Catherins attempt at lawyering

[Anichek]

Originally Posted by Derubael [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

naw we get along just fine, whatchu talkin about?

I was not serious when I made this post:



But since you really, really want to see me totally lose it this morning, I'll simply point out three things:

1) Nothing in your post disproves anything I said. Unbrella's petition was literally ignored for a ridiculous amount of time, at which point it was finally addressed in a Skype call with Myself, Sirken, and Unbrella, where a mediation was requested. i don't know if Sirken was even fully aware of what he was telling you not to worry about during your conversation together - and yes, I can see why having this brought back up months later may have frustrated you - but the fact remains that you had both GM's agreeing to mediate for the TMO dispute against BDA

2) We have few viable options when "forced" to discipline Class R guilds when a dispute cannot be mediated by players, due to the way Class R rotates mobs. If we tak away, say, the next FFA Nagafen.... there's no real punishment there - we have no idea if you would have even gone after that target to begin with. So we are more or less forced to take away a rotation mob if it becomes necessary to address a situation that way. To be perfectly honest I am very thankful that you guys in Class-R rarely have conflicts like this that need to be escalated to that level, as they seem to be more difficult to find a fair and appropriate punishment for a violation.

To close this out, your last statement, while perfectly legitimate from your point of view, lacks the full picture required to truly make that judgement. Any bias that you may have thought was present is a combination of growing pains from the raid scene transition combined with biased perception of events - don't take that to be an insult, almost everyone carries some kind of bias, especially without having access to any of the Class C disputes - where mobs are forfeited all the time to compensate for infractions. I think that over time it will become clear we are really striving for fairness and cooperation as often as is possible in today's raid scene.

Now lets stop trying to make my head explode, ty!

Heads exploding - requesting code changes to implement that into game, please.

[Ravager]

It will be a fun day when Deru loses it, logs on and just starts Deathtouching people at random.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Ella`Ella]

Originally Posted by arsenalpow [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So what you're saying is there isn't a rule against what we did? Got it.

Somewhere in your 10,000 posts asking to clarify rules in the Raid Discussion thread, it was addressed that 3 or more players from separate guilds on a single target would be considered a joint raid and thus would both be subject to lock-out.

You became a joint raid by default and thus violated the 2-tracker rule. Either that or you maliciously caused raid interference and prohibited another guild from a legitimate attempt should Taken have wiped.

[knix]

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It doesn't matter why we jumped in on a mob that was almost dead.

Naggy was not almost dead, that is a lie you are telling yourself to minimize your involvment.

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

it's not against the rules to attack another Guild's mob in an FFA situation.

I believe this point is wrong. Try again, and still avoiding the question, because the truth is that you were butt hurt at TMO and were doing it to deny TMO an attempt at this Naggy.

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Which is why Unbrella had to resort to saying it was only against the rules because we were working together from the very beginning (despite BDA never speaking with Taken, or getting any share of the loots, there's no way it was premeditated) and thus we had 4 trackers there instead of 2.

So if what you did wasn't against the rules, why did the GM's think that you deserved a suspension from this event.

Originally Posted by arsenalpow [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So what you're saying is there isn't a rule against what we did? Got it.

No i said, Playing dumb doesn't suit you, and I am not going to entertain your asinine request.

[arsenalpow]

Originally Posted by Ella`Ella [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Somewhere in your 10,000 posts asking to clarify rules in the Raid Discussion thread, it was addressed that 3 or more players from separate guilds on a single target would be considered a joint raid and thus would both be subject to lock-out.

You became a joint raid by default and thus violated the 2-tracker rule. Either that or you maliciously caused raid interference and prohibited another guild from a legitimate attempt should Taken have wiped.

But where's the rule that says you can't attack a dragon that is about to die? What about people from an opposing guild trying to get a faction hit? Is that interference too?

[Uuruk]

Chest getting shit on by all the females today. Where's Catherin?

[Ella`Ella]

Originally Posted by arsenalpow [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But where's the rule that says you can't attack a dragon that is about to die? What about people from an opposing guild trying to get a faction hit? Is that interference too?

It's the same rule that says you can't attack a dragon with 3 or more people from another guild without it being considered a joint raid. I'm going to ignore the second part of your question.

[Susvain2]

Originally Posted by kotton05 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

help create solid references

sick reference merkk

[Heebo]

Originally Posted by arsenalpow [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But where's the rule that says you can't attack a dragon that is about to die? What about people from an opposing guild trying to get a faction hit? Is that interference too?

Does someone need to draw you a Venn diagram illustrating dragons you can and can't attack?

[Llodd]

Originally Posted by Anichek [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Chest feels disrespected by Sirken because he was told an issue was handled, closed, done - and then BDA was punished postmortem for it. In that specific instance, it was like the left hand didn't know what the right hand had already done.

This really doesn't matter. It is at the behest of the GM's to reopen any grievance/petition/whatever whenever they want to regardless of whether or not it has been brought to a conclusion or not.

What he should have done is agreed to Deru's request and dealt with it later in a respectful manner.