Hey Forsaken

[cs616]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And that is what I've been saying.

Can we just pretend that we disagree? Us agreeing on something is confusing and makes me feel unclean.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Ravager [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

http://www.project1999.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=189856

Q17

What Q17 does not say is that they can reform as a new guild and pretend like they're class R all of a sudden.

[Man0warr]

Originally Posted by cs616 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Anyone else remember how class R was created specifically as an inclusive class to allow non-raiders the opportunity to kill mobs without having to deal with the cut throat competition of the raiding guilds? Funny how it has gotten more and more exclusionary. Gotta protect those welfare pixels.

Every guild is Class R by default, you only have to petition to be Class R if you are currently Class C.

Disbanding your guild and forming a new one made up of 97% of the old guild does not get you out of Class C, so says Rogean.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Disbanding your guild and forming a new one made up of 97% of the old guild does not get you out of Class C, so says Rogean.

Inb4 someone tries to argue semantics by saying that they didn't actually disband, that everybody left and that there are some non-raiders or people that switched to red still with the former TMO tag.

[falkun]

If 93.2% of your raid force is comprised of ex-members of a class C guild and you attempt Class R targets without those members waiting 30 days and petitioning to be allowed to kill R targets, you're gonna have a bad time. - Rogean

[Colgate]

if you try to participate in the endgame on blue, you're gonna have a bad time

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
When was Rampage suspended... for how long... what raid mobs spawned during their suspension.. what happened the day before their suspension...what are the repop timers on raid mobs?

GG

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Just like almost every TMO suspension ever.

--DEFLECTION

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
Sure demonstrate your point, or do you find this too difficult considering the lack of evidence to support you?

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not sorting through the TMO suspensions again. There are way too many of them.

--DEFLECTION

Originally Posted by falkun View Post
You, unbrella, and brobafett(reddit) all have this similar argument. Yet here is Unbrella of TMO arguing with Hokushin of Rampage[/URL]. In this thread, Sirken lays down the law:

Therefore, ANY TMO that join Forsaken are forbidden from killing a Class R target until their 30-days of not killing a Class C mob is up. This rule was not followed, and 69 TMO members did not wait 30 days. That was your leadership's fault, they KNOWINGLY disregarded a raid rule.

^^ Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
In this post Falkun clearly demonstrates he can't wrap his mind around simple concepts.

Your proof isn't a proof. TMO was not suspended. This isn't a discussion about suspensions.

Try again.

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

^^ In this post Alarti clearly demonstrates he ha no idea what the fuck he's talking about.

Nobody said anything about TMO being suspended. The post was about how your class standing would carry on with your characters when all that changed was your guild name.

Still a moran.

Falkun clearly tries to connect a IB suspension guild reform to a non suspended TMO splitting into a new guild.
Somehow Samoht doesn't see this. Not deflection I guess... just really really DUMB

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
How idiotic can you be? Falkun clearly brought up a IB suspension not carrying as evidence about class switching. You seem incapable of following a line of thought. Falkun was arguing about suspensions. See the links in his post.

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

TMO and IB aren't even the same guild us moran. I have no idea what you're even talking about any more, and I'm pretty sure you don't either.

Proves he can't follow a conversation then lashes out in anger. DUMB

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
Yep you are lost. It's okay if you want to keep up you should try to figure out the point Falkun was trying to make first. This seems to be a recurring problem with you, can't follow the course of the discussion.

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's hard to follow the nonsense you've been spewing. He didn't mention anything about a TMO suspension, but somehow that's what you zeroed in on in your response.

Now, if you want to talk about how people cannot follow the course of the discussion, let's talk about how members of TMO/Foreskin have been trying to compare the IB/Rampage suspension to the TMO/Foreskin suspension before he did, and yet you completely ignored their comparisons.

It's clear that you're only responding to people unaffiliated with TMO/Foreskin, and that in your selective responses, you're completely ignoring how TMO/Foreskin members have been trying to leverage the same evidence in their justifications for their douchebaggery.

ITT: douchebags defend douchebags.

Still can't follow the course of the conversation.. E-pride kicks in..more lashing out and eventual new topic is brought up to deflect from the topic at hand.

---DEFLECTION + DUMB

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
What forsaken people are posting here? Should I argue with people who aren't posting here?

What Forsaken people are posting arguments here?

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are clearly insane. This thread is up to 23 pages and full of TMO/Foreskin people looking to justify their actions using plausible deniability. You're going to ignore that fact because it's inconvenient to you, but it doesn't change the truth. If you're going to be too lazy to look back through the rest of the thread, that's your prerogative, but to pretend it never happened because you can't be bothered? Do you think everybody else in the world besides you is stupid? Take a look in the mirror. They say ignorance is bliss, tell me, is that true? Can you really choose to be as ignorant as you are just to be able to argue that things never happened?

No, it's not my job to reread the thread for you. If you want to be a big boy and have any substantial presence in this conversation, you will reread it yourself.

--Makes claims... won't support them DEFLECTION


Originally posted by Alarti0001 View Post
If you are trying to prove something you must provide evidence. What forsaken people are posting arguments in here. It's funny how the amount of insults you spew correlate directly with how badly you are failing at your argument.

When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim. An argument from ignorance occurs when either a proposition is assumed to be true because it has not yet been proved false or a proposition is assumed to be false because it has not yet been proved true.[1][2] This has the effect of shifting the burden of proof to the person criticizing the proposition, but is not valid reasoning.[3]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You're not feigning ignorance on this just because that's what's convenient to you. I'm not rereading this thread for some lazy asshole on the Internet that's derailing threads by chasing tangents about irrelevant off-topic information. Start addressing the substance. And I believe the word you're looking for is onus. Stop saying "burden of proof" you fucking pleb.

--DEFLECTION----all hope lost for this idiot.


Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
It's logical rules. They exist in any medium if you want to debate an issue with any kind of rational ability. I already spoke to the issue at hand. Maybe you should read it and come up with a coherent reaponse.

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And where's the logic in reading a thread starting on page 16? Do you really think that just because you didn't read the other 15 pages you can deny they exist? I think that would be a requirement before you could logically try to argue with someone about it, but that didn't stop you, did it?

---Deflection + thinking that if you claim something is true it must be true. DUMB

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You have zero validity because you're arguing a tangent. Again. It's what you do. You find what you perceive to be a weakness and zero in on it until a thread is completely derailed. Why don't you tell me about how many pages there are in the thread on your screen again? Because that's what matters here, right?

You have no substance to your discussion, so you have to focus on the little battles. Since you're the one who brought up the debate rules, I'm going to have to say you'd suck at debating.

They don't allow tangents.

Your specialty appears to be filibuster.

--Doesn't even realize we are arguing a tangent he brought up. DUMB

Officially bored of you. Come back when you can .... Prove It

[cs616]

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Every guild is Class R by default, you only have to petition to be Class R if you are currently Class C.

Disbanding your guild and forming a new one made up of 97% of the old guild does not get you out of Class C, so says Rogean.

Making rules up as you go to exclude a newly formed guild based on the history of individual members just seems to go against the whole reason class R was created. Class R was supposed to be the non-competitive raiding class, but instead of competing for mobs, the competition is to get included in the class it seems. Even if it is 97% the same people (which im guessing is a grossly exaggerated number), it is a new guild with different leadership, and they should be afforded the same opportunity as any other new guild.

Ive got no lost love for TMO folks, and agreeing with alarti makes me feel dirty, but this definitely seems like class R people throwing a bitch fit and rule lawyering their way into making life difficult for some former class C people.

[Tiggles]

So who was is winning the fight? Alarti or Samoht?

Post below.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
When was Rampage suspended... for how long... what raid mobs spawned during their suspension.. what happened the day before their suspension...what are the repop timers on raid mobs?

GG



--DEFLECTION

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
Sure demonstrate your point, or do you find this too difficult considering the lack of evidence to support you?



--DEFLECTION

Originally Posted by falkun View Post
You, unbrella, and brobafett(reddit) all have this similar argument. Yet here is Unbrella of TMO arguing with Hokushin of Rampage[/URL]. In this thread, Sirken lays down the law:

Therefore, ANY TMO that join Forsaken are forbidden from killing a Class R target until their 30-days of not killing a Class C mob is up. This rule was not followed, and 69 TMO members did not wait 30 days. That was your leadership's fault, they KNOWINGLY disregarded a raid rule.

^^ Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
In this post Falkun clearly demonstrates he can't wrap his mind around simple concepts.

Your proof isn't a proof. TMO was not suspended. This isn't a discussion about suspensions.

Try again.



Falkun clearly tries to connect a IB suspension guild reform to a non suspended TMO splitting into a new guild.
Somehow Samoht doesn't see this. Not deflection I guess... just really really DUMB

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
How idiotic can you be? Falkun clearly brought up a IB suspension not carrying as evidence about class switching. You seem incapable of following a line of thought. Falkun was arguing about suspensions. See the links in his post.



Proves he can't follow a conversation then lashes out in anger. DUMB

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
Yep you are lost. It's okay if you want to keep up you should try to figure out the point Falkun was trying to make first. This seems to be a recurring problem with you, can't follow the course of the discussion.



Still can't follow the course of the conversation.. E-pride kicks in..more lashing out and eventual new topic is brought up to deflect from the topic at hand.

---DEFLECTION + DUMB

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
What forsaken people are posting here? Should I argue with people who aren't posting here?

What Forsaken people are posting arguments here?




--Makes claims... won't support them DEFLECTION


Originally posted by Alarti0001 View Post
If you are trying to prove something you must provide evidence. What forsaken people are posting arguments in here. It's funny how the amount of insults you spew correlate directly with how badly you are failing at your argument.

When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim. An argument from ignorance occurs when either a proposition is assumed to be true because it has not yet been proved false or a proposition is assumed to be false because it has not yet been proved true.[1][2] This has the effect of shifting the burden of proof to the person criticizing the proposition, but is not valid reasoning.[3]



--DEFLECTION----all hope lost for this idiot.


Originally Posted by Alarti0001 View Post
It's logical rules. They exist in any medium if you want to debate an issue with any kind of rational ability. I already spoke to the issue at hand. Maybe you should read it and come up with a coherent reaponse.




---Deflection + thinking that if you claim something is true it must be true. DUMB




--Doesn't even realize we are arguing a tangent he brought up. DUMB

Officially bored of you. Come back when you can .... Prove It

^^^ Holy crap at this wall of text. Your level of immersion is daunting. I now feel bad for you personally. Find a new obsession.