The screen shot might have been fake. Why did everyone else not jump on that… we are some how the victim.
Then immediately acknowledging it was not fake?
TDR. Anoynmous and mathos guardians as acknowledged by the guild leaders colluded with each other.
They claim it was smart I still call it cheating. At best it was completely against the spirit of the game.
As I said earlier I generally do not do meta grief defenses but when I am up against annoy and mg I will. Because they are cheats and so I will treat them accordingly. I hope everyone else does the same
As we’ve been meeting nothing but meta teams for as long as I know - I don’t think we’ll see the difference - so I believe that’s perfectly fine.
This sounds like an attempt of global collusion.
Jokes aside - I sincerely believe you guys are absolutely free to set whatever defenses you like. It’s been that way ever since day one. Except it’s not exactly the same now - but still relatively the same.
A quick reminder, that just because you perceive a thread to be no longer useful or contributing anything, isn’t a reason to derail it / go off-topic.
Also if you have a personal disagreement with a member, please take it to Private Messages. (That’s why the “send a message to the poster” option is the first one on the list when you hit the Flag button )
ITo everyone who thinks an alliance is cheating, this is for you.
Your way of thinking is what’s wrong with the world today. Instead of persevere over adversity, you crumble and cry foul. You look for a way out instead of looking for a way forward. The correct response to this would have been to find a friendly guild to ally with, not extinguish the rights of other people to have fun with friends. I find your views on alliances akin to republicans gerrymandering voting districts Just a way for people with money to keep the poor down
Nah, I’ll tell you what’s wrong in the world today. People cutting corners and doing the easy thing instead of the fair/right thing. The absolute kicker is when those same people decide to get indignant when they are called on the behavior.
I agree that alliances are fine in terms of members having an option to change guilds if/when they ever need a change of pace, and alliances are also fine with the sharing of strategies, team building ideas and so on. But where alliances are not fine is when it involves deliberately throwing matches to improve the guild’s ranking in their respective bracket at the expense of the other guilds in said bracket. That’s just wrong and I have yet to hear an excuse that justifies it.
With regards to all of @Beefbaloney’s posts, I really wish that the forum would enable a downvote capability instead of only having the ability to flag it as inappropriate. While its obvious to the vast majority that he is completely incorrect in all his recent statements he is entitled to his opinion no matter how ludicrous they are and they should not be flagged… But it would be nice if the rest of us had a way of showing our dislike for his opinions in a way that does not involve getting the post closed due to flags.
I believe the reason Discourse doesn’t have a “dislike” button is because it does not lead to productive conversation. If you dislike something, post a comment in rebuttal; your “likes” become their “dislikes,” and you’ve also progressed the dialogue.
(Not saying this is my own view, I wouldn’t be against having “dislikes,” but I see the rationale behind their decision.)
The rules against flagging to close a thread cannot come out soon enough, it will be interesting to see if that rule becomes an enforcement nightmare for Ozball and Saltypatra though. In the current state, with people flagging posts (just to close a thread for a few hours) there are going to be a lot banhammers dropping to get this aberrant behavior adjusted back to a normal discussion format.
)