Jump to content


Photo

players from the Zone, don't be so stubborn!


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#21 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 21 March 2018 - 09:40 PM

 

Interesting to see that lonello and don_homer neither wish to play for the Dutch team - also mentioning the "Nortrom doctrine". 
 

 

Can anyone take this guy seriously anymore? I just explained how the team organisation thing happened and he is just stating the exact opposite.

 

{...} Lonello has completely lost any touch with reality.

 

You are just stating 2 lies here, Nortrom. I expect you to rectify them. First I never said anything about a Nortrom doctrine. Secondly If you dont trust Lonello, why are you copying words he says without checking with me? I never said I will not play for the team. I said that I do not want any roll in organisation and that I do not think I am good enough for the team (at the moment). So I told Lonello he should first ask better players like yourself, Hielco, MadMax, Master.mind, hello124 etc.


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#22 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,809 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 21 March 2018 - 09:53 PM

"Me and Don have already said not to play and let the youngsters have a go"

Source: Lonello. If you disagree, I suggest you take it up with him. I just repeated what he said.

 

Looking back at my sentence:

"Interesting to see that lonello and don_homer neither wish to play for the Dutch team - also mentioning the "Nortrom doctrine". I wonder how they came to this agreement - surely they didn't talk to eachother"

 

My post was a response to lonello - who also mentioned (and exclusively mentioned) the socalled "Nortrom doctrine". You did not.

 

Well, it seems that lonello is twisting your words then :) I suggest you take that up with him then. I'm glad you were willing to clarify your position. 


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog post

 


#23 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 21 March 2018 - 09:58 PM

"Me and Don have already said not to play and let the youngsters have a go"

Source: Lonello. If you disagree, I suggest you take it up with him. I just repeated what he said.

 

Looking back at my sentence:

"Interesting to see that lonello and don_homer neither wish to play for the Dutch team - also mentioning the "Nortrom doctrine". I wonder how they came to this agreement - surely they didn't talk to eachother"

 

My post was a response to lonello - who also mentioned (and exclusively mentioned) the socalled "Nortrom doctrine". You did not.

 

Well, it seems that lonello is twisting your words then :) I suggest you take that up with him then. I'm glad you were willing to clarify your position. 

No, your source is a PM from Karaiskakis. And you did not check if this was true. You somehow trusted Lonello while you are stating 200 times on the forum how you cannot trust him.

 

The second thing about the Nortrom doctrine I have no clue how and why you link me with that statement. Probably just for harassment reasons. 

 

I ask again remove your statements please.


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#24 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 21 March 2018 - 10:03 PM

@Don_homer: Checking what is true seems no requirement at the moment.

 

There are some libel cases against Lonello for this that have not been opened and handled yet.

 

If you want to add one to say that you did not tell Lonello you were not going to play for the Dutch team, I am sure there will be someone that will open a case for you?

 

Or I am willing to say: Lonello was lying with whatever he said about Don_homer? Do you consider this a public rectification?

 

Or do you need it from Nortrom that quoted Lonello?


  • johnpeterson9191 likes this

#25 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 21 March 2018 - 10:06 PM

Morx I am talking to Nortrom here. Are you his daddy or can he handle his own business? I want him to rectify it and if someone gets a case from me its he. 


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#26 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 21 March 2018 - 10:09 PM

I am more like a legal advisor, involved in handling cases.

 

Right now I will advice Nortrom to rectify as you clearly do not agree with what Lonello said.

 

And as for minding your own business, do you remember all your posts in the Topics of Abusive behaviour you made about the cases that I wanted to open? Minding your own business is not one of your strongest qualities.


  • johnpeterson9191 likes this

#27 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,809 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 21 March 2018 - 10:10 PM

I want him to rectify it and if someone gets a case from me its he. him

 

XEiqXpA.png

 

Tell me don_homer, is lonello, again, caught lying here? Do you deny lonello's statement (thus he was lying, again) or do you agree? (sounds like there would be zero need for rectification if so).


  • johnpeterson9191 likes this

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog post

 


#28 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 21 March 2018 - 10:15 PM

XEiqXpA.png

 

Tell me don_homer, is lonello, again, caught lying here? Do you deny lonello's statement (thus he was lying, again) or do you agree? (sounds like there would be zero need for rectification if so).

If I say you are lying then you are able to do the math yourself are you? Otherwise you can ask Morx to do it. Your conclusion between bars is 0% true (because Lonello did not state this at the forum but in a PM). I give you 10 minutes to rectify your message.


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#29 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 21 March 2018 - 10:22 PM

@Don_homer: Legal advice: if you say in a PM that fish can fly, it is the same as saying it in public.

 

The verifiable facts do not change between a PM and a forum message.


  • johnpeterson9191 likes this

#30 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 21 March 2018 - 10:55 PM

@Don_homer: Legal advice: if you say in a PM that fish can fly, it is the same as saying it in public.

 

The verifiable facts do not change between a PM and a forum message.

If I want to report someone I will and if I do not do it I do not do it. I do not have to explain to you. I dont know why you interfere here everytime. Also I do not care about legal issues, this is a forum, not a court. We cannot control all the things people say or write privately.


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#31 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 21 March 2018 - 11:05 PM

@Don_homer: yes it is your good right to open a case against someone,  I am one of the last to say you should not.

 

I was just questioning your logic.

 

You said that "Your conclusion between bars is 0% true (because Lonello did not state this at the forum but in a PM)"

 

This for me translates as If I say to you and a few others in private that the Earth is flat  and this message becomes public, the same thing was still said.

 

The Abusive topics should act like a court process, case reported, case opened, gather evidence from both parties, judge case>verdict. This is the one of the key tasks of MT we are discussing here for weeks.



#32 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,509 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Colonel

Posted 27 March 2018 - 08:03 AM

The Abusive topics should act like a court process, case reported, case opened, gather evidence from both parties, judge case>verdict. This is the one of the key tasks of MT we are discussing here for weeks.

.

There must be a different location for discussion of verdicts than in this same public thread, if for no other reason that the clutter factor would cause more missed new cases than ever before.
  • Don_Homer likes this

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#33 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,809 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:03 PM

Atleast it can serve as a somewhat valid reason for missing cases opposed to simply ignoring them :)


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog post

 


#34 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:36 PM

There was not much discussion on verdicts recently. Only gathering evidence and repeated request to open cases.

Morx vs lonello #1 and
Morx vs lonello #2

Are the first ones that come to mind.

Note that these are still not opened. Every day of delay in opening these cases can be seen as MT doing a very poor job.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users