11 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1860: (Adnarel): Don't sign up unless you intend to honor the DMZ unconditionally. |
13 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1860: game on, I will do the DMZ's, should be fun |
13 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1860: Awesome. It improves the map immensely, I promise. Good luck! |
13 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1860: I'm game for it |
14 Jun 13 UTC | Autumn, 1863: Lake Michigan harassment fleet is best fleet. |
14 Jun 13 UTC | Autumn, 1864: yeh I hate that damn thing |
14 Jun 13 UTC | Autumn, 1864: Oh, shit. I'm sorry, that was a misclick into Chesapeake. I'll withdraw immediately. |
14 Jun 13 UTC | Autumn, 1864: thanks, we'll be fine, just move back, it's good |
14 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1865: It will be doing no SH or SM. Consider it invisible this turn. |
14 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1865: Shit. Our first retreat phase of the game. |
15 Jun 13 UTC | Autumn, 1866: I did not see you in Anchorage. =I |
15 Jun 13 UTC | Autumn, 1866: it's colored blue! |
15 Jun 13 UTC | Autumn, 1866: I am not a clever man. |
15 Jun 13 UTC | Autumn, 1866: going to have to not finalize here as I have a busy weekend, sorry |
15 Jun 13 UTC | Autumn, 1866: That's fine. Have a good weekend. |
19 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1869: I'm appealing what I feel is an unfounded metagaming ban. If I suddenly disappear, the appeal has been denied. Just FYI. |
19 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1869: oh, sorry to hear |
19 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1869: Meh. I metagamed once, in ignorance. But that's no excuse, so I accept that. This time around, I think somebody may have gotten butthurt and flagged me. |
19 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1869: whaddya mean, you metagamed? i won't say anything and obviously you are a good player ... just curious |
19 Jun 13 UTC | Spring, 1869: In a previous WWIV I died almost at once... New York wanted a share of my territories, but I wanted to give them to Quebec, since I knew Quebec from elsewhere. That was when I was pretty new to the site, and did not know that such practices are quickly bannable. I got a come-to-Jesus talk from a mod, and set off with the earnest intention to not metagame again. Well, now in this new game I've apparently been accused by somebody and found guilty. It's frustrating, because by my interpretation of the rule (no alliances based on familiarity) I've not infracted upon it. Yes, I know a guy in a game. But we've been everything between non-aggressive and hostile in the game so far, and none of it was based on the fact that I know him. So I really don't get why I'm guilty of metagaming. Once the mod gets back to me, I'll present my organized case to him and see what he thinks. I admit that the first situation with Quebec and New York in the first infraction was legit; and ignorance is no excuse. But this second offense - which is having me face a ban - I just can't take lying down. We'll see. Because you're right: I am a halfway decent player and I don't need to metagame to do it. |