Pirates Roost 2
09-07-2007, 09:02
Nation lockout ramifications are still unexplained regardless of two pages with regular Mod comment.
Since the nation was merely locked, not deleted, can it be revived? If so, what are the particulars of that: timeline, benchmarks, etc?
Is there any good reasons for such a curious punishment, rather than usual deletion?
Since the Mods virulently claim that the reason for chastisement was the flimsy pretext of threat+action in furtherance (RHB spam is the claim), does that mean it is acceptable to call the Mods salty names? Y'all were the ones who set up this distinction, not me.
Since Mods regularly break their own rule about uncouth messages that do not use any direct profanity, does that mean the players can express their opinion of the Mods using the same tone of condescension and haughtiness so long as profanity is avoided? One might assume fair is fair, after all, with no further clarification.
UN status, EXPLAINED.
Doesn't locking a player out if his/her nation fit the textbook definition of nation-stealing--done by Mods or not?
Are Mods subject to the rules of the game or not?
Since Mods have stated a preference against rules that in any way shape or form favor raida/fenda play, isn't this a bias in the basic definition of the word (aka preference)? I think I did say I appreciated the flat statement of preference or bias after years of equivocating, just want tot make sure this isn't warped into more gray words.
And as for the Hack's lock. Typical Modding, always ready to dish, never willing to take.
Since the nation was merely locked, not deleted, can it be revived? If so, what are the particulars of that: timeline, benchmarks, etc?
Is there any good reasons for such a curious punishment, rather than usual deletion?
Since the Mods virulently claim that the reason for chastisement was the flimsy pretext of threat+action in furtherance (RHB spam is the claim), does that mean it is acceptable to call the Mods salty names? Y'all were the ones who set up this distinction, not me.
Since Mods regularly break their own rule about uncouth messages that do not use any direct profanity, does that mean the players can express their opinion of the Mods using the same tone of condescension and haughtiness so long as profanity is avoided? One might assume fair is fair, after all, with no further clarification.
UN status, EXPLAINED.
Doesn't locking a player out if his/her nation fit the textbook definition of nation-stealing--done by Mods or not?
Are Mods subject to the rules of the game or not?
Since Mods have stated a preference against rules that in any way shape or form favor raida/fenda play, isn't this a bias in the basic definition of the word (aka preference)? I think I did say I appreciated the flat statement of preference or bias after years of equivocating, just want tot make sure this isn't warped into more gray words.
And as for the Hack's lock. Typical Modding, always ready to dish, never willing to take.