Page 3 of 6
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 11:58 am
by kynell
Deadliest Wes wrote:kynell wrote:Malasorte wrote:I think this vendetta should really be for your officer... Since pascal is already smaller than you and you massed him already..
Your officer looks inactive and therefore if he gets attacked it should be him posting a vendetta and not you, otherwise I'll be more convinced of his inactivity and I'll just be thinking that pascal had the right to attack him
pascal took a planet from his officer that affects his (whereub) UP therefore damaging his account he has every right to vendetta him you guys shouldnt be stealing UP planets from a naps officer in the first place just out of common courtesy.
go whereub go whereub go!!! whop his backside
Well whereub has attacked one of my officers, still in his attack logs, maybe ill vendetta him.
just farm attacked of stole a UP planet that affects u?
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:02 pm
by Fallen Gabriel
Deadliest Wes wrote:In all fairness you are breaking the nap. You should pay back all loses that you have inflicted on Pascal. Or apporiate actions needs to be taken upon the alliance HC.
You have agreeded to theses terms. You should follow them. Terms in bold you have broken.
OE Ricos NAP 60 days
No hits in main and no allowed hits.
Planet steals to be arranged to be mutually agreed upon
Vendettas to be posted and agreed upon BEFORE massing
Hits on outside parties, including officers are not justification for breaking of terms
No hits in ascension if tagged.
This ends on the 20/05/2011
Your officer appears to be either inactive or a feeder account.
In all fairness pascal failed to answer,did he or did he not get a warning from WhereUB. And to be more honest if that acc is active or not,can whole omega empire say that all of their officers are active as well? Or how would any of you fell If I was striping and farming your officers and ignoring your posts....Please do tell me that and no BS and nap talk,just straight facts TEKKI,RSE JORG...etc In my opinion it would piss you off.
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:04 pm
by Rudy Peña
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:17 pm
by Imperius
Go JJ,
im with Kynell, Pascal effected JJs account. inactive or not, deserves what he gets.
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:26 pm
by Fallen Gabriel
Ahhh so you like tekki and daz,jumping alliances?
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:32 pm
by whereub
im glad all of you have opinions .... but there are too many cooks in the kitchen
and yes i know nap doesnt protect officers .... that is why i am not the alliance
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:34 pm
by Tekki
Fallen Gabriel wrote:Deadliest Wes wrote:In all fairness you are breaking the nap. You should pay back all loses that you have inflicted on Pascal. Or apporiate actions needs to be taken upon the alliance HC.
You have agreeded to theses terms. You should follow them. Terms in bold you have broken.
OE Ricos NAP 60 days
No hits in main and no allowed hits.
Planet steals to be arranged to be mutually agreed upon
Vendettas to be posted and agreed upon BEFORE massing
Hits on outside parties, including officers are not justification for breaking of terms
No hits in ascension if tagged.
This ends on the 20/05/2011
Your officer appears to be either inactive or a feeder account.
In all fairness pascal failed to answer,did he or did he not get a warning from WhereUB. And to be more honest if that acc is active or not,can whole omega empire say that all of their officers are active as well? Or how would any of you fell If I was striping and farming your officers and ignoring your posts....Please do tell me that and no BS and nap talk,just straight facts TEKKI,RSE JORG...etc In my opinion it would piss you off.
I would like the straight facts as well.
I really would. And whereub always could have tried the novel approach of PMing me.
But our NAP agreement was written specifically to avoid situations like this yet apparently that's not good enough.
As for Harchester and everyone who wants that invite into PI, you are always welcome in Pi Gentlemen but Harchester can't handle a wet fish on a good day, he's hardly going to be able to handle Pi.
I'm still waiting Whereub, or are you happy to take on someone with 6 less covert levels and fewer ascensions?
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:45 pm
by Deadliest Wes
I was just told by pascal he declared an vendetta and then massed him, and then sent pascal a message saying: for the attacks on my officer.
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:47 pm
by Maha Vishnu
I dont know the full story, but I think we need to get a action that if there is an issue, we have a 48 hour turn around or a direct contact for situations like this.
If Pascal got a pm from WhereUB then he should of answered it or forwarded it onto the most appropiate person.
1 week is long enough in this game to reply back. 3 1/2 days for a leader is also a long time but a week?
In absolute terms, that condition of the NAP was broken, but the time it took was too long, so WhereUB took action. How long would he have to wait for a clarification. Also, a pm from Ricos HC should of been answered much quicker than if a member of Ricos sent an pm
True, maybe Tekki would of been the correct way, but I suppose WhereUB went straight to the source and the leader at that time for a quicker resolution.
Also, Kynell raises a good point. I have never taken a planet from an alliance or NAP players officer... bottom line. If I see they are inactive I would send a pm to there commander and ask them out of common curtesy.
On many occasions, my active officers have planets taken by Napped alliances and a simple pm to that person normally is enough.
and final point
May 10, 21:56 turkey_junior [ Ω Allegiance - Goldmember] WhereUB [ ~RiCoS_WÅrLoRdS~ - JOYSPREADR] attack 15 Loss
OE Ricos NAP 60 days
No hits in main and no allowed hits.
Planet steals to be arranged to be mutually agreed upon
Vendettas to be posted and agreed upon BEFORE massing
Hits on outside parties, including officers are not justification for breaking of terms
No hits in ascension if tagged.
Dont know if this was tit for tat?
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:56 pm
by Tekki
Harakash Maha Vishnu wrote:I dont know the full story, but I think we need to get a action that if there is an issue, we have a 48 hour turn around or a direct contact for situations like this.
We do NOT have a turn around time on PM's. I dont' know where you got this from.
If Pascal got a pm from WhereUB then he should of answered it or forwarded it onto the most appropiate person.
1 week is long enough in this game to reply back. 3 1/2 days for a leader is also a long time but a week?
It has not been a week for Malasorte to reply. Again don't know where you are getting your information.
In absolute terms, that condition of the NAP was broken, but the time it took was too long, so WhereUB took action. How long would he have to wait for a clarification.
Do you really want to know the answer to that?
I'm gathering then that the fact that the officer stole planets back is of no consequence.
There is also the fact that Whereub's PM was very general. It mentions multiple people in PI and does not specify anything in particular expect to state that there are some planet steals. But when it mentions three people, then it's a little hard to know which one is being the most annoying stealing officer planets.
Is this another case of someone who doesn't talk for themselves?
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:58 pm
by whereub
just like pascal is ?
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 12:59 pm
by Tekki
Was actually thinking of someone else whereub. Another officer who didn't say a thing but lead to a war.
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 1:06 pm
by Maha Vishnu
Tekki wrote:Harakash Maha Vishnu wrote:I dont know the full story, but I think we need to get a action that if there is an issue, we have a 48 hour turn around or a direct contact for situations like this.
We do NOT have a turn around time on PM's. I dont' know where you got this from.
It was an suggestion to make communication more open
If Pascal got a pm from WhereUB then he should of answered it or forwarded it onto the most appropiate person.
1 week is long enough in this game to reply back. 3 1/2 days for a leader is also a long time but a week?
It has not been a week for Malasorte to reply. Again don't know where you are getting your information.
I did not say Malsorte took a week. I said Pascal took a week
In absolute terms, that condition of the NAP was broken, but the time it took was too long, so WhereUB took action. How long would he have to wait for a clarification.
Do you really want to know the answer to that?
And if you read in between the lines of that response then it suggests that his pm was going to be ignored
I'm gathering then that the fact that the officer stole planets back is of no consequence.
There is also the fact that Whereub's PM was very general. It mentions multiple people in PI and does not specify anything in particular expect to state that there are some planet steals. But when it mentions three people, then it's a little hard to know which one is being the most annoying stealing officer planets.
Is this another case of someone who doesn't talk for themselves?
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 1:10 pm
by whereub
well since this is nothing but a smack session .... can this be closed for now
if it needs to be opened later ill let you know
thx whereub
Re: whereub vs pascal
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 1:22 pm
by Tekki
Maha Vishnu, the PM's being ignored and un-replied is not something that Rico's is particularly brilliant on either. So it's something that perhaps requires work by both parties.
