three pages ago, yet here we are. What is your point?Yep, little did I know...
That's a lie. I totally should have known better.
Don't worry about that, we'll be able to kill each other soon enough. Over and over and over again.

![]() |

DeciusBrutus wrote:Gol Morbis wrote:"We"? Fidelis isn't independent of Golgotha?We moved Fidelus away. Golgotha has only grown from this drama.
Might wanna try a different tact than "See, we convinced some of you!"
And we weren't worried about you. We were never scared of you. We were worried that Dancey might be "capricious and arbitrary" and decide that we were in some way undeserving.
Cue audible sigh.
Yes, Fidelis is independent of Golgotha. Pax Gaming is a community, "we" refers to that community.
Aeternum is not an subset of the UnNamed Company, but "we" have members of UNC that play other games with "us"
If the community makes the call about Fidelis, rather than Fidelis making the call, (without losing generality) that is sufficient for the allegation.

![]() |

-Aet- Charlie wrote:If the community makes the call about Fidelis, rather than Fidelis making the call, (without losing generality) that is sufficient for the allegation.DeciusBrutus wrote:Gol Morbis wrote:"We"? Fidelis isn't independent of Golgotha?We moved Fidelus away. Golgotha has only grown from this drama.
Might wanna try a different tact than "See, we convinced some of you!"
And we weren't worried about you. We were never scared of you. We were worried that Dancey might be "capricious and arbitrary" and decide that we were in some way undeserving.
Cue audible sigh.
Yes, Fidelis is independent of Golgotha. Pax Gaming is a community, "we" refers to that community.
Aeternum is not an subset of the UnNamed Company, but "we" have members of UNC that play other games with "us"
And what allegation is that precisely?

![]() |

The official interpretation is apparently that Golgotha has done no wrong, else they wouldn't be in the Landrush.
I don't know that this is a valid statement since Ryan noted he never had any intentions of removing Golgotha no matter the outcome of the discussion.
I have no direct opinon one way or the other on the matter but that statement seems incorrect to me.