Attacking for the Sole Reason that Someone is Offline is Dishonorable Play

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Kiryat-Dharin

You're correct. It is dishonorable play.

Now show me one rule, anywhere, against 'dishonorable' play, especially in the context of inter-guild wars.

If I con you into selling me a PPPE for 500k, because you don't know how much its really worth, is it honorable? And is FC going to do anything about it, is it against the rules?

No, it isn't honorable. And no, it isn't against the rules.

You're looking for honor. Don't expect to find it here. That's not what this is about.

I said it to him earlier but he running to flame people he ran right by it:

Honor is a man's gift to himself - Tom Clancy

Not to anyone else. He can't give anyone honor He can't force honor on anyone. Especially not me.

I have honor. I just don't waste it on video games. Cause that's exactly what it is, a waste when used on games. Eventually you'll run up against someone that plays with no honor whatsoever. And then the only choice you'll have is to quit or accept it. Getting pissed because someone won't play by your version of 'fair and honorable' is can best be described as 'tantrum'.

PS
Best way I can think of to describe it is with the old Mortal Kombat arcade games. They were the first games to introduce chain combos, some of which were unbreakable. I remember pretty well some of the arguements that occured, with some of these same words being used. "It's not fair to use combos since I can't break them". "Why don't you firght me fairly?". "Cheater!". Usually led to some kid stomping off in a huff at best. At worst, I saw fights over it.

The funniest thing is the people that used combos didn't cause any trouble. It was the morally uptigh...er, upright people that caused all the trouble. Sanskrit needs to take this game less seriously. "Honorable" is how you treat a lady on a date. "Fair" is the business deal you negotiate with a smaller competitor. "Cheating" is what you do on your taxes every year . None of them belong in a game where you can exhibit behavior as saintly or as sinful as you wish...within the rules of the game.

[Jaesic]

Originally posted by Kuroshio
Not to anyone else. He can't give anyone honor He can't force honor on anyone. Especially not me.

I have honor. I just don't waste it on video games. Cause that's exactly what it is, a waste when used on games.

I personally disagree. If you truly have honor, a code of sorts, you follow it at all times. People who follow a code of honor when it suits them to follow it may never understand that. Generally, I think people hide the fact that they have honor more often than they actually function without it.

It's not 'cool' to have honor... or to recognize some higher power... or to care about other people. Which is understandable, because when someone claims to want to treat people with respect (and receive the same) and act with honor, they are tested by people who want to see just how willing they are to continue to believe while under some variety of 'torture.'

I agree with Sanskrit in his core statement. Those people who are willing to choose their target by checking what orgs do not have enough people on to defend their bases are dishonorable.

As such, when people become aware of their action, they will grow less trustful of anything these attackers do. They will never be willing to support them (if they are on the same side) or make trades that will benefit them.

Perhaps this means little to you personally. You may not care one way or another if you never have to deal with those people.

Sanskrit has my respect for standing up for something he believes is right. I don't think he will accomplish anything other than that from doing so, except find out who a few of the people not to trust are.

One of the most common statements thrown in this debate by both sides has been "this is a game, not real life"... varied at times to "wargame vs war". I would agree that it is true that war is rarely a place were honor is seen. But ALWAYS... when it is not present, war leads to atrocity... and ends only after the most horrible things are done. With honor, war is less likely to occur... and it is more likely to be resolved before atrocities are committed.

Even Kuroshio, who has toyed with Sanskrit throughout this thread, has made statements that indicate that he follows a certain code of his own. Its not the same as either Sanskrit or myself but its there... and visible in plenty of his statements.

SO Kuroshio... he can't force honor on you, true. But he can withhold any trust of you... as can any other player in the game who is aware of it. You can function in a society that does not trust you... but you must always watch your back.

Jaesic

PS: one final note to all of you who like to point out that the game is about war. you should know that nothing about this game is warlike. war is violence, constant, unending... not knowing if you will still be alive in a minute or a second... not knowing if death will be a bullet or a lack of food and shelter. there is no 100% zone... no balance of power... you can be the best marksman or swordsman in the world and die when a bomb is dropped on you from miles into the air... or propelled across half a planet.

if you want to talk about the honor or dishonor of war, you better be willing to understand the emotions of it and the reasons to continue it... and the reasons to try to end it.

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Jaesic

I personally disagree. If you truly have honor, a code of sorts, you follow it at all times. People who follow a code of honor when it suits them to follow it may never understand that. Generally, I think people hide the fact that they have honor more often than they actually function without it.

Who says I don't follow my personal code of honor, even here? However, Tower PvP is competition. When competing, I'm ruthless. Blame my little league baseball coach or something. I don't mind. But "Ruthless" != "Cheat" because a person doesn't agree with my methods. It's not for Sanskrit to decide that. That's up to Funcom.

Originally posted by Jaesic
It's not 'cool' to have honor... or to recognize some higher power... or to care about other people. Which is understandable, because when someone claims to want to treat people with respect (and receive the same) and act with honor, they are tested by people who want to see just how willing they are to continue to believe while under some variety of 'torture.'

See my signature for what I think of 'cool'. Will I scam a n00b out of an item? Nah... Would I gank a n00b coming out of a mission door in Meetmedere, before the PvP timer was introduced? Nah... Would I take a n00b going into a mission in Meetmedere, cover him in BBQ sauce, ransack/deprive him, and eat him like the toddler he was? *burp*

Originally posted by Jaesic
I agree with Sanskrit in his core statement. Those people who are willing to choose their target by checking what orgs do not have enough people on to defend their bases are dishonorable.

As such, when people become aware of their action, they will grow less trustful of anything these attackers do. They will never be willing to support them (if they are on the same side) or make trades that will benefit them.

Perhaps this means little to you personally. You may not care one way or another if you never have to deal with those people.

Don't wear the black hat if you're not prepared for the possible consequences of being the bad guy.

Originally posted by Jaesic
Sanskrit has my respect for standing up for something he believes is right. I don't think he will accomplish anything other than that from doing so, except find out who a few of the people not to trust are.

Heh...Normally I'd agree. Cept Sanskrit feels obligued to equate something that isn't against the rules, can't be made against the rules, and in the end is the org's own fault (they chose their recruitment methods, they chose when to place their tower) to 'Cheating' and 'Exploiting'. Is napalm 'Honorable'? Hell no. But it works and its legal

Originally posted by Jaesic
Even Kuroshio, who has toyed with Sanskrit throughout this thread, has made statements that indicate that he follows a certain code of his own. Its not the same as either Sanskrit or myself but its there... and visible in plenty of his statements.

SO Kuroshio... he can't force honor on you, true. But he can withhold any trust of you... as can any other player in the game who is aware of it. You can function in a society that does not trust you... but you must always watch your back.

Jaesic

I think people could trust people like me far more than they can people like him. He's a Crusader. They're unpredictable and nothing but trouble. A person that stands up for what he believes is a Good Person. No argument there. People that try to force what they believe onto others have caused far more grief and pain in every world, real or digital, than anyone else.

If Funcom declared attacking org assets while the org was offline illegal the most you'd get outta me is a shrug of my shoulders. That is, aside from a couple hours of side splitting laughter from me (given the how naive something like that would be) . Hell, I'd prolly snicker for a week

But not the Crusader. If Cz stepped into this thread and said this is not now nor will it ever be considered cheatin, Crusaders would still carry on. They'll continue on and on, attempting to force others to their way. If they can't they'll push their Crusade harder and harder until they can, even if they can't. Eventually, with all that pushing, something gives and the whole thing comes tumbling down on everyone's head.

History (both Real and this game's history) is littered with examples of this. I didn't accidently use the words "Crusade" and "Crusader". Think about it.

[BigGreen]

While I do disagree with Sanskrit on the specifics of his argument, I also must say I find myself in disagreement with much of the spirit expressed here by some of the opposition. The sentiment that 'if it's legal, it must be moral or at least ok' doesn't hold much for me; that attitude is what is corrupting US businesses and institutions today, and is no more healthy in- game. This translates in AO to "it's a game and I'll do what I want until I get banned". The problem is that MMORPGs are inherently social mediums. If you're not concerned with the people around you, why not go play Quake or Counterstrike? Online worlds are only as pleasant as the people who populate them and it can turn ugly quickly, as Ultima Online did due to all the PKing that occurred early on. The same excuse was used, 'Hey it's a game! Stop being so sensitive'. I haven't played UO in a long time, but when I left it was a real armpit of a game due in large part to the PKers.
Now the tricky part is that I cannot, nor can Sanskrit, tell you exactly what is dishonorable since as I've mentioned before common values are not universally held. The basic rule of do unto others as you would have them do unto you I think makes sense. If you don't mind what you're doing being done to you, then you're doing the right thing. If not, well..

All of this is not to say I agree with Sanskrit. I still believe that despite the defiance expressed by some in this thread, that niether they nor anyone else is actually going to the trouble of finding out when an entire guild is offline and planning attacks accordingly.

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Strax
While I do disagree with Sanskrit on the specifics of his argument, I also must say I find myself in disagreement with much of the spirit expressed here by some of the opposition. The sentiment that 'if it's legal, it must be moral or at least ok' doesn't hold much for me; that attitude is what is corrupting US businesses and institutions today, and is no more healthy in- game. This translates in AO to "it's a game and I'll do what I want until I get banned". The problem is that MMORPGs are inherently social mediums. If you're not concerned with the people around you, why not go play Quake or Counterstrike? Online worlds are only as pleasant as the people who populate them and it can turn ugly quickly, as Ultima Online did due to all the PKing that occurred early on. The same excuse was used, 'Hey it's a game! Stop being so sensitive'. I haven't played UO in a long time, but when I left it was a real armpit of a game due in large part to the PKers.
Now the tricky part is that I cannot, nor can Sanskrit, tell you exactly what is dishonorable since as I've mentioned before common values are not universally held. The basic rule of do unto others as you would have them do unto you I think makes sense. If you don't mind what you're doing being done to you, then you're doing the right thing. If not, well..

All of this is not to say I agree with Sanskrit. I still believe that despite the defiance expressed by some in this thread, that niether they nor anyone else is actually going to the trouble of finding out when an entire guild is offline and planning attacks accordingly.

I, for one, don't equate "Legal" to "Moral". I disagree with the law reguarly because things I believe are morally right are illegal in the eyes of the law. Fact of the matter is most rules are specifically written to avoid the moral issue and deal with technical greivances only.

And for most orgs it is impossible to tell whether or not they're online. Hell, I can't tell when the majority of my org is online. There are a few that are vulnerable, however, because they advertise they recruit "only <insert nationality/timezone here>" players. I have a little pity for the orgs than do this because of language barriers (only a little, though).

As for Sanskrit and this particular topic, I don't care if he thinks I'm scum of the earth. Been there, done that, asked the Devil if I could have a room with AC. The only people whose thoughts concern me are the ones I care about. Which Sanskrit will never be. He took his position, turned into a pulpit and dealt out his Judgement. All he needs now are a few true Knights and we can have a good ole time:

Originally posted by Sanskrit
ROFLMAO, you think you're going to pull out the old cliched SunTzu on me and get away with it? Nooooooo.

An application of SunTzu to AO, similar to what you advocate, justifies:

1) Cheating, including exploits.
2) Cracks and pirating.
3) All forms of griefing.

Be careful what reasoning you rely on to justify your GAMEPLAY. You will end up with a new set of "ethics."

Now go back to your sophomore (high school, not even the most naive college student would quote Sun Tzu in such a superficial manner and in disregard of context) "World Cultures" class and finish your book report.

Originally posted by Sanskrit
Please address my point that the application of SunTzu you advocate would approve of cheating and cracking the game.

Originally posted by Sanskrit
This is cheating in the same respect that any other dishonorable action not covered in the rule book of any game is cheating.

Cheat if you want, but do it proudly and admit what you are.

Originally posted by Sanskrit
Kuroshio and "Ven" believe in taking advantage of any situation, going right over the line of unfair play and right up to the very line of getting caught cheating in a game to win.

Those are Sanskrit's words. Sorry but he can burn for them. Fluffy is done with my company's marketing department and you know you have to constantly feed a dragon lest they get cranky.

P.S.
What did I have to say on the subject?

Originally posted by Kuroshio

Dishonorable? Maybe. But when it comes to people I'm attacking I claim to be a practical man, not a honorable one.

[_____Real Kinky Ityn]

I don't dispute the morality of attacking during a time when a guild is offline, meaning I neither think it a moral or immoral thing. I really don't think I have the ability to make a clear judgement on this rather subjective point of view. What I want to point out are a few objective observations.

The defender picks the time when their base can be attacked. Not only do they pick the exact time when it can be attacked, but they also control any times between that window when their base can be attacked.

Though you could use the "ccaddbuddy" cmd to go through a guild's roster and find out who exactly is on line and who is off, it's an undertaking I wouldn't bother with; I'd rather more of a guild was on-line. I don't attack bases for the joy of killing towers; it's for the joy of the fight that happens around the towers. What I do disagree with is putting the burden of proving the defender has enough on-line players to defend on the shoulders of the attacker. It is not the attackers problem if their are enough defenders or not, it is the defenders responsibility. Having said that, I'd be glad to say that it would not be harmful to game mechanics to remove the ability to have members of any opposing faction on your buddy list or friends list, Omni only Omni, newt only newt and clan only clan. Though I'd never be bored enough to neither use that method, nor would it be in the spirit of my pursuit of fun, someone may and I don't discount your desire for insurance.

I dislike almost all of your alliance ideas, the only one I could support is one where alliances made allied guilds able to stand in your base during 5% gas and not be attacked by your towers, or be able to attack your towers. Building at allied bases is a way for weak guilds that avoid pvp or single class guilds that are unbalanced, to hide under a strong wing instead of find ways to make them strong. If your guild is weak it is your job to make it strong, not to find another guild to hide behind, or to blame your attacker for your weakness.

At any rate, there should be an alliance system that deals with 5% gas better than the current system, and it should allow fast alliances and the dissolution of those alliances.

People keep forgetting this isn't a war, this is just a conflict, and this is like some balkanized nation with a bunch of warlords bashing it out for buffs. If you aren't a strong warlord, keep a low profile.

[Raveleet]

Originally posted by Jaesic


I personally disagree. If you truly have honor, a code of sorts, you follow it at all times. People who follow a code of honor when it suits them to follow it may never understand that. Generally, I think people hide the fact that they have honor more often than they actually function without it.

I have personal honor and a code of sorts...one of those codes includes not killing people and stealing their money, yet I do it all the time when I play AO.
If I where to live after my RL standards in AO I'd be a low level doc having done all my leveling with tradeskills.
So when you say you follow same code of conduct in AO as you do in real-life I have serious problems believing you.

As for attacking when defenders are offline...yes it is dirty, but so is war.
The defender have got allmost all advantages when it comes to tower wars, including the choise of when the towers are going to be subject to an attack.
Using a little recon before the attack falls under the smart things to do catergory on my list, not under the stupid cheating things to do category.
But my moral standards are prolly too low understand how being smart is stupid.

To your defence I will say that fighting people is much more fun than fighting towers.

But one would think it would be better for a man with morals to take over the enemies base with minimum casualties?


One last thing, if the rumours of various gangs rampaging towers today when allmost everyones not playing cause of the holidays (me included), then that is pretty lame.
There should've been a xmas amnesty.

[Jaesic]

Originally posted by Ravegrrl
One last thing, if the rumours of various gangs rampaging towers today when allmost everyones not playing cause of the holidays (me included), then that is pretty lame.
There should've been a xmas amnesty.

A very good summary of the point that was being made here. There's gonna be a lot of unhappy people tomorrow when they discover that their time spent with friends and family cost them credits and effort.

Jaesic

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Jaesic


A very good summary of the point that was being made here. There's gonna be a lot of unhappy people tomorrow when they discover that their time spent with friends and family cost them credits and effort.

Jaesic

Problem is how do you distinguish? How do you tell the difference between said roving gang and say...an aethiest? Or someone that's single and has no living relatives? Or someone away from home? Or someone that enjoyed xmas with their family, like the people offline were doing, but is now on December 27th (cause it's the 26th now for me)? Or someone that did spend time with their loved ones...in AO because they're currently separated for some reason (business trip, military, ect.)?

Short of them sending you a /tell saying "Neener, neener neeeeeeeener! I knew you were offline so I stole your land!!!", you can't. But I'm quite willing to bet people that log in tomorrow, that think like Sanskrit, will automatically say "Those jackasses did this when they knew I was offline!!!".

I've had enough fun playing with Sanskrit. It's kinda like kicking someone after they're down (if your morals and ethics allow you to do so, which mine do ). After a while, the fun wears thin and you just go ahead and finish them off. I was logged in yesterday and today. Yesterday I spent killing Santa Leets. Today I spent giving away Christmas Gifts. While hunting those red hatted rats, I came across 2 separate orgs whose towers were in 25% zones and green to me. I didn't bother to attack cause I already had a mission, Santa Leets....

But, if I weren't on my mission I'd have attacked them in a heartbeat. I don't bother attempting to distinguish the improbable to satisfy the impossible. Namely, it's improbable anyone could distinguish if the majority of an org was or was not online. And it's impossible, for reasons like those different types of people I just named, to satisfy some naif's sensless Honor Code.

And before you ask, if it weren't improbable and I didn't have my own personal mission would I attack with the knowledge that the majority of the org was offline due to Xmas? Dunno...depends on my mood. But you'd never be able to tell, if I did choose to attack, whether I did it because I'm just an Evil SOB...Or just your regular Joe who happened to be playing AO when you weren't

[_____Real Kinky Ityn]

Originally posted by Jaesic


A very good summary of the point that was being made here. There's gonna be a lot of unhappy people tomorrow when they discover that their time spent with friends and family cost them credits and effort.

Jaesic

LOL I really hope they don't regret the time they spent with their family because of the loss of some imaginary and recoverable in-game commodites, that would be very sad. I'm out of town so you can take our bases Jaesic, if you want, I won't be sad. I just needed my dose of morning comedy before my son and I go out to have some fun. I'll be gone till the 31st, so you have plenty of time.

Anyway, the fun of land control isn't holding it, it's fighting over it. I mean, it's not there to hold indefinitely, it's there to be fought over. And if your guild hates PVP, maybe you should just forget about towers, they may just be much more effort then they are worth, and it seems they cause you a lot of personal stress, which isn't fun.

If this was a major problem, wouldn't funcom have just made all towers 100% from the start of Hanukkah till the day after New Years? I guess that would be a fair solution to all the people NOT playing the game during the Holidays, maybe the people playing the game might object.

Again, my only point is, please stop directing blame to the attackers for attacking your base when it's in 25%, it's not their job to keep your membership on-line. Think Pearl Harbor, who's fault was it the American's got caught with their pants down, the Japanese? Was it right, no, but the blame for lack of preperation falls on the United States. I could make a hundred such examples, what you are doing is akin to blaming a casino for your gambling problem. You choose the exposure of your base in terms of time and location, and only you are to blame if it is attacked, not the house that holds the games, not the competition, the ball is in your court.

[steppenrazor]

Originally posted by Eidolus



Furthermore, REAL war does NOT justify anything you can get away with, or think you can get away with.

Many countries on this earth have made a show of creating and following a set of "rules" for warfare, such as chemical and biological weapons should not be used, or that .50 caliber machine guns can only be used against equipment, not personnel (are uniforms worn by personnel still equipment?).

Ypers. got to love the 'Rules of war'

they are created to make us feel better. nothing more, got some how give us the impression tha war isn't a horried scare mess humans should never get involved in.

'rules of War'

Sounds a lot like 'Rules of the game' 'Leg before wicket'

makes the folks sitting at home, worries about their boys feel better.

Thier are no rules in war. no matter what happens the loser will be put on trial for 'Breaking the rules of war'. As i said before, it could have eisly have been american boys on trial at nurimburg.

The win of the war, deisded the 'Rules of war'. mainly to justifi in thier own minds thier actions.

And its seeming more and more like the started fothis thread does not want to accapt the fact that this is a non-issue. (nor answer my respon to his 'attacking on x-mas'. some folks don't like the fact that x-mas means nothing to oh, 3/4 of the world. and like the idea that EVERYONE AND THIER BROTHER are gathred around thex-mas tree opening presents.

Get a clue - the world does not revolve around x-mas. only a small protion of the world believes in it. Shoud they stop playing for a day becuase your haveing a holiday?

Hum, by that logic if we have any hard core jewish folks, i guess we can no longer play on the sabath. as they won't be on line. so we can't attack them.

Oh wait, jewish folks make an exception for war. don't they?

wonder why you don't? i know - cuz you don't want to wake up to find 50 mill worht of towers and such flushed down the old porclin alter.

lol.

Steppenrazor

[steppenrazor]

Originally posted by Ityn

Again, my only point is, please stop directing blame to the attackers for attacking your base when it's in 25%, it's not their job to keep your membership on-line. Think Pearl Harbor, who's fault was it the American's got caught with their pants down, the Japanese? Was it right, no, but the blame for lack of preperation falls on the United States. I could make a hundred such examples, what you are doing is akin to blaming a casino for your gambling problem. You choose the exposure of your base in terms of time and location, and only you are to blame if it is attacked, not the house that holds the games, not the competition, the ball is in your court.

Got to agree. sucks, but its true.

The burden of defense is on the defender.

its just that easy.

if the defender put up a weak defensive, he's gone.

If the defender gets drunk and can't fight, he's gone.

if the defender takes to sleeping pills and can't wake up in time for the fight?

he's gone.

The Attacker has one, and only one job in a war - To ATTACK. to run screeming at the enemy trying thier best to put a few extra hole in them.

Thats the attackers job. planing thier attack so as to have the greast chance of win is a smaller part of that.

its the defenders job to well defend. if thier off getting drunk, or what ever, well to bad so sad. mabye you weren't cut out to run a country anyway.

Like i said before, what do you want folks to send a tell 'Hey, Boss blank guild. Look, hate to say this, but we want that base of your. We're planing on attacking it around 6pm ish, that ok with you? No? hum. how about tommarow at 9? Oh being attacked by bobs guild. Hum. ok what about the 3rd tuesday after peticost, around 5ish? That works for you? Great its a date!"

Get a clue.


Steppenrazor

[steppenrazor]

---- A very good summary of the point that was being made here. There's gonna be a lot of unhappy people tomorrow when they discover that their time spent with friends and family cost them credits and effort.

Jaesic -----



Ah. thats just so sad.

no wait its not. Big fat hair deal. They lost fake stuff in a fake world. That they knew was a chance they'd lose.

After all it seems like pretty decent and simple math. 24 hours in a day, difrent time zones. Lots of folks on at all hours.

And for the love of pete will you people get off you dang high x-mass horse?

3/4 of the world could give a rats butt about x-mass. thats right, the VAST majority of the world does not have x-mass, and they have EVERY RIGHT IN THE WORLD TO PLAY AS THEY WISH ON X-MASS.

Just becuase you have x-mass does not mean a thing to most of the world.

Are you forgetting that this is an internation game? with folks from all over the world? Hum? of corse the only people who matter are YOU. the fact that 3/4 of humanity diesn't have x-mass just seems to slid right past some people.

i know its a blow to your jewdao-christin view of the world. But get over it. x-mass is not a world wide holiday, most of the world could careless about it.

godz blipping fools.


i said it just before NW came out - lol you folks are fools. bases are nothing more the a hugh money sink. thats it, its gong to start eating into the huge bank accoutn sof long time playrs and guilds.

money down the drain as it we're becuase thiers nothing you can do.


Steppenrazor

[Nyderach]

A very good summary of the point that was being made here. There's gonna be a lot of unhappy people tomorrow when they discover that their time spent with friends and family cost them credits and effort.

Heh, if people prefer credits and effort over invaluable time spent with friends and family.. well I don't really know what to say, except that it's incredibly sad.

How do you tell the difference between said roving gang and say...an aethiest? Or someone that's single and has no living relatives? Or someone away from home? Or someone that enjoyed xmas with their family, like the people offline were doing, but is now on December 27th (cause it's the 26th now for me)? Or someone that did spend time with their loved ones...in AO because they're currently separated for some reason (business trip, military, ect.)?

Understand that, and you will be redeemed. It's pretty simple.

[locomdenom]

Originally posted by Jazger
jewdao-christin

It's generally spelled Judaeo-Christian. Not to be nitpicky or anything.

And yes, to Jazger, the Jewish religion (Jewish religions, Jewish people, Judaeo-Christian.. I know ) does include an exemption from many religious obligations in circumstances involving life-threatening situations. It's called "pikuach nefesh", and basically amounts to: If it's to save your life, you can break Judaic law.

I.E. if the only thing to eat for 500 miles is pig, you best make bacon!

Or, alternately, if someone attacks you on Shabbat, don't worry about that "No work" thing and kick his ass.

Whiny Christians. Get your presents and get over it, or stay in game and keep your towers, but make up your MIND.

[Jaesic]

Originally posted by Kiryat-Dharin

Whiny Christians. Get your presents and get over it, or stay in game and keep your towers, but make up your MIND.

... and i'm not even christian.

here i thought we were talking about people attacking while others aren't online... and its suddenly a religious issue.

[locomdenom]

<--- Makes Baby Jesus Cry.

[steppenrazor]

Originally posted by Kiryat-Dharin


It's generally spelled Judaeo-Christian. Not to be nitpicky or anything.

And yes, to Jazger, the Jewish religion (Jewish religions, Jewish people, Judaeo-Christian.. I know ) does include an exemption from many religious obligations in circumstances involving life-threatening situations. It's called "pikuach nefesh", and basically amounts to: If it's to save your life, you can break Judaic law.

I.E. if the only thing to eat for 500 miles is pig, you best make bacon!

Or, alternately, if someone attacks you on Shabbat, don't worry about that "No work" thing and kick his ass.

Whiny Christians. Get your presents and get over it, or stay in game and keep your towers, but make up your MIND.

Oh no worries, i knew i had it wrong, and that was about as close as i could get.

And a few of my buddies growing up were (well i think they still are jewish so i have a vauge understanding of thier ways. (still rember the discuaaion the first time i went over to thier palce for dinner. - Blue plate for meat, white plate for the other stuff.' my response - hum i'll just use the blue on then. just want meat.

but yea, this whole 'but its x-mass' is the most annoying attemp to force belifes onto other i have ever seen.

Bunch of winy little girls blouses.

And you know for a fact if this were the otehr way around say a muslim or jew saying - 'but its our holiday' they'd be saying 'Bah STFU. and what not.

just sad. And make me wonder why i even assoitate with them by claiming christanity.

Steppenrazor.

[_____Real Kinky Ityn]

Well, I do feel bad for all of you that are going to Hell for attacking towers on x-mas day and not loving baby Jesus.

[p00finger]

Originally posted by Ityn
Well, I do feel bad for all of you that are going to Hell for attacking towers on x-mas day and not loving baby Jesus.

Is that a joke?