pRo declares war on NERD

DeletedUser63840

Guest
Read his profile bro.

I'll tell you what's goin on though. tone87 had 7 trains sniped today. Ouch.

Ahh TOBY arent you that player that couldnt back his case last time he opened his mouth and tried to talk about me.. Yes Toby im still waiting for my reply to my other mails (i Know there wont be one)

yes indeed i may have had X ammount of trains killed.. you see the thing is im attacking Facey.. i sent those attacks under the impression i was attacking Facey (A Nub Cake) Now i know hes being sat, and most likely by you since your wetting yourself with excitement over those dead nobles.. Now i Know not to be so lax with the attacks..

Toby if you've got a problem with me which it seems you have, instead of hiding behind other peoples accts who are and will be pwnd.. How about you attack me with your acct..
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Ahh TOBY arent you that player that couldnt back his case last time he opened his mouth and tried to talk about me.. Yes Toby im still waiting for my reply to my other mails (i Know there wont be one)

yes indeed i may have had X ammount of trains killed.. you see the thing is im attacking Facey.. i sent those attacks under the impression i was attacking Facey (A Nub Cake) Now i know hes being sat, and most likely by you since your wetting yourself with excitement over those dead nobles.. Now i Know not to be so lax with the attacks..

Toby if you've got a problem with me which it seems you have, instead of hiding behind other peoples accts who are and will be pwnd.. How about you attack me with your acct..

lol
I usually try not to disrespect nerd players because I like xmach and others, but...
Fail.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
How about you attack me with your acct..

That would be against the rules genius. I would destroy you with my account, considering Facey has not gotten support throughout the war, and he stil manages to snipe your trains.
 

DeletedUser63840

Guest
lol.. read the rules and you will find out that you can.. you just gotta wait 24hrs.. as for facey not recieving support throughout the war thats another piece of bull.. iv taken a few that have had support incomming.. off Jack par,thoelanx just to name a couple.. thats why most of his northern villas have over 20k-30k spr,swrd,ar

_________________
4116713.png
 

Stotty2009

Guest
That would be against the rules genius. I would destroy you with my account, considering Facey has not gotten support throughout the war, and he stil manages to snipe your trains.

And I would call people sitting him/co-playing him support aswell.
If he didn't have a co-player, he would of been rimmed within 2 weeks at the very most...and thats a promise. His weakness was my advantage - he knows what that was.
 

DeletedUser

Guest

And I would call people sitting him/co-playing him support aswell.
If he didn't have a co-player, he would of been rimmed within 2 weeks at the very most...and thats a promise. His weakness was my advantage - he knows what that was.

An account being active is not support. You sir are a fool. :icon_neutral:
 

Stotty2009

Guest
An account being active is not support. You sir are a fool. :icon_neutral:

When Facey cannot snip, nor did he even have the ability to rename 100 incomings (he did not have premium - if you are wondering), then he got a co-player who bought him premium, who could rename 000's of attacks and can snip.
Then get a sitter - Duke of pRo - I think that means its pretty bad what is happening.

So you sir are the fool.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
When Facey cannot snip, nor did he even have the ability to rename 100 incomings (he did not have premium - if you are wondering), then he got a co-player who bought him premium, who could rename 000's of attacks and can snip.
Then get a sitter - Duke of pRo - I think that means its pretty bad what is happening.

So you sir are the fool.

Someone keeping their account active is playing the game, it is in no way tribal support :|

Looks like you are just mad because your assumed easy lunch is putting up a fight. Deal with it and send proper attacks, or give up. Thats all there really is to it, no use in blabbering about it here.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
When Facey cannot snip, nor did he even have the ability to rename 100 incomings (he did not have premium - if you are wondering), then he got a co-player who bought him premium, who could rename 000's of attacks and can snip.
Then get a sitter - Duke of pRo - I think that means its pretty bad what is happening.

So you sir are the fool.

Oh yeah, pRo is in deep trouble because Toby likes to have fun every once in a while and destroy any NERD noble train in his vicinity. Honestly Stooty, I don't think you will have a problem attacking me will you? I mean, if you can attack. The only thing I have heard is that you can snipe....but that was from you yourself.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I gave the dictionary definition because there's a clear distinction between what you seem to be claiming a coalition to be and the what it actually is, a bare-bones definition makes it extremely simple to grasp the concept of a word yet still you find yourself confused, I'm also at a loss when looking for where it is you argued against either of the three examples I gave.

Are you now going to argue with the dictionary definition? Perhaps in your next post you can explain to me whether your prostate gland has been swapped with your tonsils, i do find it hard to distinguish between what comes out of either of their original areas with you.

I already dealt with the lack of objectivity we both agree that i have (though of course the mighty xmach is unbiased) by asking for an unbiased definition from an outside TW player, i later re-quoted this request in case you missed it somewhere along the line, clearly you did.

In closing xmach, i don't need to counter your arguments, i have done so time and time again and you repost the same tiring drivel, repetition is not victory you tedious little fellow, logic is, and in your ramblings you only continue to show you have neither victory nor logic.

Kindly open your eyes or shut your mouth.

My point was that an encyclopedia definition is more THOROUGH than a plain dictionary definition, of which you only gave one reference.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Coalition
1. a combination or alliance, esp. a temporary one between persons, factions, states, etc.

See the OR, no previous "alliance" is necessary for it to be a coalition.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Coalition
coalition [ˌkəʊəˈlɪʃən]
n
1.
a. an alliance or union between groups, factions, or parties, esp for some temporary and specific reason

See no "alliance" is needed, it even says for SPECIFC and TEMPORARY reason, which fits perfectly in our situation.

An ad hoc arrangement between two or more nations for common action. See also alliance; multinational.
Source: Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. US Department of Defense 2005.

coalition noun
/kəʊ.əˈlɪʃ.ən/
/koʊ-/ [C or U]
the joining together of different political parties or groups for a particular purpose, usually for a limited time
Source: (Definition of coalition noun from the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary)


So lets see thats:
2 (actually many more but they all say the same thing) online dictionaries
The U.S. Department of Defense's definition
and
Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary

How many more examples do you need to prove you're wrong? While yes Alliances CAN form a coalition, an alliance is not NEEDED to form a coalition. You provided 1 simple, narrow definition to fit YOUR argument, while I found multiple dictionary definitions as well as a thorough encyclopedia definition. You can find more that agree with you, but you CANT refute that there are just as many sources that agree with ME, its a matter of scope, you want a very narrow definition of coalition so you can HIDE behing the SEMANTICS.

So lets see if you can open YOUR EYES and accept THAT logic and THOSE definitions...or just shutup.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Oh yeah, pRo is in deep trouble because Toby likes to have fun every once in a while and destroy any NERD noble train in his vicinity. Honestly Stooty, I don't think you will have a problem attacking me will you? I mean, if you can attack. The only thing I have heard is that you can snipe....but that was from you yourself.

54:71:14 (414|571) K54 10,371 Simon Yuen [pRo] Stotty2009 [NERD] 2009-12-30 14:46:03

54:81:00 (410|580) K54 10,193 Simon Yuen [pRo] Stotty2009 [NERD] 2009-12-30 14:00:01

Maybe you should check twstats before attacking people blindly.

And the "i woudl destroy you with my account" must be in reference to the one you share with what... 3 other people? Is that really something to brag about? If you want to co-play thats your call, but don't expect those that solo-play to be impressed by an account that took 2-3 people to build/play.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
My point was that an encyclopedia definition is more...
So lets see if you can open YOUR EYES and accept THAT logic and THOSE definitions...or just shutup.

Here I've given you a very wide list of terms, all the applicable ones taken from the definitions you have provided above. I'll even give you a simple questioning system requiring only one word answers so you don't get further confused when given the whole English language to respond with, simply respond; yes/no/ignorant.

'Combination' ...are Powers and SCUM combined? (with a 500 member limit i think it would be pretty obvious if we were).
'Alliance' ...are Powers and SCUM allied? (nope).
'Union' ...are Powers and SCUM united? (i suppose very tenuously yes, we do have a common cause).
'Arrangement' ...is there an arrangement between Powers and SCUM? (not that i know of, and I'm co-duke of Powers).
'Joining' ...is there a joining between Powers and SCUM? (again pretty obvious if we were with a 500 member limit).

So here we can see, of the five definitions you gave Powers and SCUM only fit into the bracket of a coalition once and then it's an extremely loose fit. Though I'm sure you're quite used to a loose fit xmach I myself prefer to satisfy any requirements completely. :icon_wink: An ambiguous 20% without proof is certainly no grounds for your accusations, evidence is a lovely thing.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
yay... xmach is still going! barb yours self out of the war! wooheeyay!
 

DeletedUser

Guest
And the "i woudl destroy you with my account" must be in reference to the one you share with what... 3 other people? Is that really something to brag about? If you want to co-play thats your call, but don't expect those that solo-play to be impressed by an account that took 2-3 people to build/play.

Stotty2009 on 06.12. at 13:41
Ok no problem :p
My co writes in Red :p haha!
So how you finding Facey's account?

Maybe you should do some research on your own tribe members. Stotty has a coplayer according to this post. I was talking about Facey's account too. I would like to see Stotty take a village off of it.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Maybe you should do some research on your own tribe members. Stotty has a coplayer according to this post. I was talking about Facey's account too. I would like to see Stotty take a village off of it.

It well known that Stotty IS a noob ,, got him self a cooplayer who seems to be quite good(not the real stotty) and loves inactives ,
I bet that its not reall stotty who is posting here and most pro members certainly rememer stottys post from our shared forums!

enough said...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
It well known that Stotty IS a noob ,, got him self a cooplayer who seems to be quite good(not the real stotty) and loves inactives ,
I bet that its not reall stotty who is posting here and most pro members certainly rememer stottys post from our shared forums!

enough said...

Him and his co player are good players...

EDIT:It is the ''real'' stotty who's posting here.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
as far as i know one of them is good the other is ..., and about stottys ''post'' We have seen,,, I rather keep quiet...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Here I've given you a very wide list of terms, all the applicable ones taken from the definitions you have provided above. I'll even give you a simple questioning system requiring only one word answers so you don't get further confused when given the whole English language to respond with, simply respond; yes/no/ignorant.

'Combination' ...are Powers and SCUM combined? (with a 500 member limit i think it would be pretty obvious if we were).
'Alliance' ...are Powers and SCUM allied? (nope).
'Union' ...are Powers and SCUM united? (i suppose very tenuously yes, we do have a common cause).
'Arrangement' ...is there an arrangement between Powers and SCUM? (not that i know of, and I'm co-duke of Powers).
'Joining' ...is there a joining between Powers and SCUM? (again pretty obvious if we were with a 500 member limit).

So here we can see, of the five definitions you gave Powers and SCUM only fit into the bracket of a coalition once and then it's an extremely loose fit. Though I'm sure you're quite used to a loose fit xmach I myself prefer to satisfy any requirements completely. :icon_wink: An ambiguous 20% without proof is certainly no grounds for your accusations, evidence is a lovely thing.

Really, is that the best you got? Taking individual words and narrowly defining each to fit your definition? Thats the lamest thing i've ever seen. You didn't even use dictionary definitions, you took YOUR SPIN on what you think those words mean as though thats a valid argument.

Here lets see what the dictionaries say, since thats your preferred argument style:

Combination has a hundred different definitions, its a very broad term, theres locker combinations, food combinations, Clothing combinations, they all are a result of Different things being put together for a singular outcome, they do not need to be MERGED to be a combination. Is a 3 punch combination = 1 large punch ? Your argument/definition MAKES NO SENSE, Combination has no singular meaning, and so your tribes are in a COMBINATION, If PSP was a combo player, one would be the fish, one would be the chips, and one would be the beer (you can't have fish n' chips without beer), would you only consider a Fish n' Chips a combo if the fish and chips were smashed together into one glob that was then blended together with a beer in a blender? Sounds yummy!

Here lets see what the dictionaries say, since thats your preferred argument style:

al⋅li⋅ance [uh-lahy-uhns] Show IPA
–noun 1. the act of allying or state of being allied.
2. a formal agreement or treaty between two or more nations to cooperate for specific purposes.
3. a merging of efforts or interests by persons, families, states, or organizations
Synonyms:
1. association; coalition, combination, bloc; partnership; affiliation. Alliance, confederation, league, union all mean the joining of states for mutual benefit or to permit the joint exercise of functions. An alliance may apply to any connection entered into for mutual benefit.

** You have a merging of interests with pro and scum, the extermination of nerd**

un⋅ion [yoon-yuhn] Show IPA
–noun 1. the act of uniting two or more things.
2. the state of being united.
3. something formed by uniting two or more things; combination.
4. a number of persons, states, etc., joined or associated together for some common purpose: student union; credit union.

** You are associated with pro and scum as all 3 of you are war'ing the same tribe, and you share an alliance with pRo, so if you want you can just call yourselves the PP coalition, by your own definition you are ALLIED to pRo **

ar⋅range⋅ment [uh-reynj-muhnt]
–noun 1. an act of arranging; state of being arranged.
2. the manner or way in which things are arranged: a tactful arrangement of the seating at dinner.
** Whether planned or not, you 3 are ARRANGED against NERD, therefor you are in ARRANGEMENT, Nothing in the definition REQUIRES it to have been planned ahead of time**

And finally,

join [join] Show IPA
–verb (used with object) 1. to bring in contact, connect, or bring or put together: to join hands; to join pages with a staple.
2. to come into contact or union with: The brook joins the river.
3. to bring together in a particular relation or for a specific purpose, action, etc.; unite: to join forces against the smugglers.
4. to become a member of (an organization, party, etc.): to join a club.
5. to enlist in (one of the armed forces): to join the Navy.
6. to come into the company of; meet or accompany: I'll join you later.
7. to participate with (someone) in some act or activity: My wife joins me in thanking you for the gift.
8. to unite in marriage.
9. to meet or engage in (battle, conflict, etc.): The opposing armies joined battle.
10. to adjoin; meet:

**There's 7 out of 10 definitions for Join(ing) that PSP falls into. ***

So 5 of your claims, 5 definitions (4 from dictionaries) proving PSP is a group, union, coalition, in virtually every sense of the meanings. Now accept the fact that COALITION is the acceptable terminology for what your group is in TW and cut the semantics bullcrap.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Please get back on topic, this has been going on for how long now? Talk about the war, and not this little ego skirmish about the meaning of a simple word.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
Map of conquers between pRo & NERD since war began:

[spoil]BLUE: pRo conquers off NERD
RED: NERD conquers off pRo

noble.php
[/spoil]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top