Rules

[jeckfromshadow]

i just read this entire thread... and i have to say it was a complete waste of everyone's time who participated.

Thanks for so valuable summarizing. Now this thread contains one more smart thought.

Used wasted his time trying be heard by deaf. For those who really looking for solution - read this post.

I support one rule - no rules.

[Alex_C]

i just read this entire thread... and i have to say it was a complete waste of everyone's time who participated.

Used wasted his time trying be heard by deaf. For those who really looking for solution - read this post.

You seem to be misunderstanding how an argument works, jeckfromshadow. You see, if someone disagrees with someone else's point of view, it doesn't mean that they 'didn't hear' it, it simply means that they disagree with it.

and here comes all the girlies getting their thoughts in that have no necessity at all

join the line of girls who don't like what i'm saying, it's long

and i could care less

~john_the_bandit_hero

You didn't seem to understand my simple instructions for sensible debate. Shame. I'd add one other actually: Try to be more eloquent and articulate in your points, this way you won't sound quite so ignorant.

[Used]

mate, obviously you're the dumbest guy in here, if you've read everything then you'd know i could care less about what your little 'instructions'

do i care if i sound ignorant? no, i just don't want to listen to your crap, simple

you could be _smart_ and stay out of this thread, but no, being an egotistical little shit you have to dig in and have a go

of course you're going to quote me now and tell me not to be childish, but i'm just going to keep saying the same thing over and over until you understand: i care not for what you have to say

lol

[Alex_C]

Used, I think you need to drop your clearly hostile attitude towards other members and your constant personal insults if you want people to take your opinions seriously. If you don't want them to and are just trolling, as I personally believe, then it would be kindly appreciated if you just left the discussion for others.

[Used]

i care not for what you have to say

[Vermin]

and here comes all the girlies getting their thoughts in that have no necessity at all

join the line of girls who don't like what i'm saying, it's long

and i could care less

~john_the_bandit_hero

Stop your discriminating crap against women plz, its rather boring, oldfashioned and I'll report you, I'd love to.

The only one I see crying around here is you; "Ohnoes, dont take my freedom to kill unarmed." and "You cant take reality, Its reality, no rules. you a woman, me a man."
Are you so afraid that adding some rules might take away your 'impressive' KDratio you got from killing unarmed?
Or you just cant fight armed people and prefer to prey on the unarmed instead?

I am a woman and I dont need kills on the unarmed to improve my KDratio. In fact, I never killed the unarmed unless they attack me.

Anyway, for people who are willing to listen,
I have played this mod several times and Ive only found to to be interesting when there are some proper factions and/or people RPing.
When I first played this mod I got killed three times before I could even get to an armoury. Unlike our friend Used thinks, women like me dont give up that easily and I kept trying until I got into the White group, defending the innocents and eventually defeating the 'bad' faction(green at the time).
I know alot of people who would never have gotten that far, who would have given up after being killed three times. People who might have been good RPers but quit because the 'though' kids(like Used the 'bandit-hero') enjoy killing them while they cant defend themselves.

Unfortunatly, it took me a while to find another game like that, sometimes you just have factions who only want people from a specific clan, country or group, the rest of the server cant(or dont want to) organize themselves and thats it. If there are, in such a case, no rules, you just die alot without achieving anything.
In another case it was just a giant DM party, where everyone ran around and killed whoever they saw. Seriously, if I want to play DM, I'll go to a DM-server where I can simply select my equipment in the menu, without having to mine and visit an armoury where some lowly little kid such as yourself is camping.

If everyone on a server wants to RP and play properly, its fun. However, there are always 5-yr-olds who enjoy killing unarmed 'because they can'. a basic 'no killing unarmed' rule take away their fun and makes them go away.
You can give it time, but it wont stop those 5-yr olds from randomming.

And, as for Useds 'reality' argument, let me tell you the story of Arnaud Foucaud,
He got involved in a village feud and killed one of the antagonists, When French officers tried to arrest him he fled to the English garrison of Montendre, where he was hired as a soldier. He burned villages and stood watch until the castle was captured by the French. Thanks to an arrangement Foucaud received a safeconduct and returned home.
A few years later he ran into relatives of the man he killed, there was a fight. Foucaud killed his two antagonists but was wounded and later captured. The seneshal wanted to be rid of him so he banned him from the province of Saintonge, Foucaud went to Bordeaux and joined the company of Jean de Colom, a rich urban knight, he helped capture bourg, fought in the wars of the English, got into trouble with a commander and hired himself out to several Gascon commanders aswell as the English. Hereafter he received a pardon from a French royal officer. But he returned to his old ways
Foucaud helped a Bearn nobleman in a raid on a priory, something that did not cover his pardon. When he tried to return home he was captured, sent to the Chatelet where he was questioned (under torture ofc) and beheaded in Les Halles the next day.

In short:
Foucaud joined the France_server and randommed, he received a warning not to do it again and even got kicked, but he couldnt resist. He joined the bandits on the server and killed an unarmed, so the Admins investigated his case and he was banned(beheaded irl) from the server.

Realism means that when you die you have to leave the server and cant come back. Realism also means there should be a royal government that'll intervene and send a 1200 strong army to restore order. Neither is possible or even advisable. Its a mod for a game, it has its limitations and it needs a few basic rules to work properly

[Used]

I am a woman

yeah

also for your cool little story about some french guy, Arnaud_Foucaud_French_bandit_legend_hero_of_the_bar, let me quote your cool story, and tell you why it has no relevance to this

And, as for Useds 'reality' argument, let me tell you the story of Arnaud Foucaud,
He got involved in a village feud and killed one of the antagonists, When French officers tried to arrest him he fled to the English garrison of Montendre, where he was hired as a soldier. He burned villages and stood watch until the castle was captured by the French. Thanks to an arrangement Foucaud received a safeconduct and returned home.
A few years later he ran into relatives of the man he killed, there was a fight. Foucaud killed his two antagonists but was wounded and later captured. The seneshal wanted to be rid of him so he banned him from the province of Saintonge, Foucaud went to Bordeaux and joined the company of Jean de Colom, a rich urban knight, he helped capture bourg, fought in the wars of the English, got into trouble with a commander and hired himself out to several Gascon commanders aswell as the English. Hereafter he received a pardon from a French royal officer. But he returned to his old ways
Foucaud helped a Bearn nobleman in a raid on a priory, something that did not cover his pardon. When he tried to return home he was captured, sent to the Chatelet where he was questioned (under torture ofc) and beheaded in Les Halles the next day.

French officers. that's where you went wrong.
there's no 'french officers' in this mod.
there's no law in this mod, at its present state.
Arnaud_Foucaud_hero_of_Mildura_killer_of_mens can do what he likes, there's no 'french officers' or anything to deal with it.
that's why it's real. it's a world with no law. you have to make the law, if you want law. i could be wrong here, but that's the intention of the mod - you make it happen. only laszlo can correct me on this.

so yeah that's all pretty irrelevant than lol

~John_J_Johnson


edit: in case you haven't noticed (lol who am i kidding,i know you havent), i'm not arguing realism. lol

[Alex_C]

Vermin, there's no use trying to argue against Used, he doesn't know how to. He'll instead just insult you and troll, for which I've already reported him. You're right though, he ought to be reported for the constant, disgusting levels of misogyny too.

[Used]

i'm not insulting or 'trolling'

i have valid points, yet you ignore them because of my jokingly manner of speech

you think this is an argument? there is a difference between debating and arguing

[Vermin]

Vermin, there's no use trying to argue against Used, he doesn't know how to. He'll instead just insult you and troll, for which I've already reported him. You're right though, he ought to be reported for the constant, disgusting levels of misogyny too.

I can always try once. But it seems I'd better talk to a wall, not dumb answers from a wall.

Used doesnt even understand that it was a real story and Arnaud Foucaud was a real person who got beheaded on 28 may 1345.

But what he said is true, there are no French officers in this mod, noone to punish the randommers like him.

Edit; admins should check up on Jeckfromshadow, seems a bit odd, joined only to come here and make a single post.
Ooops ninja'd, he made another one, only here ofc

[Used]

But what he said is true, there are no French officers in this mod, noone to punish the randommers like him.

cheers, that is essentially saying that i was right, and what you said had little (i should say none) relevance.

and.... how do i not understand that that really happened? lol???? i never said that wasn't true, or that it didn't happen.

lol

keep 'em coming

~ Friendly_neighborhood_Johnno

[jeckfromshadow]

Used wasted his time trying be heard by deaf. For those who really looking for solution - read this post.

You seem to be misunderstanding how an argument works, jeckfromshadow. You see, if someone disagrees with someone else's point of view, it doesn't mean that they 'didn't hear' it, it simply means that they disagree with it.

Wha? Who was talking about arguments? Please read carefully my post. Another one "deaf".

You seem to be misunderstanding how an argument works, jeckfromshadow. You see, if someone disagrees with someone else's point of view, it doesn't mean that they 'didn't hear' it, it simply means that they disagree with it.

I will explain it using your words:
You seem to be misunderstanding how an argument works, Alex_C. You see, if someone disagrees with someone else's point of view, it means:
- that they disagree with it, in this case they clearly write why the argument is wrong and are making their own argument.
- that they 'didn't hear' it, in this case they writing some nonsense, changing discussion  theme or starting to abuse the opponent.
Use my simple instruction: use your brain and stop flooding

[Alex_C]

Used wasted his time trying be heard by deaf. For those who really looking for solution - read this post.

You seem to be misunderstanding how an argument works, jeckfromshadow. You see, if someone disagrees with someone else's point of view, it doesn't mean that they 'didn't hear' it, it simply means that they disagree with it.

Wha? Who was talking about arguments? Please read carefully my post. Another one "deaf".

You seem to be misunderstanding how an argument works, jeckfromshadow. You see, if someone disagrees with someone else's point of view, it doesn't mean that they 'didn't hear' it, it simply means that they disagree with it.

I will explain it using your words:
You seem to be misunderstanding how an argument works, Alex_C. You see, if someone disagrees with someone else's point of view, it means:
- that they disagree with it, in this case they clearly write why the argument is wrong and are making their own argument.
- that they 'didn't hear' it, in this case they writing some nonsense, changing discussion  theme or starting to abuse the opponent.
Use my simple instruction: use your brain and stop flooding

Well, you said 'Used wasted his time trying be heard by deaf', which I interpreted as meaning 'Used was right and that people just didn't listen to his points.' This is incorrect as many just thought he was wrong.
The person in this thread who began 'writing some nonsense, changing discussion  theme or starting to abuse the opponent' was Used.
Again, my point about articulacy comes into play. I had difficulty understanding what you really meant in both of your posts.

[Vermin]

that's why it's real...

... i'm not arguing realism. lol

So what is it? Is it real or not?

Obvious troll is epic troll

[Alex_C]

But then his entire argument relies on insulting and trolling his opponent whilst ignoring their points. People eventually get bored of this and can't be bothered to argue with him and he seems to see this as him winning.