Godpoing / Moraine

Zoolander said:
Well, if you read Jamal's post, he basically did do the right thing. Its just that his view of what the right thing was differs from what yours is.

Not really suprising somone would choose to do what is best for the LS over what the masses demand.

It does make him look like a hypocrite, but he already admited that. Success of your LS > your own personal image.
I agree with this he did a admirable thing and if it was anyone else I don't think anyone would give it a 2nd glance, same case go for vang joining H. Angel. Here the thing though this is Jamal same guy not even 2 months ago that gave me 3rd degree for being in Antares. Now that the shoe on the other foot it ok?
As for GP being punished, well he was a thief which he no longer has if I remember correctly he was also first person get that multi hit dagger by fishing, so in sentimental aspect he did loss alot. {sarcasm on} Least now he a mithra so it not total lost. {sarcasm off} Then again he did get a pretty good equiped war (even if only rare/ex items) and one that has sky and sea already unlocked.

shaw said:
It's that gaybo Shaunessy. Don't worry, ofcourse he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's never had a job high enough to fight Bark Tarantulas, let alone see Fafnir or Nidhogg.

could not help to lol at this.
 
Skaw said:
Oh, I do when possible. Anyway, I was just harassing the one in this thread out on posting just in spite of being found out by the creator of this topic, not because he was a cheater. But then again theres only been one cheater posting in this thread, unless you want me to encompass people associating with cheaters - But I'm sure you're sick of having people hound you for having been in OH, aren't you?

oh? and who's the one cheater? lol, skaw, glad to see that your feeble mind is still in full gear.

Edit: Firestreak got it right on. Skaw respects jamal because of his stance on cheaters. Yet jamal changes his stance (gogo jamalbot), and skaw jumps on me over it lol.

Skaw heres a questiong for you. Have you ever seen me cheat? yes or no question (makes me wonder how you will screw this up). Can you say with 100% certainty that i was banned?(again, yes or no question). Can you point out anyone that has ever seen me cheat? (a third yes or no question, as i have to keep this simple for you). The fact of the matter is that you are trying to change the subject so your fanatical aquaintance doesnt look so bad.
 
Last edited:
camping fafnir/nidhogg with 1 blm is total win. if you dont have the arsenal to camp something, just get the tod.
 
neophytal said:
camping fafnir/nidhogg with 1 blm is total win. if you dont have the arsenal to camp something, just get the tod.

The irony is they got the M. Body so it begs the question, was it a loss (you said win, but it was obviously sarcasm)? They should have just let them wipe and take their chances on claim.
 
Lavi said:
The irony is they got the M. Body so it begs the question, was it a loss (you said win, but it was obviously sarcasm)? They should have just let them wipe and take their chances on claim.
In retrospect yes, we should have.
 
Lavi said:
The irony is they got the M. Body so it begs the question, was it a loss (you said win, but it was obviously sarcasm)? They should have just let them wipe and take their chances on claim.

well, basically i was just trying to get the point across.. that.. if you cant beat it with what you have, dont camp it, simple as that.
 
neophytal said:
well, basically i was just trying to get the point across.. that.. if you cant beat it with what you have, dont camp it, simple as that.

I know, but considering they beat it (with Jamal's shell) and got the drop, how is that going to send the message? To me it just says they can get claim, rely on someone else for help when they need it. When I camp money NMs, I hate when people ask me to borrow TH2 for the drops. The way I figure it, if I give it to them, it only encourages them to camp further when if I refuse, they will have a smaller chance at drop and eventually leave. So unless they are friends, I normally refuse. Obviously, Jamal's learned the lesson, but he already payed for the mistake.
 
Lavi said:
Obviously, Jamal's learned the lesson, but he already payed for the mistake.
The decision wasn't mine to be made at this point, just a clarification.
 
Also throw out, I don't actually disagree with the decision to let him stay, rather I'm commenting on Jamal's obnoxious rants and tirades against cheaters and friends of cheaters when he was going to make this decision in the end. If you don't have the balls to actually take a stand against cheaters, then seriously, shut the fuck up about cheating.
 
Skaw said:
Again, no other known cheater(to my knowledge) has posted here. The guy ran and hid during the suspension. Thats pretty much an admittance of guilt. If you notice, in threads were Chasym posted about cheating after he admitted, I did the exact same thing. And the Salvage thread.

If another person that I knew had cheated posted here, I'd be after them too, buddy. But theres only been one. Whats so god damn hard to understand about that, Firestreak?

The problem is it has nothing to do with you about who's cheating and who admits what. You start shit with people who accept cheaters, if you don't like them and you give a pass to people you consider more acceptable, even if they do the same thing. For example you flamed just recently a good times thread over Grayswander because he was in a Salvage run. You flamed the whole run. Neo flamed the whole run. Neither of you are flaming this linkshell. It's the same damn thing, just different people you have a different relationship with.

If you're simply about using the morality to support people you do like and condemn people you don't like... then you're not speaking out of concern about fair play - simply spite, and it's a dishonest presentation of yourself.

Zoolander said:
Well, if you read Jamal's post, he basically did do the right thing. Its just that his view of what the right thing was differs from what yours is.

Not really suprising somone would choose to do what is best for the LS over what the masses demand.

It does make him look like a hypocrite, but he already admited that. Success of your LS > your own personal image.

He probably did the best thing for his linkshell in keeping the member that most people wanted around. However, he has consistently did the wrong thing for his linkshell on a larger scale, trying to make himself an internet cop and assault other linkshells and setting the spotlight on his own linkshell by setting the standards so high. If you're going to take the principle that the success of the linkshell is more important than personal standards - you're a damn fool to try and enforce those standards on other rival linkshells.

Afterall, Jamal even attacks Sirel now simply for being friends with people who cheat. They're not EVEN in the same linkshell. This is ridiculous.

Back when GP was originally banned, on QCDN I defended him and said it was bad for the community he was gone if he was a good guy and people liked him. Who assisted me then? Not Jamal. It would have been the right decision, and I'd be defending Jamal right now, had Jamal not taken a stance that makes him impossible to defend. You simply cannot do it. If you think cheating is wrong, you cannot defend letting GP in his shell. If you think cheating is alright, you cannot defend his tirades.

This makes him worse than a cheater himself, period.


Editing in here: http://www.qcdn.org/showthread.php?t=32811&page=8

This is his original banned thread. I defended GP here, Jamal made no appearance of course. Seems quite a few people's opinions have changed since then.

Edit in: To clarify how it makes him worse...

Let's say me and you are both trying to claim a NM. We both have access to a voke bot. I do 2 things... I use the voke bot and I tell you that using voke bots is disgusting. Now instead of neither of us having voke back, or both of us having voke bot, the only one with the voke back is the one who convinced the other guy they're wrong.

As in, Jamal tries to convince all of us that it's wrong to do ANYTHING with someone who is a cheater. So people are convinced, boot their cheating members... then Jamal invites a cheater who is a benefit to HIS linkshell.

Do we see how this is worse than just cheating and shutting the fuck up about it?
 
Last edited:
I do read. You said you're going after Sirel cause he's a cheater and he's posting here while GP isn't posting here. You went after people on the good times board simply for associating with a cheater. Which says to me, you dislike Grayswander, you don't dislike Kyle, therefore you hold them and their friends to different standards.
 
Firestreak said:
I do read. You said you're going after Sirel cause he's a cheater and he's posting here while GP isn't posting here. You went after people on the good times board simply for associating with a cheater. Which says to me, you dislike Grayswander, you don't dislike Kyle, therefore you hold them and their friends to different standards.

I didn't go after Grayswander specifically until he posted. The only thing I said before he did was to Uzor, saying that he doesn't cheat anymore doesn't excuse him for cheating before. Do I really need to repeat that here?
 
Skaw said:
I didn't go after Grayswander specifically until he posted. The only thing I said before he did was to Uzor, saying that he doesn't cheat anymore doesn't excuse him for cheating before. Do I really need to repeat that here?

No, but other people DID bring Grayswander in to it. even if you say that, you were talking ABOUT grays. Thus, you still went after Grays.

Sometimes I doubt you think over what you write.
 
Uzor said:
No, but other people DID bring Grayswander in to it. even if you say that, you were talking ABOUT grays. Thus, you still went after Grays.

Sometimes I doubt you think over what you write.

Thats kind of beside the point. It's like saying "He did it," while OJ was on trial.
 
Skaw said:
Thats kind of beside the point. It's like saying "He did it," while OJ was on trial.

Grays wasn't on trial. You guys brought him up without he having done something. What you did was uncalled for and only further proves the hypocracy (sp?)
 
Uzor said:
Grays wasn't on trial. You guys brought him up without he having done something. What you did was uncalled for and only further proves the hypocracy (sp?)

Hypocrisy for saying "Just because he doesn't cheat now doesn't excuse him" in a roundabout way? What the fuck are you talking about? You're the one that said he did cheat. I was replying TO YOU.
 
Skaw said:
Hypocrisy for saying "Just because he doesn't cheat now doesn't excuse him" in a roundabout way? What the fuck are you talking about? You're the one that said he did cheat. I was replying TO YOU.

I didn't say he cheated in assault. And it doesn't matter if you were replying to me or not.

Besides, the same can be said about Godpoint. Just because he doesn't cheat now doesn't excuse him, which still makes Jamal a hypocrit.
 
can i get an LS so I can decide what side of the argument i should be on?
 
Back
Top