Messages - webDiplomacy

Chat archive

26 Apr 17 UTC	Autumn, 1999: Texas, c'mon bud.
27 Apr 17 UTC	Autumn, 1999: GameMaster: WellsTheDestroyer was banned: Multi/meta/no reply. The time until the next phase has been extended by one phase length to give an opportunity to replace the player. Remember to finalize your orders if you don't want to wait, so the game isn't held up unnecessarily!
05 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2006: Hey guys, let's have a great game!
19 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Full disclosure everyone. I want to draw. Don't let the zero bet Texas say otherwise.
19 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Texas: Seriously? Again? I thought we went over this, but I guess you are too retarded to get it through your thick ass skull, Huh? Mexico: It was a tap in Arizona that I will do again. I gave Quebec the support in Florida but he missed his turn so now we need to wait, again. I will take it myself this turn and then we can end this. And need I remind you YOU ARE A ZERO BET. ACCEPT THE SITUATION I OWE YOU NOTHING. You can also see that I never supported the attack in Arizona. Texas: And just because you are a bet doesn't mean I owe you anything. You are simply attacking for no reason. I clearly havent attacked you yet, but you are prodding my lines. That is something that is clearly you just being an aggressor to agitate me into attacking you so that you have cause to break this out into a full war. So, I wish for you to ACCEPT THE SITUATION and realize that YOU are the aggressor and I owe YOU NOTHING. Simply betting means nothing. Also, moving into the gulf of Mexico, right near my land, only makes me question your motives even more. There is no reason for you to have a fleet there unless you plan to attack. I am not a fool, and I do not accept your simple minded reasoning for why you would continually attack me. This is your last warning. Attack me this turn again, and I will have the rest of the world believing you are going for the solo, and we will all be attacking you. Mexico: It is called DEFENSE. Stop pestering the point. How could I have known you wouldn't of pushed into Gulf of Mexico with Louisiana (which would have been wise) and we would have bounced? I didn't support the Arizona move which indicates A TAP, understand the difference. I didn't attack San Antonio and I haven't moved closer to the Californian coast. If I want to hold my line then all these moves make sense. But I still need to defend against a possible aggression from you. If you were so worried you would have bounced in Gulf of Mexico but you didn't.
19 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: If you're "going for a draw" why haven't you voted to draw yet?
19 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Because you're still here. And that question applies to everyone here.
19 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: :(
19 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Sorry bud
19 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Well Texas? Tell us your thoughts
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Well he told me this: It is not defense to move forward. You are taking something close to my coast that is clearly capable of launching an attack. Not only that but you used a PROBING ATTACK. Moving an army into someone's land is not DEFENSE. I'm sorry, but you were taught wrong. It is a clear attack. No one else in the game is making these moves. That should tell you something. It certainly tells me something about you. I am not the only one in this game noticing how unnecessary this is. The others are the ones coming to me asking if this is you making it clear that you are going for a solo. So keep that in mind.
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: I am not bothering to respond unless it is global. He is creating his own narrative and won't listen to anything I say or see the reasoning behind it.
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Texas, if he wanted to get Arizona from you, he just have to support it from Baja California, but he didn't. The only reason he did this is that he doesn't want you to take over San Diego. You can't support a move if you are attacked. Now he can hold his SC in San Diego without being afraid of a move from you to get. Do you even understand this game really?
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Thank you British Columb. Do you see that Mexico, I am not the only thinking your moves are simply to aggravate me
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: My thoughts are that he is attacking an probing while setting up an attack in the East through his fleets, If I were trying to do anything to go for a solo or something stupid like that, do you all not think I would have already attacked? It is clear what my intentions are. I wish to draw the game as soon as Florida is taken off the map. I have yet to even do anything in this game, I haven't moved into anyone's land or anything. I am clearly not the aggressor of this game. I have attacked no one, even though I have had clear chances to do so. But I have not done so, and with that I see no reason to attack me this late in the game unless you plan to aggravate me or to attack me for land. He says "No Bets" are wild cards, and they can do whatever they please. But being here for a little while now in this game, and doing nothing you'd expect from a wild card, I would believe that it is clear I am no wild card who would be playing with "Nothing to Lose". But he insists that he MUST attack me because I am a zero bet and therefor am BOUND to attack him and take over his whole damn country. So he continually attacks me. That makes no sense after seeing my moves here.
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Fuck it, I will prove my intentions clearly and vote a draw now, even with Florida here.
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Dude, why do you guys even care whether you vote to draw when I'm in the game or out of the game. It's 1 point. Most of you won't even get the 1 point I'm holding.
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: It isn't about the point, its the principal of allowing someone who is so clearly done in this game the ability to win. Someone so defeated the ability to win. In that sense, why not draw when the first country is on the verge of losing. It is a matter of principal. of Fairness to those already defeated. But I have already stated that I have done nothing to help my country's cause in this game, and so I voted draw, because I have no ability to say that I am better than you or not, since we never even had ground that touched.
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: Texas, I was talking to you, not to Mexico. If you read it good you will see it. I agree with Mexico that your thoughts about the tap in Arizona. It isn't attacking it's just self defence in case you want to take over San Diego from him
20 Jun 17 UTC	Autumn, 2009: If I wanted to attack him I wouldn't have moved my units away from his border. Isn't that obvious? If I planned to make a move on him, do you not think I would have hit him originally?