GM Wippo Group#01_Deutschland
Moderators: Duke, trewqh, korexus
- Raw
- Commander
- Posts: 769
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
- Contact:
- Raw
- Commander
- Posts: 769
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
- Contact:
There is a point to me breaking this NAP. The point is, be careful who you call a NAP breaker. By calling the Scholars NAP breakers, you include every one of us. If you want to call someone a NAP breaker do it, just be careful who you include.Allister Fiend wrote: Is that the only way you guys can win is by breaking NAP's?
TK just happened to be the lucky recipient, not that he deserves it or anything.
Cheers,
Raw
It's not fast unless its got a fart can.
- TK
- Trooper
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:00 am
That doesnt explain why you've been working on my spycode for what, 5 turns?
We have a clan alliance. Do you guys think that the most powerful spy op is allowed in an alliance?!?
It also throws a different light on the "mishap" when you attacked me earlier. Was it really an accident?
And you wonder why people call you NAP-breakers? In the last 2 weeks, Xarfei has broken 2 NAPs (one by accident, I admit), and now the two of you have orchestrated a massive double-alliance-break.
If you had a problem with someone calling you a NAP-breaker, attack that person. It is no justification for attacking me. Do not try to sound righteous here.
Its pretty sad that this is the only way you guys can win. If I knew winning was so important to you, I might be a little more generous.
We have a clan alliance. Do you guys think that the most powerful spy op is allowed in an alliance?!?
It also throws a different light on the "mishap" when you attacked me earlier. Was it really an accident?
And you wonder why people call you NAP-breakers? In the last 2 weeks, Xarfei has broken 2 NAPs (one by accident, I admit), and now the two of you have orchestrated a massive double-alliance-break.
If you had a problem with someone calling you a NAP-breaker, attack that person. It is no justification for attacking me. Do not try to sound righteous here.
Its pretty sad that this is the only way you guys can win. If I knew winning was so important to you, I might be a little more generous.
- Dameon
- Moderator
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse
Wow, TK, you sound like....me. Yep. That's pretty much the same reasoning I used on you when you were in your NAP/alliance breaking days; basically right up until you joined TFF. Maybe you understand why I got so frustrated with you now. Oh well, as far as I know ever since joining TFF you've played the straight and narrow so I'm going to assume you're reformed unless it's proved otherwise. It's still hard to dredge up sympathy when really all that's happening here is your karma is coming back to kick you in the ass, I have to admit. Oh well, nobody's perfect.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."
- Raw
- Commander
- Posts: 769
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
- Contact:
You're telling me that working on a spy code is breaking a nap? That's a bunch of BS.
Also...don't bring Korexus into this, he didn't know that I was going to attack you.
I did this to prove a point, not to win.
-Raw
Also...don't bring Korexus into this, he didn't know that I was going to attack you.
I did this to prove a point, not to win.
-Raw
TK wrote:That doesnt explain why you've been working on my spycode for what, 5 turns?
We have a clan alliance. Do you guys think that the most powerful spy op is allowed in an alliance?!?
It also throws a different light on the "mishap" when you attacked me earlier. Was it really an accident?
And you wonder why people call you NAP-breakers? In the last 2 weeks, Xarfei has broken 2 NAPs (one by accident, I admit), and now the two of you have orchestrated a massive double-alliance-break.
If you had a problem with someone calling you a NAP-breaker, attack that person. It is no justification for attacking me. Do not try to sound righteous here.
Its pretty sad that this is the only way you guys can win. If I knew winning was so important to you, I might be a little more generous.
It's not fast unless its got a fart can.
- Undertaker
- Commander
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: The Back Room (behind Sharky's place)
- Contact:
Wow Nick, those kinds words ... they usually don't get associated with the First Family. Though that is our style, go figure.Dameon wrote: ever since joining TFF you've played the straight and narrow
"That's a good question. Let me see...In my case, you know, I hate to advocate drugs or liquor, violence, insanity to anyone. But in my case it's worked." Hunter S. Thompson
- TK
- Trooper
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:00 am
"Working on it" (by which I guess you mean finding it?) may be OK, but running it certainly is not OK. Korexus brought himself into this by running my code. You just dont do that in an *alliance*. It is like spying every province that someone owns!!Raw wrote:You're telling me that working on a spy code is breaking a nap? That's a bunch of BS.
Also...don't bring Korexus into this, he didn't know that I was going to attack you.
However, "working on it" suggests that you were always aiming to run it. In turn this suggests that you have been planning to break our alliance for the last 5 turns or so. Suddenly your attack doesnt look like such a spontaneous move. If you are just trying to screw me over, say so. I will take it as a compliment that it takes alliance-breaking to beat me.
Prove a point to who though? Me? You already said that it was nothing to do with me, just that I was the "lucky recipient".Raw wrote:I did this to prove a point, not to win.
So who? Allister? Then why not attack him?
If someone else, why not break an alliance with THEM?!
I simply find it hard to believe that I "just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time". I am sure you understand how I feel.
- Raw
- Commander
- Posts: 769
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
- Contact:
Running a spycode in no way harms you, thus it's not breaking a NAP. If anything, running a code could end up hurting me if you happened to change it. Also, I did not plan this out for 5 turns as I just found out that Korexus had the code...I haven't even tried to find out anyones spy code this game.
Also, I may be on my way to Allister
I do understand how you feel, but I just had to live up to my clan name.....the NAP breaking Scholars.
Also, I may be on my way to Allister
I do understand how you feel, but I just had to live up to my clan name.....the NAP breaking Scholars.
It's not fast unless its got a fart can.
- Brykovian
- Moderator
- Posts: 1045
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA ... Clan: Scholars
- Contact:
Oh ... I understand how that feels. Though you may not remember such an insignificant bit of history, TK.TK wrote:I simply find it hard to believe that I "just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time". I am sure you understand how I feel.
Cheers and carry on.
-Bryk
Matt Worden Games ... Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess
- Raw
- Commander
- Posts: 769
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
- Contact:
- korexus
- Moderator
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Reading
- Contact:
Raw hadn't been working on your code, I was doing that alone, a few turns back I did two 100 apart at random and yours was in the middle.
I really don't believe that in doing so I was being aggressive. I had no plans of attacking you, as I explained in person I was mainly curious and I had the orders spare.
Bear in mind that the only reason that you know I ran your spy code was because you asked me whose I ran and I told you. If I'd thought you'd consider it a NAP/alliance break, I could have just lied and said it was Fredos...
Also, this entire game hasn't really had the feel of an alliance to it. I suggested 'possibly a clan alliance' before turn 1 and nothing more was said about it, so you may be stretching a point just a touch there...
korexus
I really don't believe that in doing so I was being aggressive. I had no plans of attacking you, as I explained in person I was mainly curious and I had the orders spare.
Bear in mind that the only reason that you know I ran your spy code was because you asked me whose I ran and I told you. If I'd thought you'd consider it a NAP/alliance break, I could have just lied and said it was Fredos...
Also, this entire game hasn't really had the feel of an alliance to it. I suggested 'possibly a clan alliance' before turn 1 and nothing more was said about it, so you may be stretching a point just a touch there...
korexus
With Great Power comes Great Irritability
- TK
- Trooper
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:00 am
Running a spycode may not be directly aggressive but still breaks even the simplest of NAPs. "No spying" is a basic NAP term, and running a spycode is the most serious of spy ops!korexus wrote:I really don't believe that in doing so I was being aggressive. I had no plans of attacking you, as I explained in person I was mainly curious and I had the orders spare.
As it turns out, the "coincidental" running of my spycode most certainly IS aggressive!!
...and then I would have asked you (as my ally) to show me the data, and you would have been unable to! But this is beside the point...korexus wrote:Bear in mind that the only reason that you know I ran your spy code was because you asked me whose I ran and I told you. If I'd thought you'd consider it a NAP/alliance break, I could have just lied and said it was Fredos...
By your reasoning, any spying is OK so long as your spies are not detected! Breaking NAPs is OK so long as the other players dont find out? I wonder if your clan agree with you there... Saladin?
Nonsense! Raw and I have worked together to take down Dameon and Nesty. In the meantime, at least 3 of us have cast spells on BoV. We WERE in an alliance.korexus wrote:Also, this entire game hasn't really had the feel of an alliance to it. I suggested 'possibly a clan alliance' before turn 1 and nothing more was said about it, so you may be stretching a point just a touch there...
Raw - I finally understand where you are coming from! You wanted to prove that you are NOT a NAP breaker? Oh, wait...
- korexus
- Moderator
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Reading
- Contact:
If you say so...TK wrote:Running a spycode may not be directly aggressive but still breaks even the simplest of NAPs. "No spying" is a basic NAP term, and running a spycode is the most serious of spy ops!korexus wrote:I really don't believe that in doing so I was being aggressive. I had no plans of attacking you, as I explained in person I was mainly curious and I had the orders spare.
As it turns out, the "coincidental" running of my spycode most certainly IS aggressive!!
Or I oculd have said I meant to try a spycode and made a typo, or I could have said I'd run Raw's code to worry Donut, or I could have said I'd tried someone before me in the OOP but they'd changed it, or, or...TK wrote:...and then I would have asked you (as my ally) to show me the data, and you would have been unable to! But this is beside the point...korexus wrote:Bear in mind that the only reason that you know I ran your spy code was because you asked me whose I ran and I told you. If I'd thought you'd consider it a NAP/alliance break, I could have just lied and said it was Fredos...
My point is I could have lied, I didn't because I didn't see it as a breach of faith
Spy Ops damage EFF, so there's already a reason why you shouldn't do them without needing to look any further... Also, I remember an article you wrote from the library explaining how when you spied on a player you had a NAP with, you spied from a province which neighboured several players so it was harder to know it was you. Maybe you're just reaping what you sow...TK wrote: By your reasoning, any spying is OK so long as your spies are not detected! Breaking NAPs is OK so long as the other players dont find out? I wonder if your clan agree with you there... Saladin?
You and Raw worked together but players work together to take down somone else pretty often without there being an alliance. I cast spells on Fredo, on my own. Mainly for the fun of it. You and Raw have cast the occasional spell on Donut, but it was hardly a concentrated or coordinated attack. Allister refused even to respond to my request to let me through him to get at Massie and thence Donut, even though he had a week to do so and was active on the boards at the time...TK wrote:Nonsense! Raw and I have worked together to take down Dameon and Nesty. In the meantime, at least 3 of us have cast spells on BoV. We WERE in an alliance.korexus wrote:Also, this entire game hasn't really had the feel of an alliance to it. I suggested 'possibly a clan alliance' before turn 1 and nothing more was said about it, so you may be stretching a point just a touch there...
I remember a couple of times as we discussed the champs game, you said that if you'd been in AF's position, you'd just break the NAP and attack Gaz. Could it be that you haven't really changed your NAP breaking ways as Nick thinks and just haven't had the opportunity recently? If so, maybe you're not so annoyed that Raw backstabbed you, but that you didn't backstab him first...
With Great Power comes Great Irritability
- TK
- Trooper
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:00 am
1-0 to the alliance keeper.korexus wrote:If you say so...
I did say this was beside the point. But if you insist...korexus wrote:My point is I could have lied...
You are saying its OK to run someone's spycode because you could lie about it and they would never know.
Yes, you COULD lie about it, but the same is true for an undetected spy op. Its STILL a NAP-breaking offence, even if you manage to hide the fact.
You are showing yourself to be untrustworthy. If you honestly think its OK to run an ally's spycode, or otherwise break an alliance in such a way that the other player wont find out, you are going to find it difficult to get allies in future!!
Are you just listing the worst arguments you can think of?? I expected better from you...korexus wrote:I remember an article you wrote from the library explaining how when you spied on a player you had a NAP with, you spied from a province which neighboured several players so it was harder to know it was you. Maybe you're just reaping what you sow...
Its OK for you to break our alliance, because I broke a NAP several years ago?
Oh, and the game you are talking about was YEARS ago! Before WOK5! In the days of Piebald, who you probably never saw!
They do, but when the chain of events goes like this...korexus wrote:You and Raw worked together but players work together to take down somone else pretty often without there being an alliance.
1 - One player suggests a clan alliance.
2 - The other three players agree.
3 - Two players from different clans arrange two successive RIPs.
...then it is clear that there IS something in place.
That was another terrible argument, by the way. Was this a late night post?
These "points" you are making are getting worse!korexus wrote:Allister refused even to respond to my request to let me through him to get at Massie and thence Donut, even though he had a week to do so and was active on the boards at the time...
Allister did reply. Even so, are you saying that a slow reply to an email means its OK for you to break an alliance?
Next...
That was after Gaz broke the NAP and attacked Allister. But again, it has no bearing on the current game.korexus wrote:I remember a couple of times as we discussed the champs game, you said that if you'd been in AF's position, you'd just break the NAP and attack Gaz.
This doesnt even dignify a response.korexus wrote:Could it be that you haven't really changed your NAP breaking ways as Nick thinks and just haven't had the opportunity recently? If so, maybe you're not so annoyed that Raw backstabbed you, but that you didn't backstab him first...
So in summary, your arguments...
1. Its OK to break alliances/NAPs if the other player doesnt find out.
2. I broke a NAP several years ago so its OK for you to do it now.
3. There was no alliance. It just happened to be mentioned, and Raw and I worked together "coincidentally".
4. Allister replied to an email slowly, so its OK to break the alliance.
5. I once said I would break a NAP which the other person already broke, so its OK for you to break an alliance which wasnt already broken.
I think its time for you to admit you are an alliance breaker...
(but I am sure you will disagree, and continue with your "if I get the last word in, I am right" policy... )
- korexus
- Moderator
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Reading
- Contact:
>So in summary, your arguments...
>
>1. Its OK to break alliances/NAPs if the other player doesnt find out.
Didn't say that, I said I didn't feel I'd broken the NAP, but if you don't believe me then there's no point arguing about it...
>2. I broke a NAP several years ago so its OK for you to do it now.
Didn't say that, I merely pointed out that the 'teaching' you gave the scholars suggested that breaking NAPs is ok so maybe you shouldn't be surprised. I'm trying to keep the tone light here...
>3. There was no alliance. It just happened to be mentioned, and Raw and I worked together.
Yes, just working together doesn't make an alliance. If I say 'How about a NAP with possibly an alliance' and you just say 'OK' you'd be perfectly justified to think we only had a NAP and you would probably be happy to work with us against someone with whom neither of us have a NAP...
>4. Allister replied to an email slowly, so its OK to break the alliance.
Allister replied after another turn had run and Raw had attacked you. For all I know Raw's attack could have been the only reason he replied at all. (He then had an excuse to say no.)
>5. I once said I would break a NAP which the other person already broke, so its OK for you to break an alliance which wasnt already broken.
Again, trying to keep the tone light...
My argument is that I wasn't trying to do anything to harm you, your argument is basically that you don't believe me. That's all it comes down to. Everything else is irrelavent except that "You're a liar!", "No I'm not!" Is pretty dull for the folks at home to read...
>(but I am sure you will disagree, and continue with your "if I get the last word in, I am right" policy... )
And what exactly is your reason for posting again?
>
>1. Its OK to break alliances/NAPs if the other player doesnt find out.
Didn't say that, I said I didn't feel I'd broken the NAP, but if you don't believe me then there's no point arguing about it...
>2. I broke a NAP several years ago so its OK for you to do it now.
Didn't say that, I merely pointed out that the 'teaching' you gave the scholars suggested that breaking NAPs is ok so maybe you shouldn't be surprised. I'm trying to keep the tone light here...
>3. There was no alliance. It just happened to be mentioned, and Raw and I worked together.
Yes, just working together doesn't make an alliance. If I say 'How about a NAP with possibly an alliance' and you just say 'OK' you'd be perfectly justified to think we only had a NAP and you would probably be happy to work with us against someone with whom neither of us have a NAP...
>4. Allister replied to an email slowly, so its OK to break the alliance.
Allister replied after another turn had run and Raw had attacked you. For all I know Raw's attack could have been the only reason he replied at all. (He then had an excuse to say no.)
>5. I once said I would break a NAP which the other person already broke, so its OK for you to break an alliance which wasnt already broken.
Again, trying to keep the tone light...
My argument is that I wasn't trying to do anything to harm you, your argument is basically that you don't believe me. That's all it comes down to. Everything else is irrelavent except that "You're a liar!", "No I'm not!" Is pretty dull for the folks at home to read...
>(but I am sure you will disagree, and continue with your "if I get the last word in, I am right" policy... )
And what exactly is your reason for posting again?
With Great Power comes Great Irritability
- Brykovian
- Moderator
- Posts: 1045
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA ... Clan: Scholars
- Contact:
Although his opinion is obviously respected, I didn't know that Saladin would speak on behalf of the whole clan.TK wrote:I wonder if your clan agree with you there... Saladin?
I remember being taught that it was fine to "do whatever it takes to win" by this former clanmate who taught that to me personally in a champs game a while ago. It was that one former clanmate who likes to consistently say that he personally "taught the Scholars everything they know".
I would say that final lesson was the first of yours that I ever payed any attention to, TK.
I realize I don't even have any iron in this flamer, but I am curious and entertained at just how far you will take your disingenuous side of the debate.
Cheers and carry on,
-Bryk
(Apologies to korexus and Raw for not keeping out of it ...)
Matt Worden Games ... Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess
- korexus
- Moderator
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Reading
- Contact:
- Donut
- Warlord
- Posts: 1041
- Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:00 am
- Location: Brew Town, WI; USA - BoV
- Contact:
- Saladin
- Moderator
- Posts: 1652
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Well i would say spying in wok 4 is an aggressive act. Looking for a spy code in wok 5 isn't an aggressive act. running a spy code i would consider that pretty agressive yeah.TK wrote:By your reasoning, any spying is OK so long as your spies are not detected! Breaking NAPs is OK so long as the other players dont find out? I wonder if your clan agree with you there... Saladin?
But that's just my opinion.
Another thing i learned here is that nobody really seems to care wether or not you break naps or not. It doesn't seem to have any consequences with most other players.
"Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by stupidity."
"To speak ill of others is a dishonest way of praising ourselves."
"To speak ill of others is a dishonest way of praising ourselves."