From: spitefulvinegar@aol.com (Spiteful Vinegar)
Date: 12 Nov 2002 23:21:34 EST
Remy is stupid Remy is stupid remy is stupid remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid Remy is stupid
remy is stupid remy is stupid
and harris sucks.
Stupid
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: cassiusmaxim@aol.com (Cassius Maxim)
Date: 13 Nov 2002 00:05:15 EST
Oh yes. This is who we want as a Baron.
Well done, Remy.
Cassius Gaius Maximius
Date: 13 Nov 2002 00:05:15 EST
Oh yes. This is who we want as a Baron.
Well done, Remy.
Cassius Gaius Maximius
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: hostgameriever@aol.com (HOST Game Riever)
Date: 13 Nov 2002 22:10:18 EST
>remy is stupid remy is stupid
>
>and harris sucks.
Me thinks you should let sleeping dogs lie
Date: 13 Nov 2002 22:10:18 EST
>remy is stupid remy is stupid
>
>and harris sucks.
Me thinks you should let sleeping dogs lie
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: prlunicorn@aol.com (PrlUnicorn)
Date: 14 Nov 2002 02:05:06 EST
>>Me thinks you should let sleeping dogs lie<<
Me thinks he's rather repeative, did a needle get stuck in the record grooves?
Date: 14 Nov 2002 02:05:06 EST
>>Me thinks you should let sleeping dogs lie<<
Me thinks he's rather repeative, did a needle get stuck in the record grooves?
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: spitefulvinegar@aol.com (Spiteful Vinegar)
Date: 14 Nov 2002 10:44:50 EST
Me thinks Remys still stupid n that a needle aint the only thing that got caught in the record grooves
I bet youd all love gettin screwed over to right?
Dom
Date: 14 Nov 2002 10:44:50 EST
Me thinks Remys still stupid n that a needle aint the only thing that got caught in the record grooves
I bet youd all love gettin screwed over to right?
Dom
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: gnrtdrgoon@aol.com (GnrtDrgoon)
Date: 14 Nov 2002 14:47:56 EST
>I bet youd all love gettin screwed over to right?
>
>Dom
Explain the statement, please.
G
Date: 14 Nov 2002 14:47:56 EST
>I bet youd all love gettin screwed over to right?
>
>Dom
Explain the statement, please.
G
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: spitefulvinegar@aol.com (Spiteful Vinegar)
Date: 14 Nov 2002 20:24:34 EST
Remy or his machine or whatever screwed up the records so that i could challenge but then he tried to fix it and now I can't challenge because of his mistake. I worked hard and all tryin to get my 10 and now they dont count because remys stupid
There you go
Dom
Date: 14 Nov 2002 20:24:34 EST
Remy or his machine or whatever screwed up the records so that i could challenge but then he tried to fix it and now I can't challenge because of his mistake. I worked hard and all tryin to get my 10 and now they dont count because remys stupid
There you go
Dom
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: gnrtdrgoon@aol.com (GnrtDrgoon)
Date: 14 Nov 2002 21:31:40 EST
>Remy or his machine or whatever screwed up the records so that i could
>challenge but then he tried to fix it and now I can't challenge because of
>his mistake. I worked hard and all tryin to get my 10 and now they dont
>count because remys stupid
Vague. What was his mistake?
G
Date: 14 Nov 2002 21:31:40 EST
>Remy or his machine or whatever screwed up the records so that i could
>challenge but then he tried to fix it and now I can't challenge because of
>his mistake. I worked hard and all tryin to get my 10 and now they dont
>count because remys stupid
Vague. What was his mistake?
G
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: spitefulvinegar@aol.com (Spiteful Vinegar)
Date: 14 Nov 2002 22:21:13 EST
" Vague. What was his mistake?
G "
Ask him
Dom
Date: 14 Nov 2002 22:21:13 EST
" Vague. What was his mistake?
G "
Ask him
Dom
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: gnrtdrgoon@aol.com (GnrtDrgoon)
Date: 15 Nov 2002 02:05:27 EST
Remy?
What was your mistake, please?
Thank you,
G
Date: 15 Nov 2002 02:05:27 EST
Remy?
What was your mistake, please?
Thank you,
G
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: hostgamewisp@aol.com (HOST Game Wisp)
Date: 15 Nov 2002 02:08:38 EST
Not to speak for Remy but from my understanding the error could have been caused by any caller, not necessarily the person in charge of organizing the data.
~::lightning bolt::
Date: 15 Nov 2002 02:08:38 EST
Not to speak for Remy but from my understanding the error could have been caused by any caller, not necessarily the person in charge of organizing the data.
~::lightning bolt::
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: hostgameriever@aol.com (HOST Game Riever)
Date: 15 Nov 2002 13:44:28 EST
>Remy?
>What was your mistake, please?
>Thank you
G
What happened was this
the standings generator spit out a second Dom name on the list. While the Warlord Dom had a record of 18-0, the new one went 6-11 in the first weekmaking him 24-11 Basically the losses were going on the new name, the old one was standing un touched at 18-0
when the records were combined, Dom lost his rank, he failed to regain it for the remainder of the cycle.
As soon as he dropped in rank his peer wins were eliminated. Period.
No matter how you cut it Dom had to lknow he wasn't 18-0 and he continued to duel as if he was a warlord. Look at the standings, you will see where his name doubled, you will see where his WoL's weren't being picked up by the warlord name.
IF Remy were to allow this challenge to continue, every warlord ever to lose peerwins after dropping rank would have a free for all with the rules.
My theory here is simple.Warlords know if they win or lose, surely Dom surely knew he wasn't 18-0 or at least should have, and should have brought it to Remy's attention.( This is the proviso on the standings
Any deficiencies found in these standings may be reported to the Sigurd Corporation style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="FIXED" FACE="Courier New" LANG="0">for analysis. The Sigurd Corporation may be contacted
using the lockbox found in the Arena.
Remy feels terrible about the problem but the rules are clear in this one, and I quote
"Peer Wins:
-------------------------
"Peer Wins" are retroactive to the last time you challenged a Baron or the Overlord. Once a challenge is met, either against the Overlord or a Baron, the challenging Warlord's "Peer Wins" are zeroed out up to the date the challenge is issued. Baron's and the Overlord do NOT accumulate "Peer Wins" while holding title and start out with zero when unseated to the Warlord rank.
" For Warlords who lose their Rank of Warlord and then reenter the rank, their Peer Wins are reset to zero. "
In conclusion, there is no need to trash Remy over this, errors occur but the fact in this is Dom fell from rank and challenged on invalid peer wins.
Date: 15 Nov 2002 13:44:28 EST
>Remy?
>What was your mistake, please?
>Thank you
G
What happened was this
the standings generator spit out a second Dom name on the list. While the Warlord Dom had a record of 18-0, the new one went 6-11 in the first weekmaking him 24-11 Basically the losses were going on the new name, the old one was standing un touched at 18-0
when the records were combined, Dom lost his rank, he failed to regain it for the remainder of the cycle.
As soon as he dropped in rank his peer wins were eliminated. Period.
No matter how you cut it Dom had to lknow he wasn't 18-0 and he continued to duel as if he was a warlord. Look at the standings, you will see where his name doubled, you will see where his WoL's weren't being picked up by the warlord name.
IF Remy were to allow this challenge to continue, every warlord ever to lose peerwins after dropping rank would have a free for all with the rules.
My theory here is simple.Warlords know if they win or lose, surely Dom surely knew he wasn't 18-0 or at least should have, and should have brought it to Remy's attention.( This is the proviso on the standings
Any deficiencies found in these standings may be reported to the Sigurd Corporation style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="FIXED" FACE="Courier New" LANG="0">for analysis. The Sigurd Corporation may be contacted
using the lockbox found in the Arena.
Remy feels terrible about the problem but the rules are clear in this one, and I quote
"Peer Wins:
-------------------------
"Peer Wins" are retroactive to the last time you challenged a Baron or the Overlord. Once a challenge is met, either against the Overlord or a Baron, the challenging Warlord's "Peer Wins" are zeroed out up to the date the challenge is issued. Baron's and the Overlord do NOT accumulate "Peer Wins" while holding title and start out with zero when unseated to the Warlord rank.
" For Warlords who lose their Rank of Warlord and then reenter the rank, their Peer Wins are reset to zero. "
In conclusion, there is no need to trash Remy over this, errors occur but the fact in this is Dom fell from rank and challenged on invalid peer wins.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: gnrtdrgoon@aol.com (GnrtDrgoon)
Date: 15 Nov 2002 15:42:13 EST
Ahh, I see.
So, because Dominic failed to keep an accurate count of his Wins, Losses and Ties in order to verify them with the record shown on the standings, and then decided to challenge, and when the discrepancy is found, it's easier to place blame on the Standings Keeper.
So, I don't really see how Remy is completely at fault here. I think there's fault on both sides. On the standings because of the duplicate records, and on the Duelist for not reporting there was an error in his rankings and then challenging.
You must make sure to check *everything* before you issue a challenge. Don't make yourself appear to be a sore loser, which was done.
I am now done.
G
Date: 15 Nov 2002 15:42:13 EST
Ahh, I see.
So, because Dominic failed to keep an accurate count of his Wins, Losses and Ties in order to verify them with the record shown on the standings, and then decided to challenge, and when the discrepancy is found, it's easier to place blame on the Standings Keeper.
So, I don't really see how Remy is completely at fault here. I think there's fault on both sides. On the standings because of the duplicate records, and on the Duelist for not reporting there was an error in his rankings and then challenging.
You must make sure to check *everything* before you issue a challenge. Don't make yourself appear to be a sore loser, which was done.
I am now done.
G
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: spitefulvinegar@aol.com (Spiteful Vinegar)
Date: 15 Nov 2002 18:05:03 EST
I was only countin the wins that counted the peer ones.
its remys fault. remys stupid.
Dom
Date: 15 Nov 2002 18:05:03 EST
I was only countin the wins that counted the peer ones.
its remys fault. remys stupid.
Dom
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: gnrtdrgoon@aol.com (GnrtDrgoon)
Date: 15 Nov 2002 20:00:43 EST
>I was only countin the wins that counted the peer ones.
>
>its remys fault. remys stupid.
>
>Dom
You're obviously stupid because you didn't know you were falling behind in your win over losses. Had you been keeping an accurate record of your duels, you would have noticed that something was wrong.
Don't put all the blame on the standings keeper when you are just as responsible.
G
Date: 15 Nov 2002 20:00:43 EST
>I was only countin the wins that counted the peer ones.
>
>its remys fault. remys stupid.
>
>Dom
You're obviously stupid because you didn't know you were falling behind in your win over losses. Had you been keeping an accurate record of your duels, you would have noticed that something was wrong.
Don't put all the blame on the standings keeper when you are just as responsible.
G