wicked wrote:Nope. Two games should've been a max of two turns, not four. THAT was my point.
So what you're getting upset about here; is somebody being instructed to 'account-sit', taking the first set of goes available, checking back later to ensure that no other goes would be missed, taking two more goes that were available, but committing the offence of not psychicly knowing that the user they were assisting would in fact have been able to take those goes had they waited till the last minute.
In other words, Lovo said 'account sit for 24 hours', and Hulmey account-sat all of lovo's goes which came available in those 24 hours. Y'know, just like account sitters are supposed to do.
Sure, he could have done less than that and let lovo's clocks run down, hoping that lovo himself would return and be able to take the goes, but instead he chose to account-sit to the best of his ability, ensured that lovo missed no turns at all, and took all turns as promptly as possible.
Now excuse me for a moment here, I realise that games of Risk are a very serious business and all, but I really can't see the problem with that kind of behaviour. Yes, the physical minimum that was required eventually transpired to be two turns, but Hulmey's behaviour wasn't unreasonable, disproportionate or unconscionable.
Don't get me wrong, I can see a problem with people 'account sitting' entire games, or people setting up games with the intention of handing over complete control to a sitter. But people who have lives outside of Risk, handing over a couple of turns to a sitter (or simply instructing a sitter to play all of the turns which arise in a 24 hour period) seems like exactly the kind of thing this site should accomodate.
wicked wrote:Or in your rush to chastise me for any reason imaginable, did you miss that?
Calm down dear, there's no witch-hunt going on here. Try to remember that I don't actually stalk you round the forums pursuing this odd little 'vendetta' that you've dreamed up. I was simply anxious to make sure that you, as arbiter of this discussion, were correctly comprehending what Hulmey was saying, no more, no less.
See, I've always thought it important that moderators understand and listen to user's comments, and I was just making sure that was happening here. Now if you disagree with that concept and want to depart from it in this thread, then please just say so...
Basically wicked, I realise you have slight paranoia about my posting in GD, but I'm not 'rushing to chastise you' here, I'm was just trying to make sure that people didn't get misunderstood, and that the rule which got thrashed out here was the one which was best for 'casual gamers' (y'know, the people who the front-page says this site caters for), not the rule which is best for odd-little Risk addicted nerds who make up a very 'vocal minority' of this site, and who regard their scores as extremely serious businesses.
)
