Deleted User - 10618707
Guest
Someone's mad they can't get looter of the day anymore ?
Someone's mad they can't get looter of the day anymore ?
First time you guys get threaten or receive hate mails/messages?
Grow some balls, stop crying about this nonsense and move on, it's not such a big deal.
Relax macho man, no one talking about crying, growing balls or anyone being offended. Its a discussion, you don't like it, don't read it.
Not like an ignorant imbecile in the online world who photoshopped us with an ISIS picture or threatened to rape my mom, will change anything in my life. After all, he specified his profession in life on skype, and no big surprise there to why he's such a failure.
Point to be made was the caliber of ethics some of Digg players have. Spying and this blablabla everyone cries about is something, its part of a war game but going that far is something else.
Apparently, 5 pages of comments from different players in different tribes makes it a discussion, unless you have another definition for it, be my guest.Discussion? where? please show me because all I see is you and matt whining over some pictures that an idiot has made.
you do know that the reason I probably won't be coming back for w100 is because you or one of your members got into deadly's account and impersonated him right? glad I called that guy the c wordEthics discussions from members of Paryl, with the likes of Matt and Karina in it... Priceless.
you do know that the reason I probably won't be coming back for w100 is because you or one of your members got into deadly's account and impersonated him right? glad I called that guy the c word
While I don't particularly agree with Ghostoxa in this instance, I have more thought that those who spam these forums with trash talk, and nonsensical garbage are more the garden variety "I post therefore I exist" types.
Your logic is flawed there. If supporting against a Nap'ed tribe was a breach of the agreement by default the Napping part would also have to NAP each other's allies, as any tribe would be forced to help support their allied tribes, as a part of such an agreement. From there the issue continues, as those new NAP's allies would also have to be NAP'ed and so on.You are specifically stating "You" which I had nothing to do with it, clearly, as I asked who did it.
And yes I did say that. Yes that may have been the only actual term but still supporting an enemy tribe at war with us as a NAP is a breach, as it is an act of aggression as sitting their accounts also is. Either way doesn't matter how it came about because it was bound to happen eventually.
That depends on what the terms of an alliance is, but if you won't support you might just as well NAP instead. If you just want to OP with someone and prevent backstabbing it is better to just NAP, and coordinate the OP together instead. Unless it is with Diggs, because they will backstab you anyway.Are allies forced to support allied tribes? Talk about flawed logic.
While I don't particularly agree with Ghostoxa in this instance, I have more thought that those who spam these forums with trash talk, and nonsensical garbage are more the garden variety "I post therefore I exist" types.