stahrgazer wrote:When setting up a game in live chat, he's cautious about who he invites, carefully checks their game history to ensure he's playing a noob to the map. He throws out a lure of "I'll teach you the map," but if you look at example gamechat below, you'll see that his teaching is nil, before or after the game. Telling someone who asks, of Galapagos, what the luggers are, "big ships," or that, "masks relate to the reefs," is hardly teaching.
How do you know what he is thinking? Unless you can read minds (through a computer) then this is impossible information to know. Also, without talking to the "victims" first hand it is only insulting to their intelligence to assume they were tricked. I knowingly and willingly accepted my invite. I was not forced to play David.
As someone that has played David twice in the past two days, I can say that I was given some pointers after each game... And guess what--- it was in PRIVATE CHAT. Looking at the game logs is an incomplete record of a conversation between David and his opponent.
If asked for a rematch, he insists any rematch be done on a different map. He squirms out of most bad ratings by reminding them of the 'points risk' - which isn't much of a risk when you're luring noobs to freestyle Waterloo and similar tricky maps.
I am not sure what you're trying to prove here. If you're so upset that he is using tricky maps to lure unsuspecting newbs, then suggest CC make only a few self-explanatory maps available instead of flaming David. I am not surprised to hear that you might have a personal vendetta with David, because these accusations are nonsense.
