1666
|
General Talk / Non-member Requests / Re: Closure of the GC
|
on: March 30, 2014, 12:42:03 PM
|
Uh, Dadds, your little rant seems to be lacking in at least one area, you didn't answer my question. And Mr Emperor JamJulLison, I require tangible proof that 'the EoS had any dealings with Rafe. roup. After I left PMI and activated the Sargasian Empire, I applied for membership in the council (I applied as the EoS because I was no longer under the protection of the group. Since I received so much flak over it (get more members and wait a month) and was no longer bound by GC regulations, I did what I could to protect myself from who was felt the big baddie. Hence the NAP. That was the ONLY dealings I had with Rafe. Well you always have two options available to you. Request a public apology for what you feel is harmful or untrue, or throw down the gauntlet for me to pick up and defend your name. Actually, that is all part of the same option. Toss your gauntlet where you may and demand satisfaction. I will gladly pick it up for you. State your terms, Sargas of EOS
Thank you I didn't realize it would be so easy. Please extend an apology for your unfounded accusations regarding my 'dealings' with Rafe. (or validate your opinion)
|
|
|
1667
|
Corporation General Talk / Bounty hunting / Re: IMG Stations
|
on: March 30, 2014, 12:22:31 PM
|
Dadds, why do you continue to use the same type of vocabulary to others that you take offense from?
Because you started it, and because it helps me to ferret out my enemy's supporters, but mostly because it is an observable fact. Raphael cannot stand and fight against my ships, but he is very brave in the forums with claiming a victory for doing nothing in the combat arena. Armchair heroes, we call em. So strong and tough, just ask them. When it comes to getting the job done however.....well the evidence is in the log books.
I started it? When did I use offensive language in any conversation with you? I'll admit that you find my differing opinions offensive, but that has nothing to do with language. Please answer my question and this time think before responding (think this - 'how would I feel if someone talked to me this way).
|
|
|
1669
|
Corporation General Talk / Corporation Stance / Re: ITO Stance @ Raph
|
on: March 29, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
|
I'm thinking pretty much the same thing Dadds has said.
As I see it (I may be wrong - if I am please enlighten me), this topic was started to insult.
Invitations (and denial) of corporate membership does not belong in the open forums.
If they do, then maybe I should let everyone know why you were denied membership of the EoS.
|
|
|
1670
|
General Talk / Non-member Requests / Re: Closure of the GC
|
on: March 29, 2014, 03:59:18 PM
|
As i see it, Matamure, currently of EOS, and Sargas, leader of EOS formerly of [PMI], and JamJul-Lison, formally PMI, currently leader of TGE, are the quitters who walked away from their many accords. ...
Uh, Dadds? Please explain to me how you see the dividing of PMI (into the separate corporations TGE , SIN, *, and EoS) can be considered 'quitting'. The first thing the Sargasian Empire did was apply for membership in the council (and we all know how that went, don't we?). After all, we do have two of the original signatories in our corp. ... (and pointed out by the part time lawyer when it suits him, Sargas)...
Be careful, this type of statement is getting dangerously close to being the same type of statement that offended you. (edit for the usual reasons)
|
|
|
1671
|
Feedback Terminal / Suggestions / Re: mission specifics
|
on: March 28, 2014, 12:46:08 AM
|
the missions don't repopulate unless all are identified. Knowing what they are before checking them out would result in going after richest ones first and then doing the lesser ones.
Oh yes, welcome back to the game.
|
|
|
1673
|
General Talk / News & Strategy / Re: re. IMG Breaking headlines
|
on: March 27, 2014, 07:37:12 PM
|
I agree completely with both JJL's and JoolzVern's (that's a lot of typing for my little fingers - may I call you Joolz?)postings and I am getting a little tired of this little 'copyright' situation.
Show us a date when you First introduced the charter. Or the date of your First contribution.
We can then discuss "Copyright Rights".
Y'all have a nice day...
...enjoy...
Edit-
(Oh, btw, I was just as involved in writing that charter (and more involved than others). I am an original signatory. Prove you have an earlier copyright than mine and I will quit this)
|
|
|
1679
|
General Talk / Non-member Requests / Re: JJL
|
on: March 26, 2014, 09:17:13 PM
|
as far as the foul regarding the PM message reporting is concerned, you need to snitch right away and don't hold it over someone's head (i.e. you better do what I say or I'm telling Mom. That's really childish, don't you think?).
JamJul, your comments are spot on.
Dadds, you might have dreamed about a council during one of your drunken debacles, but if you do not have verifiable copyright (dated before June 20, 2013), your arguement is dismissed as not being a legal copyright.
The charter was hammered out by Aysle (IMG), Goodperson (NHC), JamJulLison (PMI), and myself (PMI). If you have a previous claim, show it.
Otherwise, please stay quiet on the subject of ownership.
(edit to provide copyright law information, now that Dadds has asked me to dust off my 'law books')
|
|
|
1680
|
General Talk / Non-member Requests / Re: JJL
|
on: March 26, 2014, 03:51:28 PM
|
...
Sargas, of EOS....where are you with your law books? hmmmm seems they only come out when it suits you hey. Bravo'ing a comment from JamJul hours after telling him he has no say here just says one thing, which i have been calling you since the year:dot: HYPOCRITE.
...
sinced you asked so nicely, Dadds, I will bring out the 'law books'. The arguement you make for ownership of the GC because you thought it up based upon RL standards is as invalid as when I tried to educate y'all about the legal status of Corporation (Sole) and Corporation (Multi). I tried the 'this is what its like in the real world' to make my point. You informed me then that this is a game and not RL, so my arguement was invalid. And now you try to use the same defense for something you want. You started the precedent that real world do not apply to the game. That is why my 'law books' have been gathering dust on my shelves.
|
|
|
|