DeletedUser
Guest
Partly im just trolling as my only proof Nam were involved is the main iamtell player stating his account was stolen and Nam given the sit.
That would hint that either Nam instructed the co to do this.. or the co just favours Nam over Golden, if it's the second then Nam isnt involved
.<3
DeletedUser
Guest
So you go around blaming NAM before you even know the full story, typical Golden though. I'm gonna pass my sit to Golden and accuse you of hijacking my account.
Apathetic h0llygh0st
Consumer of Beverages
- Reaction score
- 1,193
Set h0llygh0st Baratheon please.
DeletedUser118341
Guest
Partly im just trolling as my only proof Nam were involved is the main iamtell player stating his account was stolen and Nam given the sit.
That would hint that either Nam instructed the co to do this.. or the co just favours Nam over Golden, if it's the second then Nam isnt involved
<3
Can we just agree that the 2nd co-players actions should be looked down upon and mocked.
To betray the main co-player/owner of the accounts wished is completely shocking and disgusting.
Regardless of whether he just prefers NAM, or he is in NAM's back pocket and was asked to do it. Either way, if #1 says no, it shouldn't have been done.
Terrible player.
DeletedUser
Guest
That I will agree with. Great comment Eddie
DeletedUser114871
Guest
bad bad bad
DeletedUser
Guest
Of course, the actions of the co player are terrible but only because maybe the co player hated Golden and didnt want them having the villages does not mean NAM did what andrew is saying.
Sinful Angel
Contributing Poster
- Reaction score
- 818
You guys are sitting the account as evidenced by the fact that he is recapping and defending us now as opposed to before when the main player purposely set us as sitter and gave us the villages as that's what he wanted. In fact aren't you doing exactly the opposite of what the main player wants?
Whoever is sitting that account better be careful or they'll be in trouble..
Brick Tamland
Guest
Hilary Duff had the sit a couple days ago Must have been a coincidence that NAM gained a lot of vills from the account at the same time? :?
Must have been a coincidence that NAM gained a lot of vills from the account at the same time? :?DeletedUser
Guest
Isnt this what happened with oogura? why are people surprised
Sinful Angel
Contributing Poster
- Reaction score
- 818
This is different, i don't think they sat Ooguru and the owner wanted it. This one is more obvious to implicate them in and the owner didn't want them to do that.
DeletedUser
Guest
But when bill was offered a sit to do the same back to nam he gave chris the sit. I would hope chris doesnt have a part in this situation and its just the 'lives under bridges' people in nam
DeletedUser
Guest
Yeah but it's happened twice now.. On sunday the co player tried changing the email and pass and gave the sit to nam.. the main player then recovered the account and gave the sit to golden.. 2 days later the co player again gives the sit to nam.. must have convinced the main player that he could be trusted then betrayed him a second time.
Maybe Nam arent involved in telling the co to do this, but Nam know the co player has now stolen the account on two seperate occasions and Nam also know the main player wanted golden to have the sit so are complicite in acting against the owners wishes.
The first time it happened on sunday you could say Nam didnt know the co was acting against the owners wishes, but after the owner retrieved the account, gave it to golden and it's now happened a second time, where the co steals it and gives it back to Nam, you figure that it's happened twice Nam now know that the main player doesnt want them to have the sit and should refuse the sit from the co as doing something against the owners wishes is illegal, and Nam maybe didnt know it was against the owners wishes on sunday.. but they sure do now as it's the second time it's happened.
The main owner doesnt check the acc often and probably thinks Golden still have the sit.. which were his wishes.
Sinful Angel
Contributing Poster
- Reaction score
- 818
Maybe one day NAM will understand we want to have a fair and fun fight not cut each other at every opportunity for small leg ups. But I doubt it.
I don't see the point in petty crap like this from them, why not prove they're better by fighting rather than cheating. Maybe they're scared?
I don't see the point in petty crap like this from them, why not prove they're better by fighting rather than cheating. Maybe they're scared?
DeletedUser
Guest
Yeah Like i'd believe Nam wasnt involved if it only happened once, but it's happened twice, both on Sunday and Wednesday, where the account was given to Nam against the owners wishes not on one but two seperate occasions, theres no proof Nam asked the co to do this but when it's happened twice you do question it.
DeletedUser
Guest
Is that what got you all crying, that a rogue co if thats even it, is capping villages off you guys? you do know the account also nuked the hell out of NAM people.
But just my opinion the main player seems to be a bit dodgy, he could of changed pass/changed email, could of even put in a ticket to ig mods to ban the account until the situation is resolved. But carry on Golden, blame NAM because you didnt get your freebies as planned.
But just my opinion the main player seems to be a bit dodgy, he could of changed pass/changed email, could of even put in a ticket to ig mods to ban the account until the situation is resolved. But carry on Golden, blame NAM because you didnt get your freebies as planned.
DeletedUser92289
Guest
Scoundrels! Id suggest they disband immediately
DeletedUser
Guest
This has always been the problem with co-players; and certainly why I'm reluctant to play with anyone that I've not known for any length of time. Being as the sit for this player has been passed between Golden and NAM certainly points towards some type of issue, but short of the owner coming on and giving us all an explanation (highly unlikely), none of us will ever know and can only make assumptions.
When NAM lost the sit to Golden, and all of a sudden your trains started being sniped and defended against, I can't imagine that you just sat back and didn't think that something fishy was going on.
When NAM lost the sit to Golden, and all of a sudden your trains started being sniped and defended against, I can't imagine that you just sat back and didn't think that something fishy was going on.
THE MURPH ALL CAPS
Contributing Poster
- Reaction score
- 948
Disagree.
What's truly unfair is to pick and choose when you want a co-player and when your want to recognise that person as a co-player on your account. Having a co-player on your account gives you many advantages and that obviously comes with risk also so you should trust the person you are sharing your account with. I wouldn't begrudge someone for wanted something else to happen to the account they both worked hard for, both actively played and both contributed premium just because one of them has access to the email. In reality it's often the case that the person with email access doesn't play the account at all. I know countless of examples. We've all had that experience of looking for the 'owner' of an account even though they don't even play it.
Neither tribe decided to recruit the account. The account probably should have hit delete if they couldnt come to an agreement. Seems like a fair way to do it but then again I don't blame either for wanting to end their time on 83 a little bit more exciting as a lot of hard work went in to get here in the first place.
So what we're seeing here is a conflict of interest between two people who, in my eyes, are essentially equals.
For example, either player on the account could ha e sent all troops on a journey of 100 hours +. They are perfectly entitled to do so and there's nothing you can do about it. That's the nature of co-playing and I hope you all come to learn that. I like to align my visions and direction with my co-players, treat them as equals and hope we enjoy playing the game together.
What you're saying is the co-player should lose every privlage just because he doesn't have the email? What's disgusting is your attitude.
It completely attacks NAM and it shouldn't. The issue is with the account and the account alone. NAM shouldn't be brought into this.
Last edited:
