i wish he made me a GM and asked me to buy the team 
rhavec
offline
offline
Originally posted by Tobin
There's also a remarkable difference between gutting a team in the off-season vs. in the middle of the season where you're vying for position.
This.
There's also a remarkable difference between gutting a team in the off-season vs. in the middle of the season where you're vying for position.
This.
purehatred
offline
offline
Originally posted by Tobin
There's also a remarkable difference between gutting a team in the off-season vs. in the middle of the season where you're vying for position.
Yup.
There's also a remarkable difference between gutting a team in the off-season vs. in the middle of the season where you're vying for position.
Yup.
purehatred
offline
offline
Originally posted by justafish2002
Originally posted by cbtd10
he's talking about guys like tim harper. you know, the MODERATOR who has, by purpose, gutted a team to bring talent or money to his main team. I think he's talking about that kind of cheater.
Give it up. Harper didn't cheat. this is why we need private forums.
if it wasn't cheating, the rules wouldn't have been changed.
It happened. It's done. Constantly defending it only makes certain no one who was here for that first season will let it go.
Originally posted by cbtd10
he's talking about guys like tim harper. you know, the MODERATOR who has, by purpose, gutted a team to bring talent or money to his main team. I think he's talking about that kind of cheater.
Give it up. Harper didn't cheat. this is why we need private forums.
if it wasn't cheating, the rules wouldn't have been changed.
It happened. It's done. Constantly defending it only makes certain no one who was here for that first season will let it go.
Last edited Jun 4, 2008 14:34:20
bigtisme
offline
offline
Its not the fact that he "gutted" the team. Its simply the fact that he is doing exactly what he has been trying to stop all this time. Thats all that i see here.
Jed
offline
offline
Originally posted by purehatred
if it wasn't cheating, the rules wouldn't have been changed.
It happened. It's done. Constantly defending it only makes certain no one who was here for that first season will let it go.
Actually, if it wasn't against the rules at the time, then by definition it wasn't cheating. You can claim it was morally wrong, but can't really claim it was cheating.
if it wasn't cheating, the rules wouldn't have been changed.
It happened. It's done. Constantly defending it only makes certain no one who was here for that first season will let it go.
Actually, if it wasn't against the rules at the time, then by definition it wasn't cheating. You can claim it was morally wrong, but can't really claim it was cheating.
GeneralMakaveli
offline
offline
Originally posted by Reic
Couldn't he just sell the team to a GM or a member of the team and quit himself?
Withing this post it has said he tried but no one wanted it.
Couldn't he just sell the team to a GM or a member of the team and quit himself?
Withing this post it has said he tried but no one wanted it.
purehatred
offline
offline
Originally posted by Jed
Originally posted by purehatred
if it wasn't cheating, the rules wouldn't have been changed.
It happened. It's done. Constantly defending it only makes certain no one who was here for that first season will let it go.
Actually, if it wasn't against the rules at the time, then by definition it wasn't cheating. You can claim it was morally wrong, but can't really claim it was cheating.
I guess that's technically true. But the game admins thought the situation was bad enough to fine the team. And alter the mechanics of the game.
To me, that means they felt that it went against the spirit and purpose of the game and it constituted cheating
Plus, be real, if you're going to argue with someone that "IT WASN'T TECHNICALLY CHEATING" it comes off as cheap justification.
Originally posted by purehatred
if it wasn't cheating, the rules wouldn't have been changed.
It happened. It's done. Constantly defending it only makes certain no one who was here for that first season will let it go.
Actually, if it wasn't against the rules at the time, then by definition it wasn't cheating. You can claim it was morally wrong, but can't really claim it was cheating.
I guess that's technically true. But the game admins thought the situation was bad enough to fine the team. And alter the mechanics of the game.
To me, that means they felt that it went against the spirit and purpose of the game and it constituted cheating
Plus, be real, if you're going to argue with someone that "IT WASN'T TECHNICALLY CHEATING" it comes off as cheap justification.
Last edited Jun 4, 2008 16:52:04
Sam Bolster
offline
offline
cheated = No he did not cheat in anyway because many others did the same and were not called cheaters...
hypocrite = Yes, All he did was argue about the cheating by MULTIPLE Players being released, yes he goes off and does the same thing.
now I call him a hypocrite not because he didn't do the right thing, I mean I would have done that same thing but the fact that he said all this stuff about teams being "gutted" and then goes off and does the exact same thing that those teams did.
Tubby sorry to see you go man, good luck whatever you do
hypocrite = Yes, All he did was argue about the cheating by MULTIPLE Players being released, yes he goes off and does the same thing.
now I call him a hypocrite not because he didn't do the right thing, I mean I would have done that same thing but the fact that he said all this stuff about teams being "gutted" and then goes off and does the exact same thing that those teams did.
Tubby sorry to see you go man, good luck whatever you do
JeffHCross
offline
offline
One thing I'll say in Tubby's defense, regarding the cheating/gutting discussion above.
As several posters mentioned, there's a difference in doing it in mid-season and doing it in the off-season. There's also a difference in doing it when players have an intended destination, and when they're released into the wild like the Legends and Devil Dawgs are now. Some of the more vocal complains have been when a team was gutted for the sole/majority purpose of building another team up.
I see this instance as no different than a real-life profession team folding (which I, unfortunately, have personal experience with). Players go their separate ways, and next season a new team will come in to take their place.
But, I can also see where the line of difference between this and what has previously occurred is thin and gray.
As several posters mentioned, there's a difference in doing it in mid-season and doing it in the off-season. There's also a difference in doing it when players have an intended destination, and when they're released into the wild like the Legends and Devil Dawgs are now. Some of the more vocal complains have been when a team was gutted for the sole/majority purpose of building another team up.
I see this instance as no different than a real-life profession team folding (which I, unfortunately, have personal experience with). Players go their separate ways, and next season a new team will come in to take their place.
But, I can also see where the line of difference between this and what has previously occurred is thin and gray.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
