foggy games first move?

[_sabotage_]

There is quite a bit of confusion.

When requesting another player conveys hidden information, you are the supplicant. Being the supplicant, you should ask in a way that might encourage the other player to say yes. If the other player says no and you pursue them, you are the harasser.

Don't be the harasser.

[BoganGod]

Are you saying that it's my responsibility to come get you?

Was it Ronc's responsibility to reply on something he'd never heard about and perhaps if he had, didn't agree with?

Since it is not a rule, then I guess there must have been people who disagreed with it becoming a rule. Does your decision that it should be a rule override his that it isn't and not one he has chosen to adhere to?

You sound like a spoilt kid. We are not here to serve you or bow down to your every decree. There are rules and if you don't wish to stick to them, man up and say, "yeah I was pissed I didn't get a good drop, went second and didn't see that single tert that he had conquered, so I made him suffer through twelve rounds of dead beating. "

+1, never thought I would be agreeing with ronc and sabotage......
dead beating cause your butt sore about a single turn and territory is incredibly puerile.

[joriki]

I'm not replying to individual posts in this thread anymore because it's pretty obvious that many of the posters are not interested in exchanging arguments (and one has explicitly said so).

I do want to set one thing straight though because yet another baseless accusation has been perpetuated in some recent posts: I never defended breaking a rule. Both in the game chat and in this thread, I countered false accusations that had been spread by several posters, and explained my actions. At first I did this without admitting a mistake, because I didn't know about the formal rule I'd broken. Then when I learned about the formal rule I'd broken, I continued countering the false accusations and explaining my actions, and at the same time acknowledged that I'd broken a formal rule, and agreed that the consistent application of formal rules is important, and said that I would therefore not object if this was formally noted. I continue to think that the rule makes no sense in this case (witness the fact that since I started taking my turns because my opponent insisted, we've played 10 full rounds (that's 10 turns for me, 40 for him) in 36 hours, instead of just waiting for 24 hours until my last player was kicked out), but I never said or implied that this was a sufficient reason to break a formal rule if someone else insists that it be followed.

[_sabotage_]

Ronc is a decent player, but had you taken those 10 turns in the first 36 hours, I'd have money on you to win.

I made a false accusation and my very next post, I pointed out I'd made it and said my bad. This is a mountain out of a molehill that stems from you trying to excuse a rather inexcusable situation. It was obvious that you were deadbeating. Did you feel justified? Who cares? Do I care about Ronc's feelings? No. It's not the point. The point is deadbeating sucks and is not encouraged because while you may agree with a select few on a fog convention, people universally hate deadbeating.

Do I want you to submit to the masses? No, I don't care. Just don't bother excusing it, or just say my bad and move on. The excuses made it like 80 times worse.

[ronsizzle]

Are you saying that it's my responsibility to come get you?

Was it Ronc's responsibility to reply on something he'd never heard about and perhaps if he had, didn't agree with?

Since it is not a rule, then I guess there must have been people who disagreed with it becoming a rule. Does your decision that it should be a rule override his that it isn't and not one he has chosen to adhere to?

You sound like a spoilt kid. We are not here to serve you or bow down to your every decree. There are rules and if you don't wish to stick to them, man up and say, "yeah I was pissed I didn't get a good drop, went second and didn't see that single tert that he had conquered, so I made him suffer through twelve rounds of dead beating. "

+1, never thought I would be agreeing with ronc and sabotage......
dead beating cause your butt sore about a single turn and territory is incredibly puerile.

youve always shared the same feelings and thoughts of myself...

[iAmCaffeine]

You're playing a game based on war, stop complaining about hostility.

Interesting; I think you're making an important point here. A lot of these threads seems to me to be a clash between two subcultures at CC (obviously I'm oversimplifying), one of which has the attitude you state and engages in relatively unrestrained hostility, whereas the other, which I identify with, sees games that are nominally about war as games more or less like any other games, with just as much reason to be friendly and respectful to our fellow humans as in other areas of life. In "real life" I'm in the German Green Party and work on peace and conflict issues; I wouldn't be playing this game if I saw it as something based on war and therefore a more appropriate setting for hostile behaviour than other games. To me it's just a strategy game.

I mostly agree with you, I'm just getting kicks from this debate. Please continue.