My my...

[bobsaturd]

Indeed. The sheer joy a hippo experiences when eating a baby knows no bounds and should be shared by all.

[Angel]

Aye. That, and sharing of the loot.>_>

[bobsaturd]

Yes. the distribution of the booty. very important.

[Angel]

Yep. I get 90%. No negotiations.

[bobsaturd]

what smaller % of the 50% you're getting is entirely up to you harmenz. I don't know who you're sharing with though? I don't know why you would want 90% of the half, as opposed to the half. ;p

[Angel]

No, you mis-read the contract. I get 90% of the entire stash, and the other 10% is devided equally between Zombies and Survivors. Luckily were making quite a few trillion off this, so you'll still get a nice stack o' cash out of this. And I bid you a good night (well, more like morning, it's 5:30 a.m.).

[bobsaturd]

I think negotiations will be required. till then, good day.

[blue tigers]

Hello Jorm & Murray,

I believe that most of the ill feelings come from the way the current motion is formulated. Essentially the motion is ill-formed because it does not make a specific request, but rather proposes a very large range of options. Passing it would mean giving free reign to a number unspecified parties to do whatever they please, and I would hope you see how that is unacceptable. Moreover, I would expect that the final result would get again through voting, which makes the current voting superfluous.

My suggestion is to settle down on what your request really is. Once you have defined what is it that you desire, please make a motion with regard to replacing the current BoB with your improved version, be it the empty version if you so see fit. However, getting other interested parties involved in the new version might be a good idea, to avoid another voting blood bath.

I would also appreciate if you could make a classy move and retract the current motion, as being unnecessary and in need of a superceeding vote anyway. That would be a great move beyond words, showing an actual desire to move on.

Best regards,
Blue Tigers

[Lachryma]

murrayjaysuskind said:

(also, while we did respond to survivor votes, there's no denying that many of the initial survivor votes were every bit as condescending as anything we said).

Yes, like mine.

That hat rocks, Bob!

[jorm]

Well. If there is a chance in hell that I am going to honor a request of any kind, it has to come from someone other than Blue Tigers.

[pyromonkey]

I just read this whole thread and the only thing I can say is that both sides just need to settle down and stop taking this thing so seriously. I agree that the article is highly inaccurate (Saying things like the RRF uses spies for instance) and that it shouldn't be historical the way it is. I don't however believe its worth the amount of energy people are wasting bickering on here and on the Wiki.

[bobsaturd]

I also find it funny that a good portion of the votes are in the vein of "frustratin' dem damn zeds" . It seems as though alot of people are missing the issue. I agree it has gotten out of hand and some would say thats to be expected. I'm of the opinion that it should just be de-tagged as historical, and a new NPOV article should be written up. As it stands, the official article contains plenty of slanderous lies and half truths about a very real, and very active in-game group. Having such things not only hurts our reputation as a group, it also demeans the effort that alot of players, many of which aren't playing anymore and would be angered by such things in a historical article, put into fighting at Blackmore. I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate claims ( made out as fact) that Ghetto Cow used alts, zergs, and bots, especially since you ( and everyone else) know that its not true. I didn't fight at the first Blackmore, but then again I didn't cast my vote as a zombie veteran of the siege, or as someone looking to take away from the survivor glory that was holding that NT. I voted as someone who saw that such a slanted article should not be a historical recount of the event. Yea, it may be impossible to be completely unbiased, but we can come close.

Thanks! I picked up that hat when the RRF was fighting in Buttonville against the Randoms. They're a great group, with an awesome sense of humor, and I would highly recommend sending an alt their way.

[Tovarisch Khrushchev]

Jorm, I request a tall glass of chocolate milk, with a little bit of ice. Infact, scratch that, I'd like some coffee. Infact scratch that, vodka should do nicely.

Infact, vodka for everyone!

[bobsaturd]

I can see the headlines now, "C4NT/ NMC provide liquor to Underage teens, Lachryma clubs seal".

[blue tigers]

Bob, I don't think many people have anything against an NPOV article per se. However, it is highly questionable to create such an NPOV article without linking to the sources that have survived until our day. That is, an NPOV article ought to link to the current SPOV article.

If there is an ZPOV article, that article ought to be linked in the reference section of the NPOV article too.

Heck, if someone decided to make a highly fictious Ode to Barhah, but inspired by the events, the NPOV article should point to that ode too.