StarGateWars Forums

Posted: **Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:00 pm**

clarkey wrote:I wonder what the people who have been saved from scammers because of my warnings that I have posted in public would say about that comment?

About my comment? They'd say:
"Normally, you would be right. But in my special case, where my non-existent awareness almost let me walk into this scammers trap, I am happy to have had Clarkey to help me deal with my ignorance by providing essential information to me in my condition."
I think that your patients and I agree.

You're doing a great job, for the lower percentage of - how to put this politely - half-wits. I thank you on their behalf, and am happy to see your logic and decorum-defying approach to the matter.
A true and virtuous zealousness only surpassed by that supporting the Western hunt for terrorists.

Ifrit wrote:what is the admin going to do about scammers, what is anyone gonna do about scammer, the only thing that can be done is make the public aware and try to get them involved as much as possible, it isnt like we have a Better Business Bureau that we can report them too.

Humans shouldn't trust any other human. Why? Because humans lie. Even if they do not intend to lie, they will always lie.
Keep that in mind, and you NEED no Anti-Scamming-Authority.
That said, I guess if you want to continue 'making the public aware', you could ask for a special Mod and a special Thread in the General Section.. if that would be an agreeable alternative to spamming the entire forums with "Oh my Goodness, this one is a scammer!".. "Oh my, this one too!".. "And this one!!".. "Great Scott! They're all the same!".. "What if we hunt them all down?!" to which the Vox Rationis can only counter: "Do you think you'll EVER prevent scammers on a large scale?" :-)

Go forth, my brethren, and continue thou great work of salvation. I'm sure there will be some people happy with what you're doing so far.

Posted: **Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:16 pm**

ok so should I assume you mocking me now?

Look is there really a problem making people aware of the facts?
So I made a post in each of the areas that I deemed closest linked, I guess thats spam...

Stop making it out that Im accusing ~artanis~ (person of the forums) being the same person as Hellsing/LOA, why dont you grammer check what I posted and tell me im wrong.

I didnt mean to imply that I was better then anyone else at english and act arrogant about it, I was implying that because of my heritage that I knew english and that I could properly compose it, that it wasnt my fault for those that didnt understand its composure. If that offended you I cant help that, if it makes you feel better I'm sorry. Look I'm a decent guy and I'm will to talk to you and make my opinions and do whatever I have to, to prove your opinions of me. But I wont throw things in your face.

Posted: **Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:35 pm**

Ifrit wrote:ok so should I assume you mocking me now?

Hardly.. I'm merely exercising and flexing some muscles.

Ifrit wrote:Look is there really a problem making people aware of the facts?
So I made a post in each of the areas that I deemed closest linked, I guess thats spam...

Two birds in one shot.

Ifrit wrote:Stop making it out that Im accusing ~artanis~ (person of the forums) being the same person as Hellsing/LOA, why dont you grammer check what I posted and tell me im wrong.

Kay then.. here goes:

For Analysis 1 wrote:Lets take LOA (Hellsing, ~Artanis~) as an example hes said he raided most of those UU, chances are he sent the UU from accounts he scammed and then raided them (at least this is my impression), on top of people getting scammed from sending their UU to accounts they were told had no FSS for the reason the scammer could raid them.

LOA (Hellsing, ~Artanis~)..
*slap*
That's one.. no distinction made, no simple notice of the Artanis in your accusatory post being a different Artanis from the one on the forums..

For Analysis 2 wrote:Did you ready the post invloved in the links up above, ~Artanis~ is Hellsing/LOA who scammed the account.

Yes.. I did "ready"(sic) the post "invloved"(sic).
Your main sentence is "Artanis is Hellsing/LOA". Pretty straightforward for someone who claims they're not accusing ~Artanis~ of anything.. :-)

Additional information regarding "Hellsing/LOA" is given: "who scammed the account." (Notice: "scamming the account" is no grammatically sound construct. It does, in fact, mean nothing.. there is no proper verb nor a proper subject/object relation between any of the possible clauses in your sentence.)
Additional information regarding the 'proof' is given: "Did you ready the post invloved in the links up above" (Notice: Yes, I did.. even though reading them all bored me beyond comparison. What was the point again?)

Ifrit wrote:(1.)I didnt mean to imply that I was better then anyone else at english and act arrogant about it, I was implying that because of my heritage that I knew english and that I could properly compose it, that it wasnt my fault for those that didnt understand its composure. (2.) If that offended you I cant help that, if it makes you feel better I'm sorry. (3.)Look I'm a decent guy and I'm will to talk to you and make my opinions and do whatever I have to, to prove your opinions of me. But I wont throw things in your face.

1. Pity, because the sentence you make at point 3. suggests otherwise.. it's ungrammatical, buddy.

Or does your "99.9% perfect grammar" only apply when you put your mind to it? Too bad.. if it does, you cannot blame your heritage for the quality of your English. If your heritage IS influencing your skills, your proper grammar should be automatic and always present.

2. Agreed; which is why I warn you.. so that you can prevent such arrogance from harming anyone in the future. Especially if you speak about being so excellent at English in a grammatically incorrect sentence.

3. I'm sure you're a decent guy.. no doubting that. But that sentence doesn't make sense. And my grammar check just told me that it was ungrammatical if anything.

No need to throw your things in my face.. you convinced me already of you being a decent guy. I will not contest that.

Anyway.. I'm done.. my exercise is over. I'll overlook your next 20 posts before commenting again. Such is the reward for offering resistance.

Posted: **Tue Apr 15, 2008 3:02 pm**

Auriel Aryamehr wrote:
Ifrit wrote:Stop making it out that Im accusing ~artanis~ (person of the forums) being the same person as Hellsing/LOA, why dont you grammer check what I posted and tell me im wrong.

Kay then.. here goes:
For Analysis 1 wrote:Lets take LOA (Hellsing, ~Artanis~) as an example hes said he raided most of those UU, chances are he sent the UU from accounts he scammed and then raided them (at least this is my impression), on top of people getting scammed from sending their UU to accounts they were told had no FSS for the reason the scammer could raid them.

LOA (Hellsing, ~Artanis~)..
*slap*
That's one.. no distinction made, no simple notice of the Artanis in your accusatory post being a different Artanis from the one on the forums..
For Analysis 2 wrote:Did you ready the post invloved in the links up above, ~Artanis~ is Hellsing/LOA who scammed the account.

Yes.. I did "ready"(sic) the post "invloved"(sic).
Your main sentence is "Artanis is Hellsing/LOA". Pretty straightforward for someone who claims they're not accusing ~Artanis~ of anything..
Additional information regarding "Hellsing/LOA" is given: "who scammed the account." (Notice: "scamming the account" is no grammatically sound construct. It does, in fact, mean nothing.. there is no proper verb nor a proper subject/object relation between any of the possible clauses in your sentence.)
Additional information regarding the 'proof' is given: "Did you ready the post invloved in the links up above" (Notice: Yes, I did.. even though reading them all bored me beyond comparison. What was the point again?)

There is a distinction made, clearly I was talking in context to the game, not the forum.

Auriel Aryamehr wrote:
Ifrit wrote:(1.)I didnt mean to imply that I was better then anyone else at english and act arrogant about it, I was implying that because of my heritage that I knew english and that I could properly compose it, that it wasnt my fault for those that didnt understand its composure. (2.) If that offended you I cant help that, if it makes you feel better I'm sorry. (3.)Look I'm a decent guy and I'm will to talk to you and make my opinions and do whatever I have to, to prove your opinions of me. But I wont throw things in your face.

1. Pity, because the sentence you make at point 3. suggests otherwise.. it's ungrammatical, buddy. Or does your "99.9% perfect grammar" only apply when you put your mind to it? Too bad.. if it does, you cannot blame your heritage for the quality of your English. If your heritage IS influencing your skills, your proper grammar should be automatic and always present.
2. Agreed; which is why I warn you.. so that you can prevent such arrogance from harming anyone in the future. Especially if you speak about being so excellent at English in a grammatically incorrect sentence.
3. I'm sure you're a decent guy.. no doubting that. But that sentence doesn't make sense. And my grammar check just told me that it was ungrammatical if anything. No need to throw your things in my face.. you convinced me already of you being a decent guy. I will not contest that.

Anyway.. I'm done.. my exercise is over. I'll overlook your next 20 posts before commenting again. Such is the reward for offering resistance.

OK when i refered to you making a grammer check, I meant put it into a grammer checker, such as MS word, or another forum of grammer check. Im not implying that I know english better then anyone else, nor am I saying I am perfect at it. I am implying that I was postive that I used correct grammer and people are interpreting what I said incorrectly.

Posted: **Tue Apr 15, 2008 7:13 pm**

Auriel Aryamehr wrote:I think that your patients and I agree. You're doing a great job, for the lower percentage of - how to put this politely - half-wits.

How the hell did you become a race mod again..... you're not even worthy of a "guest".

Posted: **Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:22 pm**

Hello,

Who are the people suspected in this thread?

adminMark

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:00 am**

adminMark wrote:Hello,

Who are the people suspected in this thread?

adminMark

adminMark,

I would say the people suspected here are (ingame)...

~artanis~ - ID 11492
McG - 93210

Hellsing scammed the ~artanis~ account.
McG was the officer of Hellsing (Lord of Avernus) until yesterday when Hellsing got banned, then McG appeared as an officer of the ~artanis~ account.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:09 am**

Thanks adminMark!

~Artanis~
~The King~

Living God of the INDU {Ostracized}
Plane: Normal Reality
Commander: None
Race: Tollan
Rank: 0
Army Size: 48,203,656

Hellsing banned twice in as many days!

Oh and by the way, just incase certain people get upset by this...... this is no longer the account of ~artanis~ on the forum.

Posted: **Wed Apr 16, 2008 12:56 pm**

clarkey wrote:Thanks adminMark!

~Artanis~
~The King~

Living God of the INDU {Ostracized}
Plane: Normal Reality
Commander: None
Race: Tollan
Rank: 0
Army Size: 48,203,656

Hellsing banned twice in as many days!

Good job, Clarkey.

*that was serious*

clarkey wrote:Oh and by the way, just incase certain people get upset by this...... this is no longer the account of ~artanis~ on the forum.

Don't worry.. if you're talking about me, my problem was more with Orion than with you, as I clearly said.. anyway. Nice job on getting them banned so quickly.

Another one bites the dust.

Posted: **Sat Apr 19, 2008 8:33 am**

Why have you two even been replying to coma girls posts in a thread about scammers??? Its frankly hilarious.

Though good job for pointing out these guys

Posted: **Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:41 am**

Don Lewis wrote:Why have you two even been replying to coma girls posts in a thread about scammers??? Its frankly hilarious.

Though good job for pointing out these guys

Why would you want to respond to her rubbish in any section?

Good job folks.

StarGateWars Forums

Are these people involved with scamming people, the same per

Re: Are these people involved with scams, the same person?

Re: Are these people involved with scams, the same person?

Re: Are these people involved with scams, the same person?

Re: Are these people involved with scams, the same person?

Re: Are these people involved with scams, the same person?

Re: Are these people involved with scamming people, the same per

Re: Are these people involved with scamming people, the same per

Re: Are these people involved with scamming people, the same per

Re: Are these people involved with scamming people, the same per

Re: Are these people involved with scamming people, the same per

Re: Are these people involved with scamming people, the same per