Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > General Community > Rants and Flames

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #33  
Old 01-29-2021, 08:16 AM
glerkywop glerkywop is offline
Aviak


Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 62
Default

Are you a goldfish? What you say looks good when taken out of context, but let's add some context, shall we?

This is a quote lifted from the first long-form petitionquest injunction, submitted by AG/Freedom.

Quote:
While Riot may argue that stalling is only the time that the mob is moving away from their raid’s camp and not the time it takes for the mob to return to its position before it was displaced, we believe that to be a self-evident misinterpretation. If the mob’s trajectory is going to deliver the mob into the camp at 00:20, but on its route it is intercepted and pulled in the opposite direction for 10 seconds, the mob will not arrive into camp at 00:30. The mob will have to double back and arrive at 00:40. Those actions for 10 seconds cause a stall of 20 seconds, and depending on which actions or paths a player takes, the mobs can be effectively stalled for much longer than the time it was simply “brought away.”
Are you now saying you now disagree with your alliance's own position because it benefits you in this case?

In the petition you're likely referencing, Riot was defending itself using Monrezz's (a leader of the AG/F alliance, if I'm not mistaken) words when filing their rebuttal (with regards to the duration of a DA):
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

aaaaand once again using Daewens's (a leader of the AG/F alliance, if I'm not mistaken) words when filing their rebuttal (with regards to "what constitutes a stall"):
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Riot was using AG/F's own words against them.

Sure you'll start to argue that these "precedents" were not set by AG/F, as they predate Freedom's formation and the AG/F alliance, but they were "set" by leadership of both guilds.

Do you expect precedent to not cut both ways? Does precedent only matter when it supports you?

Please show me where in my post I "defended" Dica's train. I simply added context to the situation because the troll's "RIOT BULLIES ANNIHILATE AG/F WITH TRAIN!" narrative is, quite frankly, boring.

I was merely highlighting the fact that the situation in Growth was a bit more complicated than your ghouls would like people to believe. Riot took the high road and conceded to avoid the headache of more petitions, a decision that I don't particularly agree with, given that Dica was just a small cog in the machine of what inevitably unfolded.
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:39 AM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.