Vyrkar
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 4592 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:24 PM |
| It states in the rules any form of exploiting or admin abuse, the war will cease* |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
PLOOBER33
|
  |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2007 |
| Total Posts: 7513 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:25 PM |
| Furthermore, why does WIJ get to dictate the terms of the war in the first place? They made all of JC's raids illegitimate for no reason other than the idea that they didn't agree to it yet, and now they claim that JC hadn't won any raids and therefore they win the war. Its really a load of hypocrisy and WIJ ought to have the decency to at least hold to the commitments that they force other clans to |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:25 PM |
Pfft. This war will be over in the amount of days it will take for JC to know they're idiots. I'm not sure if I said that right, but you get it.
"It is during our darkest moments that we must focus to see the light."
-Aristotle Onassis |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
nahom007
|
  |
| Joined: 05 Mar 2011 |
| Total Posts: 18274 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:25 PM |
Conditional victory means there is no clear winner.
That's practically the same thing as ceasing the war, considering JC could've put it as a conditional victory in their description as well.
JC then were offered an FB to take it home as an unconditional victory, or WIJ could've done the same.
JC decided not to show up to the FB, which is CLEARLY a sign of surrender in the clan world today.
Case closed. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
PLOOBER33
|
  |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2007 |
| Total Posts: 7513 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:26 PM |
| I will and have argued that the actions would not at all constitute admin abuse. Read the thread above please. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:26 PM |
Celestus, quit trying to use my typo as a means of shifting attention. It won't work.
If you're dumb enough to start arguing based on a typo then that means you're looking for any means to fight back in an argument that you are losing.
What you idiots don't realize is that JC, for the most part, has agreed with what we have said. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Vyrkar
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 4592 |
|
| |
|
Celestus
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Aug 2011 |
| Total Posts: 14873 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:27 PM |
'JC then were offered an FB to take it home as an unconditional victory, or WIJ could've done the same.
JC decided not to show up to the FB, which is CLEARLY a sign of surrender in the clan world today.
Case closed.'
The final battle was set for the 20th, as in the original agreement. WIJ demanded they final battle them the next day, as I have already explained in my original post this causes issues. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Celestus
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Aug 2011 |
| Total Posts: 14873 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:28 PM |
'Celestus, quit trying to use my typo as a means of shifting attention. It won't work.
If you're dumb enough to start arguing based on a typo then that means you're looking for any means to fight back in an argument that you are losing.'
You failed to respond to my whole point. You are the one shifting attention.
I was generally wondering, what does wqs mean? I am not pointing out your typo, I'm not even aware if it is one. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:29 PM |
first of all, the cobras constant admin abuse is a victory, JC's possibility to win the war ends here. admin abuse. no.
second, john said he refused to final battle.
third, wij would easily handle anything jc throws at them anyways so
made some great points, celestus, but jc lost the war themselves, even though we could have won it anyways |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Celestus
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Aug 2011 |
| Total Posts: 14873 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:30 PM |
And now since you've hypocritically shifted the attention. I ask you to respond to my original point:
Though I do not argue with the fact admin abuse allows you to cease the war, nowhere did it state in the original rule agreement, it gives you a conditional victory. It only gives you the right to 'CEASE THE WAR'. The victor of the war was to be decided on the 20th by a final battle. What is a wqs? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:30 PM |
Ploober, are you dumb?
JC didn't have any raid wins to give us.
We DID lose defenses, but if JC is so disorganized that they can't give us a raid win list, that's their fault. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
cashpop
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Aug 2008 |
| Total Posts: 2984 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:30 PM |
Onto this thread, as much as I like to see loopholes, it's pretty irrelevant. I mean they only reason would be to add more ammo to the flame gun.
Think about it guys. We are players in a gaming website. Do you honestly believe some of us is going to make a binding contract of the highest caliber for the sake of this?
JC AA'ed. WIJ called off the war. Even if it is not stated, WIJ would win.
FB or not. Do you honestly see the JC FB team beating the WIJSTs? No. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:30 PM |
| are you forgetting the part where it said if either side admin abused it was a win for the opposing side |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Vyrkar
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 4592 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:31 PM |
| WIJ won. I don't know these guys keep bringing up these facts that we all know.. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Celestus
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Aug 2011 |
| Total Posts: 14873 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:32 PM |
'first of all, the cobras constant admin abuse is a victory, JC's possibility to win the war ends here. admin abuse. no.'
By the original agreements it actually only allowed you to cease the war. Not cease the war and win.
'second, john said he refused to final battle.'
He refused to battle with one day advance, when the original battle was set for the 20th.
'third, wij would easily handle anything jc throws at them anyways so'
I already admitted this, but it's despite the point. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:33 PM |
| okay, you're playing on words here. by cease they meant win okay. you don't get away on aa with a tie |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
PLOOBER33
|
  |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2007 |
| Total Posts: 7513 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:33 PM |
| WIJ at the very least should give them till the original date. Otherwise I advocate viewing the win as illegitimate. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:35 PM |
we've already brought up the idea of fighting jc elites on the date that was initially agreed on
im not entirely sure if we'll do it but i hope we do |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Vyrkar
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 4592 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:36 PM |
| oh really, sir? Well there's something. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Celestus
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Aug 2011 |
| Total Posts: 14873 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:36 PM |
'Onto this thread, as much as I like to see loopholes, it's pretty irrelevant. I mean they only reason would be to add more ammo to the flame gun.
Think about it guys. We are players in a gaming website. Do you honestly believe some of us is going to make a binding contract of the highest caliber for the sake of this?
JC AA'ed. WIJ called off the war. Even if it is not stated, WIJ would win.
FB or not. Do you honestly see the JC FB team beating the WIJSTs? No.'
I see your point, but it really defeats the purpose of declaring yourself the victor in the first place. If you are not going to win by a mutual agreement, then neither clan is going to take a defeat. I never believed JC had the slightest chance of winning, I've already explained, and have to keep repeating. What I am getting as is WIJ's ability to bend rules in their favour. There is a crystal clear ignorance of breaking rules here and it's funny how people will completely deny it.
'are you forgetting the part where it said if either side admin abused it was a win for the opposing side'
WRONG. Like I've said so many times, nowhere does it say win, only 'CEASE THE WAR'.
'WIJ won. I don't know these guys keep bringing up these facts that we all know..'
If you don't explain or expand, I don't care.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
cashpop
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Aug 2008 |
| Total Posts: 2984 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:37 PM |
There was talk earlier. Owen said if they AA'ed further, the date of the FB would be accelerated. It was discussed during their...discussion with the JC HRs.
A lot of things could have changed during their discussions. Not everything is written on stone. Especially not the thread declaring the war.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
cashpop
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Aug 2008 |
| Total Posts: 2984 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:40 PM |
| And as owen claimed, we were going to have the FB, but they pulled back. What are we supposed to do then? Just sit there and call it a tie? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
PLOOBER33
|
  |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2007 |
| Total Posts: 7513 |
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:40 PM |
| That doesn't give WIJ the right to "accelerate" the date by any means. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 11 Apr 2013 08:41 PM |
Do you not understand?
THE WHOLE WAR ENDED
That includes the original FB date.
WIJ offered a FB to end it then, something that didn't have to be done.
JC HRs organized a team, but then Pspjohn ordered them not to fight. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|