137784.....Objective advice please

[KoolBak]

OK....First off....Hugh G Rection, I respect you and consider you a CC friend, so my apologies to YOU PERSONALLY in advance for this; you have not spoken in the game chat so I guess it is my hope that you are blissfully unaware of this and not supporting it - I would be saddened to lose you as a friend......the rest of you pilgrims in this game can bite me.

A triples game; glide and I are partners - I get axed early on so glide is a single against two teams of 2...that is cool.

Partner 2 of Team 1 conspires (privately?) with Partner 1 of Team 3; a potentially endless alliance is made against my single partner from the other two TEAMS.

Those of you that are regulars here know my feelings on alliances ( ) in singles games, but this frucking blew me away..........

I cannot be objective; I would love some others input.

[b.k. barunt]

If what you say is true, i would say that this is base cowardice. I have noticed that with a lot of the higher ranking players, winning seems to be paramount. What happened to ". . . but how you play the game."? It is cowardly enough to go after the weaker instead of the stronger (unless you have a chance to take him out and get his cards), but if two individuals from separate teams went after the single, this sounds like a game fit only for wankers. I have played Hugh in at least 2 games and have witnessed nothing dishonorable in his playing. So my comments here are not directed at him, but simply a response to a possible situation. Oh . . . and speaking of wankers, who would cast a neutral vote on a subject like this?

[hwhrhett]

not neccessarily dishonorable, but if the 'alliance' was made in private, then i think this definately sounds like rules have been broken. how do you know this 'alliance' was made in private?

[KoolBak]

If I recall correctly, the team 1 member announced that he and the team three member were gonna focus on my pard which means they HAD to be discussing it in private.....very strange.

[cowshrptrn]

The rules dont' say anything about forging the alliance in private, so long as it is announced before you act on it.

[KoolBak]

Yes I know that and THAT has been a seperate item of many threads...that is not my point; The honor of the action as a whole, which is NOT against the rules, is what I question.

As I have said before, frivilous lawsuits are completely legit too but I dont like them either....

[cowshrptrn]

Its probably somewhat dishonorable, you can ally against whoever you want, but allying against the weakest link is a bit like beating a dead horse.

[glide]

HEY! I aint dead.......I'm just a tad hungover.........and quit callin me a horse!

[Hugh.G.Rection]

@Kool,still haven't looked at the game my turn wasn't up yet.There was no alliance b4 my last turn what has happened after I am unaware of.I will respond with greater detail once I can examnie the situation.

Well I played my turn..I haven't spoken with my partner so this is just speculation....I don't think he was making an alliance he was just stating the obvious that yellow was getting too strong and worded it wrong.I made no alliance and wouldn't either espescially 4-1.everyone involved seems to have taken care of it b4 I even got there.Kool take them off your ignore check out chat and then decide wether or not to put them back on your blacklist....lol

~HGR