Messages - webDiplomacy

Chat archive

16 Sep 15 UTC	Autumn, 1997: I WANT NO PART IN THIS JASON, MATT AND RAPE ROOM GANG BANG. Screw you guys.
23 Sep 15 UTC	Spring, 1999: Game said I had "no orders to fill" in last round and then goes ahead and destroys my fleet in irish sea. Cool game guys. eff this.
23 Sep 15 UTC	Spring, 1999: I'm calling out Tess. Tess, please play the game to win.
23 Sep 15 UTC	Spring, 1999: What makes you think I'm not? But I'm small, and France attacked me on the first turn. I had to use all my units to defend England. I had no allies. I still small, but I'm still alive, when all of you jerks said I was finished. There's a lot more game to play!
25 Sep 15 UTC	Autumn, 1999: I like how this game has become a competition to see who can lose the least gracefully.
25 Sep 15 UTC	Autumn, 1999: Btw I'm covering for Sam for a bit. This is Ryan.
28 Sep 15 UTC	Spring, 2000: im rooting for Hollywood! go j $!
28 Sep 15 UTC	Spring, 2000: im rooting for Hollywood! go j $!
10 Oct 15 UTC	Autumn, 2002: I call unfair collusion!! If you want to quit, that's lame, but not unfair. You can simply stop playing and let us all have the chance to fight for your territory. But it's not cool to strategically donate your land to one empire to everyone else's disadvantage. Booooooo!
10 Oct 15 UTC	Autumn, 2002: What are you talking about?
11 Oct 15 UTC	Autumn, 2002: Is this Tess complaining about unfair collusion? That's a hoot.
11 Oct 15 UTC	Autumn, 2002: An alliance is part of the game, as long as both people in the alliance are trying to gain territory, and are helping each other advance. Am I wrong in thinking that helping each other do well is different than one player advancing based on the other's intentional demise?
11 Oct 15 UTC	Spring, 2003: An alliance is part of the game, as long as both people in the alliance are trying to gain territory, and are helping each other advance. Am I wrong in thinking that helping each other do well is different than one player advancing based on the other's intentional demise?
12 Oct 15 UTC	Spring, 2003: An alliance is part of the game, as long as both people in the alliance are trying to gain territory, and are helping each other advance. Am I wrong in thinking that helping each other do well is different than one player advancing based on the other's intentional demise?
12 Oct 15 UTC	Spring, 2003: An alliance is part of the game, as long as both people in the alliance are trying to gain territory, and are helping each other advance. Am I wrong in thinking that helping each other do well is different than one player advancing based on the other's intentional demise?
12 Oct 15 UTC	Spring, 2003: Doing nothing but help joe win is the same as giving joe your supply centers
12 Oct 15 UTC	Spring, 2003: An alliance is part of the game, as long as both people in the alliance are trying to gain territory, and are helping each other advance. Am I wrong in thinking that helping each other do well is different than one player advancing based on the other's intentional demise?
12 Oct 15 UTC	Spring, 2003: Doing nothing but help joe win is the same as giving joe your supply centers
12 Oct 15 UTC	Spring, 2003: Doing nothing but help joe win is the same as giving joe your supply centers
12 Oct 15 UTC	Spring, 2003: An alliance is part of the game, as long as both people in the alliance are trying to gain territory, and are helping each other advance. Am I wrong in thinking that helping each other do well is different than one player advancing based on the other's intentional demise?