Wok 4 invite?

Post by **Egbert** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:59 am

Donut wrote:Popcorn?

Donut

Sure! Thanks, Donut --- I ran out of popcorn from that last thread. I love double features.

But tell me, Donut, there's something I don't understand. Remember Mullog's letter to AF, in which he says:

Mullog wrote:How about a 10-turn nap with a 2-turn cancellation period? No attacking, bombing or spying on each others.

Well, what does that mean actually?

That could mean that the NAP is no longer than 10 turns, but that either side can give a 2-turn notice beforehand to end it earlier. Or, it could mean that the NAP is at least 10 turns, but it can go longer, whenever someone wants to give notice. Or, it could mean that the NAP is exactly 10 turns, and the 2-turn notice provision is meaningless.

I know, I know --- stop talking and watch the show.

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:48 pm

Egbert wrote:Or, it could mean that the NAP is at least 10 turns, but it can go longer, whenever someone wants to give notice.

This is the rule i always use.

Validon · Post by **Validon** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:50 pm

Hmmmmm, very very interresting!!!!!!!!!! And what was the response e-mail from AF?????

Donut???? A little popcorn over here please!!!!!!!!

Egbert!!!!!!!! That's my chair find your own!!!!!!

Mullog · Post by **Mullog** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:59 pm

YAY! Popcorn!

I want some too!

The nap was a 10-turn nap. The agreement said nothing like "continious" or "at least 10 turns" or anything to indicate that it should last more than 10 turns.
AND on turn 10 I wrote (to quote myself again) "... this means WAR!". You could interpretate this as me inviting you to extend our nap for another 10 turns, but most players would not.

In addition, you never replied and confirmed that we had a nap. The same strategy as you have used before.
To say it in your own words:

Undertaker in reply to Dukes accusations wrote: Blah! Blah! Blah!

You all just assume too much that's all, you don't get things in writing like everyone else does and like your supposed to, some of you do and just misinterperate what it says ...

If it had been in your favor, you would have broken the NAP and claimed that it was never valid. I would not do that, but I saw the nap as ended after turn 10 AND even if it was still valid my declaration of war surely ended it.

Bah!

The discussion of what our agreement really meant is an interesting though. I use the words "continious" or "at least XX turns" and otherwise assume it to be of fixed length.

Undertaker · Post by **Undertaker** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:46 pm

Mullog wrote:YAY! Popcorn! I want some too!

The nap was a 10-turn nap. The agreement said nothing like "continious" or "at least 10 turns" or anything to indicate that it should last more than 10 turns.
AND on turn 10 I wrote (to quote myself again) "... this means WAR!". You could interpretate this as me inviting you to extend our nap for another 10 turns, but most players would not.

In addition, you never replied and confirmed that we had a nap. The same strategy as you have used before.
To say it in your own words:
Undertaker in reply to Dukes accusations wrote:

Blah! Blah! Blah!

You all just assume too much that's all, you don't get things in writing like everyone else does and like your supposed to, some of you do and just misinterperate what it says ...
If it had been in your favor, you would have broken the NAP and claimed that it was never valid. I would not do that, but I saw the nap as ended after turn 10 AND even if it was still valid my declaration of war surely ended it.

Bah!

The discussion of what our agreement really meant is an interesting though. I use the words "continious" or "at least XX turns" and otherwise assume it to be of fixed length.

You're probably the only that thinks, according to your NAP offer, that the NAP is over after turn 10 has run. I guaranndamnte that everyone would agree that you would have to give notification on turn 9 to be able to attack on turn 11. Your declaration of war should have been your 2 turn notice. Although, I don't think I'd accept anything short of "here's your 2 turn notice".

You broke the NAP, face it.

PS, I don't believe that was my reply to Dukes accusation.

Allister Fiend · Post by **Allister Fiend** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:52 pm

Mullog wrote:YAY! Popcorn! I want some too!

The nap was a 10-turn nap. The agreement said nothing like "continious" or "at least 10 turns" or anything to indicate that it should last more than 10 turns.
AND on turn 10 I wrote (to quote myself again) "... this means WAR!". You could interpretate this as me inviting you to extend our nap for another 10 turns, but most players would not.

In addition, you never replied and confirmed that we had a nap. The same strategy as you have used before.
To say it in your own words:
Undertaker in reply to Dukes accusations wrote: Blah! Blah! Blah!

You all just assume too much that's all, you don't get things in writing like everyone else does and like your supposed to, some of you do and just misinterperate what it says ...
If it had been in your favor, you would have broken the NAP and claimed that it was never valid. I would not do that, but I saw the nap as ended after turn 10 AND even if it was still valid my declaration of war surely ended it.

Bah!

The discussion of what our agreement really meant is an interesting though. I use the words "continious" or "at least XX turns" and otherwise assume it to be of fixed length.

You never sent me an e-mail saying your giving me my 2-turn notice Mullog and you know it.
You did send me a reply to Duke's accusations which DID NOT INVOLVE YOU AT ALL, saying "this is war" and "cheaters will not be tollerated" but I do not accept that as an alternative to a actual notice.

Your being really retarded about this. Your e-mail says that we have a 2-turn notification period(see above), and if you think that that means on turn 10 you can attack me without giving me my notice, your more stupid than I thought, but reguardless.

Validon · Post by **Validon** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:54 pm

I am the GM so I will remain on the outskirts of this conversation as much as possible BUT if there was no return e-mail after Mullog said 10 turns with a 2 turn cancellation(and to me this means minimum 10 turns only cancelled with a 2 turn notice so it could last beyond turn 10) then there wouldn't be any agreement in place. I always make sure to get an email back that agrees with the terms otherwise I would never think they were valid. So if someone could produce the agreement to the proposal then I believe that we could put this baby to rest one way or the other.

TK · Post by TK » Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:56 pm

Mullog wrote:The nap was a 10-turn nap. The agreement said nothing like "continious" or "at least 10 turns" or anything to indicate that it should last more than 10 turns.

"How about a 10-turn nap with a 2-turn cancellation period?"

If all you wanted was a 10-turn NAP, why would you even mention "a 2-turn cancellation period"? Surely you would just write "How about a 10 turn NAP"?

Another NAP-breaker to add to the list.

CrazyPsycho · Post by **CrazyPsycho** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:05 pm

the question is whether AF agreed or not, so stop hiding behind the 2 turn notification and tell us if you sent confirmation or not?

TK · Post by TK » Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:10 pm

I am assuming confirmation was sent seeing as the remained at peace for 10 turns!!

Post by **Donut** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:10 pm

Nope... not gonna touch it... I think I will have to go and grab something sweet now after the popcorn. Anyone want anything while I'm up?... It's on Raw.

Donut

Mullog · Post by **Mullog** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:41 pm

Undertaker wrote:PS, I don't believe that was my reply to Dukes accusation.

You are right. That was AF's reply not yours... My mistake.

Now, this discussion is getting stupid so lets stop it here.
I never got a reply confirming that we had a NAP, but in my opinion we had one. But, in my opinion the NAP lasted for only ten turns and I did not attack before turn 11 so the nap had expired.
If you did not agree with this then I am sorry for that. I had no intention of breaking any nap, and I don't think I did either.

There would have been peace between us for the ten turns NAP or not btw, for there was no good reason to fight before this.

Validon · Post by **Validon** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:51 pm

Ahhhhh, TK you should never assume anything. You know what they say about that don't you?

Until I see proof of a response to the nap request I will have to believe that the nap was not agreed upon by both parties thereby absolving Mullog of being a nap breaker. Innocent until proven guilty!!!!
We have the arguments and the beginnings of the prosecutors report but we must have the end, the final confirmation e-mail to seal the deal.

Ummmmmmmm, Butterfinger for me Donut and a coke if you don't mind.

Allister Fiend · Post by **Allister Fiend** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:58 pm

..l..

Mullog wrote:I never got a reply confirming that we had a NAP, but in my opinion we had one.

You are such a liar and you don't even realize it.

I will post my actual "reply" to you when I get home tonight.

This is getting to the point of Taker and I just "quitting" the game so that only Saladin get a VP and not Mullog( you don't deserve any, really, you don't)

First you accuse me of NAP breaking and then you do it yourself to me, and I wasn't even involved with you at all until you layed claim to ending our nap that actually never ended properly.

Undertaker · Post by **Undertaker** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:00 pm

Mullog wrote:. But, in my opinion the NAP lasted for only ten turns and I did not attack before turn 11 so the nap had expired.
If you did not agree with this then I am sorry for that. I had no intention of breaking any nap, and I don't think I did either.

Assuming AF did reply to you, then you did indeed break your NAP.

If that's your defintion of 10 turns with a 2 turn notice, then I'll remember not to ever NAP with you because you can't be trusted to keep your word. I'm annoyned enough by this non-sense that I'll avoid making any deals with you from now on. Actually if anyone else agrees with that definition please speak up so I can avoid you as well.

What's for dinner tonight?

Roast Mullog...

Mullog · Post by **Mullog** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:09 pm

Undertaker wrote:Assuming AF did reply to you, then you did indeed break your NAP.

If that's your defintion of 10 turns with a 2 turn notice, then I'll remember not to ever NAP with you because you can't be trusted to keep your word. I'm annoyned enough by this non-sense that I'll avoid making any deals with you from now on. Actually if anyone else agrees with that definition please speak up so I can avoid you as well.

What's for dinner tonight?

Roast Mullog...

Ok. If AF can find the email where he confirmed that we had a nap I will accept that I have broken our nap. I did not receieve any confirmation from him but that is hard to prove (anyone are invited to come visit me and check my computers

).
In this case I will resign from the game and let Duke and Saladin share the VP's. I am not interested in getting points if anyone think I cheated.

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:33 pm

Allister Fiend wrote:This is getting to the point of Taker and I just "quitting" the game so that only Saladin get a VP and not Mullog( you don't deserve any, really, you don't)

Well seeing how you both will be ripped next turn i don't think that will work.

Validon · Post by **Validon** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:59 pm

So we wait until tonight then. AF will show the e-mail or not and it will be decided. If he did agree to the terms set down by Mullog then a nap has definately been broken.
So everyone tune in later for the resolution of this episode of "As The World(of kaomaris) Turns"

Donut!!!! Bring more popcorn!!!!!!!

Undertaker · Post by **Undertaker** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:13 pm

Saladin wrote:
Allister Fiend wrote:This is getting to the point of Taker and I just "quitting" the game so that only Saladin get a VP and not Mullog( you don't deserve any, really, you don't)
Well seeing how you both will be ripped next turn i don't think that will work.

Not if we quit before the turn is run.

Raw · Post by **Raw** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:31 pm

Mullog has broken many NAP's with me in the past. I wouldn't trust him one bit.

-Raw