Angels/NewDawn

[The_Fish]

Where did I say you did or wanted?

I was more referring to the fact we can and will do whatever we want. we are not cheating, whatever we do, we can. Just because people refer to us as support planets without proof doesnt make it true.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

DLR members are allowed to join ND in game. If we weren't, Gate wouldnt have been allowed to join.

Whether or not we do is down to us, not Assassin. DLR will always have a high ranking average, whether or not we are in our own tag.

And we could always merge with Ascendancy to make us #1. Its all within the rules.

Except Ascendancy rules. It'll be breaking them if you did join Ascendancy.

[SteInMetz]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

And we could always merge with Ascendancy to make us #1. Its all within the rules.

Actually thats not entirely true..

Originally Posted by Manual

Alliances cannot merge this round

So you cannot merge with em, but what you can do is leaving your tag, getting conviently recruited by Ascendancy..

but thats another story

[h3ll]

nuff said see my siggy

[Willzzz]

Originally Posted by Kargool

I have indeed reported him to his superiour on some occasions. But i've stopped caring along time ago. Its an old expression saying that you get what you deserve, and the game certainly is getting what it deserves right now. The defplanet rule was never discussed openly before implemented, there was no discussion about it in the Allianceforums before it was implemented, it was implemented in midround. (because the claims was that eXilition was doing it in a high scale) eXilition went on and won the round anyways, so Im guessing the "impact" on the game as all the people claiming wasnt that superior.

In regards to closing of planets, no, I havent really had many objections to that. Infact i've reported and gotten closed alot of my own alliancemembers due to them cheating. Allthough some I find very fun that they closed, like closing people for having the same surnames and closing people for logging in at the same military base, but oh well, they're just paying customers getting what they deserve.

Assassin also went before this round posting another one of his arbitrary decisions without opening it up for discussion at all on the forums, or atleast informing the community about what he felt was needed. It was posted around 1 hour before tickstart, Im guessing PA crew was in the loop (hopefully) still, the players playing this game wasnt and they might have had some views and some input that might prove valuable to the work the mh's are doing.

And now regarding this last of his major screwups, im gussing hiding behind a convinient "oh, we are not allowed to discuss what the multihunters do" creates alot of confidence in what terms the multihunters work under and what they do to prevent people from cheating in the game. Especially when they specifically goes after what one alliance appearntly has done the great big sin of defending out of tag in "5" occasions, but decide that large quantities of appearntly very random incomings before a certain large alliance attacks is just totally random and not preplanned at all.

I dont usally get involved in some sort of 'Personal Vendeta' But beings this post was directed at me i thought it was only right i again reply to it.

Ok I am going to put my comments on this reply into points so you can read them and see why i have put them in this order to justify/answer your post. I sujest you read it through properly before posting again.

1) You have answered my question about reporting it to his superior (when i say superior btw i mean the Jolt Rep, not kal or Appoc) You said you had enough of doing so, and you gave up. Fair comment. But this can show me 2 things. A) No punishment was given on the grounds your evidence was to be honest laughable, or was saw as you just taking personal offence and making a big deal over somthing minor, or B) You havent reported him to the jolt rep (which i am guessing is Biffy?) Instead you probably came into Support, pmed either Appoc or another PA Team member and had a rant. Just my personal view on things but the way you act, gives me the reason to beleive my second point.


2) The Support planet rule. Now what i want to ask you Kargool is do you read posts before replying to them? I did state that 3 quaters of the members did vote on a poll that he was justified in doing what he did. I can ofc agree this was done after it was implented, but then again Squishy as well as Assassin did state that even though they didnt want to implement the rule after having so many complaints from most of the top 10 alliances they had to act upon it. Which to me tells me, as well as the rplies on the poll and thread after the rule was implemented that the community agreed with it. Sorry you dont, but open your eyes and live with the community agreed to it. Now as far as it making an impact on Exilhilation goes, your correct they won the round. But.. on the same note, surely you, being a HC of a top ranked alliance would have noticed after the rule was implemented exhilation dropped 3 ranks in the space of 4 days? They were first nearly all round, then dropped 3 ranks after this rule was implemented.. Coincidence? I think not some how. Now i dont want to go through this all again, as i did it on the thread regarding the rule, and to be honest this has nothing to do with this thread (Appologies to the mods but i feel i need to answer a post that was put toward me) And finally, wheather you like it or not, it clearly states in the EULA they can make changes they see fit, you signed that when you signed up. If you dont like it, tough. You made the choice to sign it when you joined the game. Perhaps you should read things more carefully next time?


3) The Closing of planets. In all my rounds of PA i have never saw or heard of anyone being closed soly on the fact they have the same Surename. Again ill ask where did you get that information from? I have read the post by Assassin and the EULA. Only thing i can see is he states if they have the same identical information (which means Password, same first and last name) Not just last name. What i find laughable is where do you get your information from?


4) The Rules and Regulations Post. Now i guess your reffering to this Post http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=189492 Now, as far as i can see, if you actually cared to read once and a while. It is bassicaly a run down of what it says in the EULA. Assassin states he has posted this on request to make it clear of what the EULA states. So, he didnt justify the rules a tick before we started, becuase the EULA has bin there way before you signed up. he was just (on request) making it more specific. I am sorry you fail to understand that, but again that is your problem not his. He has responded to the community asking him to define the rules. Why is that a problem?


5) The last situation you claim is a 'Major Screw up'. Well i have voiced my appionon in this time and time again. I have also bin sitting in DLRs public channel for nearly 12 hours since i requested they pm me with the log of a DLR HC (Troll) Speaking with Assassin. Still no reply. Reason why i want this is becuase i want to know why its being hidden, and perhaps its being hidden becuase Assassin stated his evidence in that log? Just a thought. The whole sitaution is about DLR Defending ND. The log on these forums is from an ND HC. I want to see the convosation with the DLR HC, which should be the main one as it was about there alliance. This reuqest keeps being ignored. The fact one of there own HCs couldnt comment on irc to me yesterday becuase even he hadnt saw the log between the head MH and one of his own command concerns me.


So in Conclusion Kargool, if that was the evidence you speak of to do with Assassins incompetitence to do his job then perhaps ill go one step further by questioning your intelligence. Everything you reffered to above is justified. if you dont like how the MHs dictate the rules then leave. Simple as. There right is to dictate the rules how they see fit. So next time i sujest you A) Read through a post before replying to it or reffering to it (Example is the rules one which is just making the eula clear) And B) Stop being such a biased individual. Oh And btw, i notice my neg rep about my post ealier which stated 'You are an idiot' was done by you? (beings it was around the same time as your reply) If so, i might reffer you to your discussion on the sugestion forum about reporting abusive neg reps. Take your own advice.?


I also appologise to the mods if this is saw as attacking somone. Again i am just replying to a poster who replied to me, and posting what i feel is a reply to it.


Edit: I have just received after this post the log from Troll. Thank you for pasting it to me as requested.

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by Kargool

And now regarding this last of his major screwups, im gussing hiding behind a convinient "oh, we are not allowed to discuss what the multihunters do" creates alot of confidence in what terms the multihunters work under and what they do to prevent people from cheating in the game. Especially when they specifically goes after what one alliance appearntly has done the great big sin of defending out of tag in "5" occasions, but decide that large quantities of appearntly very random incomings before a certain large alliance attacks is just totally random and not preplanned at all.

I'm sure you know more about this than the MH's, so why not boast around a little about that too

And yes, they CAN hide behind "we are not allowed to discuss...", BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT, as in NOT (capisci?), ALLOWED TO SPEAK OPENLY ABOUT IT.

[Kargool]

Originally Posted by Willzzz

*snip*

You did have some good points, but since you actually tackled the man instead of the ball I'll refrain from commenting.

[Kargool]

Originally Posted by Nadar

I'm sure you know more about this than the MH's, so why not boast around a little about that too

And yes, they CAN hide behind "we are not allowed to discuss...", BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT, as in NOT (capisci?), ALLOWED TO SPEAK OPENLY ABOUT IT.

Well, seeing as he took time to inform/threaten a HC of an alliance.

Originally Posted by rules for r16

Discussing Cases

One thing I want to make clear is that cases will only be discussed with the person involved. So, if a HC of an alliance comes in to ask questions regarding a members closure we will not answer you. We have given leeway once before to speak to an alliance HC because the person we closed couldn’t speak English, but again that was an unusual circumstance and we gave permission for that. It’s only ever happened once also. But I am making this clear now so we don’t get people coming to the MH Team demanding why there members have been closed, as this will only be discussed with the planets involved.

I feel this little snip was amusing.

[Achilles]

In a bid to drive this thread past the aforementioned 30 pages I will reveal some, dare I say, E-lite inteligence on further ND support activity. My source must, of course, remain anonymous but I can reveal that he is deeply placed within the infid....errrr NewDawn organisation.

Originally Posted by Source

(06:33:34) <NewDawn> Quote 1157 of 3141: (23:52:05) * Achilles was kicked from #private by [ND]SteInMetz (dont devoice me! I WUB j00!)

As can be clearly seen, [ND]*Steinmetz is playing as a 1up support planet under the ND tag. I hope PATeam takes immediate action and delete at least 6 good Ascendancy planets to warn ND that future violations wil not be tolerated.

[Willzzz]

Originally Posted by Kargool

Well, seeing as he took time to inform/threaten a HC of an alliance.



I feel this little snip was amusing.

Do i have to Point out somthing again to you? hes reffering to closed planets, no one was closed when he went to speak to the HCs. He was discussing a political situation and preventing it from going any further. Point made?

[Kargool]

Originally Posted by Willzzz

Do i have to Point out somthing again to you? hes reffering to closed planets, no one was closed when he went to speak to the HCs. He was discussing a political situation and preventing it from going any further. Point made?

Discussing a political situation. Yes, because that's exactly what's the job for the multihunters.

And again. 5 fleets!!! I am pretty sure alot of other alliances have had more incoming deffleets from various contributors than 5 fleets that seems to be the big issue here. Assassin took a direct step into PA politics with an agenda and this is becoming more and more apperant.

[Willzzz]

I am reframing from posting again as you dont seem to learn. I dont know what it is with your vendeta against him. I am not imagaining it as i have saw you post on several threads slatering him in every chance you get. Youve chosen to ignore the facts i posted ealier and still see on attacking him. You speak of agendas, well you seem to have one. And btw read phils and my posts about what a Mhs job is, then think (i have asked you to do this several times) They can dictate pollitics, they can do whateva they want tbh in the basis of them protecting what they think is right for the benefit of the players of the game. If you dont like it (feels like da shavou here) Leave. Stop making it your sole case to attack somone on these boards with every chance you get please.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

Except Ascendancy rules. It'll be breaking them if you did join Ascendancy.

How come someone negregged this?

It's the truth. Accepting DLR into Ascendancy would be breaking their own rules, unless jester has had a personality (and sex) change over the last two days.

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by Kargool

Well, seeing as he took time to inform/threaten a HC of an alliance.

I feel this little snip was amusing.

You never thought it may have been a reason for pm'ing the alliance HC? If he suspected it was DLR alliance politics to support ND (I don't say it is, only IF) then it's natural he's pm'ing the HC's to discuss it with them rather than the members who's only following orders. That makes sense, don't you think?

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

It's the truth. Accepting DLR into Ascendancy would be breaking their own rules, unless jester has had a personality (and sex) change over the last two days.

We actually did accept some DLR into Ascendancy, but the effect on the space/time continuum was so disastrous that reality distorted into an alternate timeline where we didn't recruit any DLR. We've learned our lesson and won't be trying that again.

[jerome]

Originally Posted by Kargool

You did have some good points, but since you actually tackled the man instead of the ball I'll refrain from commenting.

someone's sure showing off their theatrics.

[SteInMetz]

Originally Posted by Willzzz

Edit: I have just received after this post the log from Troll. Thank you for pasting it to me as requested.

If you recieved the log as you say you have (i have no doubts about that), why havent you posted a long post about "Assassin was oh'so right!"?

It seems obvious to me that the log prooved you wrong, and you found a way to just shut up without further suspicion..

[Willzzz]

Actually no Stein. Reason why i havent came on here posting the log (or about the log) is becuase DLR have chose not to and i respect the fact people dont want to post logs on here. I requested to see it as no one would show it me after several times of asking for it. And ive saw it. What else is there to comment on it?

[Tomkat]

Jeez laweez is Willzzz the new wakey? He's certainly challenging him for the "so long I can't be bothered to read it" posts!

[jerome]

his last few have been tiny you lazy newbie

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

DLR members are allowed to join ND in game. If we weren't, Gate wouldnt have been allowed to join.

Whether or not we do is down to us, not Assassin. DLR will always have a high ranking average, whether or not we are in our own tag.

And we could always merge with Ascendancy to make us #1. Its all within the rules.

I disagree, given DLR's self-proclaimed affiliation with NewDawn that would be against the rules. It would showcase an original (and continuing) intent to serve as a second tag. Joining them after three fleeting for an entire round and hitting everything BUT them would be blocked. Assassin made that clear, and it's just. The alliance tag limit is there for a reason.

I don't know why Gate was allowed to join the NewDawn tag, if I remember right, your own "justification" was that he was acting as a NewDawn member all the while he was in DLR. The point being, he was acting as an individual not a group. An individual can freely enter/exit membership with any alliance that will accept them. DLR could not.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Banned

We actually did accept some DLR into Ascendancy, but the effect on the space/time continuum was so disastrous that reality distorted into an alternate timeline where we didn't recruit any DLR. We've learned our lesson and won't be trying that again.

No we didn't. I think you missed the lecture where the creation of alternate timelines was discussed

[The_Fish]

Originally Posted by bwtmc

An individual can freely enter/exit membership with any alliance that will accept them. DLR could not.

Ok. So what if DLR was to disband and members join ND? Is that allowed?

How about if DLR members left 1 by 1 to join ND? Is that allowed?

Which is essentially the same thing as DLR joining ND, and similar to what happened in R14 with SiN members joining ND, and WP members joining ND.

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Ok. So what if DLR was to disband and members join ND? Is that allowed?

How about if DLR members left 1 by 1 to join ND? Is that allowed?

Which is essentially the same thing as DLR joining ND, and similar to what happened in R14 with SiN members joining ND, and WP members joining ND.

If you need to merge in order to win, go ahead

[jerome]

stop pretending to be so ****ing thick & oblivious already, christ.

[hook]

Originally Posted by jerome

stop pretending to be so ****ing thick & oblivious already, christ.

I think 'pretending' is based on an awfully large assumption.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Ok. So what if DLR was to disband and members join ND? Is that allowed?

How about if DLR members left 1 by 1 to join ND? Is that allowed?

Which is essentially the same thing as DLR joining ND, and similar to what happened in R14 with SiN members joining ND, and WP members joining ND.

If you want me to gut you like a fish, yes.

(See my pun?)

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Ok. So what if DLR was to disband and members join ND? Is that allowed?

How about if DLR members left 1 by 1 to join ND? Is that allowed?

Which is essentially the same thing as DLR joining ND, and similar to what happened in R14 with SiN members joining ND, and WP members joining ND.

Did you even read what I wrote?

No, No.

No.

No.

No it's completely different.

[Paddy]

Originally Posted by bwtmc

I don't know why Gate was allowed to join the NewDawn tag, if I remember right, your own "justification" was that he was acting as a NewDawn member all the while he was in DLR. The point being, he was acting as an individual not a group. An individual can freely enter/exit membership with any alliance that will accept them. DLR could not.

If you have read the rest of the thread then you know that Gate was not asked by NewDawn to join, he was kicked from DLR. He was kicked because he had become very anti-1up and as ND were also hitting 1up DLR didn't want him to be part of their tag anymore. This is because even without any evidence of support at all (and I mean absolutely zero, the only "cooperation" is a NAP) DLR have already been branded as ND support planets. They didn't want any real evidence for people to try to use, even if it was only 1 member.

Consider a member of, for example, 1up (only an example) who decided that he just wanted to hit Angels (again just an example) but 1up weren't hitting them. The member may act on his own for a few days, hitting Angels without permission from 1up. This would obviously get him kicked. If this planet then decided to try and join an alliance that was NAPed to 1up but was hitting Angels would you say that was against the rules?

In essence this is exactly what has happened with Gate. He had never retalled ND incs or defended an ND planet, in fact he had even got defence from ND for a fleetcatch. He was hardly a support planet for ND (ditto for the rest of DLR) and before he became anti-1up had been hitting solely DLR targets (90% of which are retals). ND then accepted him because Gate is a great player and a super BC.

In summary, Gate was not acting as an ND member for 95% of the time he was in the tag with DLR. For the last 5% of his time in DLR he wanted to help ND in hitting 1up and got kicked from DLR because of this. He then applied for ND who gladly accepted him. If there is any reason at all why any of this would be against the rules I just can't see it.

[jerome]

life is all about perspectives guys. except you are all going about this the wrong way, your all supposed to make mine easier.

[bwtmc]

I did read the rest of the thread, that's exactly what I meant by the individual/group comment.

I didn't mean that I disagreed with Gate joining NewDawn after being a DLR member, but simply that I had no real sway on it at all. (Mostly because it really doesn't matter)

[themast]

wow nones posted in here for a day now, amazing

[aestuos]

indeed maybe its over???

[Willzzz]

Most people are now trying to get the new thread regarding Ascendancy to pass it.