Super Mango & Skittles! (Multis and/or Secret Alliance)

Skittles! · Post by **Skittles!** » Thu May 10, 2007 1:58 am

funiboy wrote:
Skittles! wrote:I'm sure I'm fruity.

Taste the rainbow.

lol no comment.

You just contridicted yourself. If it was a no comment, then you wouldn't of posted back.

UH-HUH.

Iliad · Post by **Iliad** » Thu May 10, 2007 1:58 am

funiboy wrote:
Skittles! wrote:I'm sure I'm fruity.

Taste the rainbow.

lol no comment.

don't post to say no comment. What the f*ck is the point of commenting no comment, retard? You might as well say:
lol I have nothing to say

Skittles! · Post by **Skittles!** » Thu May 10, 2007 1:59 am

You just wasted your 1000th post in this thread.

Shame, shame

Iliad · Post by **Iliad** » Thu May 10, 2007 2:03 am

Oh f*ck that! Fucking, shitting, fucking son of a bitch! Sorry. I wasted my 1000th post on these retards.

dogwillhunt · Post by **dogwillhunt** » Thu May 10, 2007 2:03 am

Iliad wrote:Were you getting owned so bad by us that you called for help, your doubles partner, funiboy?

Go home, loser and find some friends.

f*ck are you girls on all day and night? You might want to check page one of this topic. Seems to me that you came to your girlfriends aid. As well as many others appearing very quickly.

Now I must admit that I have a lot of fun verbally abusing all of you but I really don't have time to spend 24 hours a day on here. There are a lot better looking girls than the 5 or 6 of you out there away from your computer. But I do promise I will continue to come back once a day to give you the verbal insults you cannot live without. Bitches.

Iliad · Post by **Iliad** » Thu May 10, 2007 2:06 am

dogwillhunt wrote:
Iliad wrote:Were you getting owned so bad by us that you called for help, your doubles partner, funiboy?

Go home, loser and find some friends.
f*ck are you girls on all day and night? You might want to check page one of this topic. Seems to me that you came to your girlfriends aid. As well as many others appearing very quickly.

Now I must admit that I have a lot of fun verbally abusing all of you but I really don't have time to spend 24 hours a day on here. There are a lot better looking girls than the 5 or 6 of you out there away from your computer. But I do promise I will continue to come back once a day to give you the verbal insults you cannot live without. Bitches.

I'm sorry but you didn't abuse me or anyone. You were owned and proven to be a retard. This post has proven it even more.

And maybe, just maybe, you will ...................

Get through your fucking thick head that we are not girls!

Skittles! · Post by **Skittles!** » Thu May 10, 2007 2:06 am

dogwillhunt wrote:
Iliad wrote:Were you getting owned so bad by us that you called for help, your doubles partner, funiboy?

Go home, loser and find some friends.
f*ck are you girls on all day and night? You might want to check page one of this topic. Seems to me that you came to your girlfriends aid. As well as many others appearing very quickly.

Now I must admit that I have a lot of fun verbally abusing all of you but I really don't have time to spend 24 hours a day on here. There are a lot better looking girls than the 5 or 6 of you out there away from your computer. But I do promise I will continue to come back once a day to give you the verbal insults you cannot live without. Bitches.

Okay. I can notice a few things wrong in that post.

1) You're not verbally abusing us. You're cyberly trying to abuse us. get it right next time.

2) You keep saying we're girls, and then you say you'll go look at some better looking girls. Does that mean you're actually looking at guys?

Good luck next time. Go to the Flame forums, btw.

funiboy · Post by **funiboy** » Thu May 10, 2007 10:46 am

lol you girls posted what 8 times since i last did? lol & you keep whining about us calling you girls? lol yet we are the retards? lol classic

SuperMango · Post by **SuperMango** » Thu May 10, 2007 6:22 pm

I'm calling you retards because you're basically trying to argue a moot point.

now, if you're going to post a single more bullcrap response to this thread, make sure its after you get a mod to look at it.

Dancing Mustard · Post by **Dancing Mustard** » Thu May 10, 2007 6:32 pm

I just wanted to swing by to tell Dogwillhunt that he's the most stupid person I've seen since I last spoke to Xtratabasco and BigFalcon65.

Your claim is one of the most baseless I've seen to date. If I were you I'd just drop it before you embarass yourself further... don't you understand that not just letting you win doesn't equal cheating?

Perhaps you should get yourself down to Flame Wars buddy? There's two fellahs there who I think you'd get along with...

Shame Take2Out and xHxIxTxLxExRx got banned really, we could have rounded them all up and made them form some kind of special-needs clan

funiboy · Post by **funiboy** » Thu May 10, 2007 7:47 pm

"Your claim is one of the most baseless I've seen to date. If I were you I'd just drop it before you embarass yourself further... don't you understand that not just letting you win doesn't equal cheating? "

First and foremost i think most would agree it is very cheap to play a 3 man game with your buddy. 2nd supermango attacked skittles a total of 2x in 5 rounds that dog was playing. 2x & that was in the same round. I guess there is an expectation in this game that you dont let your friends build up their bonuses. That is cheap. If this is the way you play dancing mustard then i wouldn't worry about dog being embarrassed, i'd worry about you. But then again, you are sticking up for simtom in another thread..so

SuperMango · Post by **SuperMango** » Thu May 10, 2007 7:54 pm

i'm sorry if i'm a little busy GETTING MY OWN DAMN BONUS BACK to not attack him, but you seemed to have missed that.
and secondly, it was the first round that i would have even had a bonus if it hadn't been taken away, so i don't really see how i could have taken away skittles! bonus anyways.
lastly, how can you blame me for taking away dogwillhunt's bonus if its equally righteous that i take away skittles? just because he is my friend doesn't mean that its his bonus i SHOULD take. if you stop looking at this from a biased point of view, i was still playing. i only attacked once after that anyways.

simtom · Post by **simtom** » Thu May 10, 2007 9:53 pm

But then again, you are sticking up for simtom in another thread..so

lol, whats so bad about that seing as I've not broken any rules?

funiboy · Post by **funiboy** » Thu May 10, 2007 10:19 pm

simtom wrote:
But then again, you are sticking up for simtom in another thread..so

lol, whats so bad about that seing as I've not broken any rules?

nothing personal man lol

LetGodSortThem · Post by **LetGodSortThem** » Fri May 11, 2007 12:17 am

Read This....
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... o+skittles

SuperMango · Post by **SuperMango** » Fri May 11, 2007 12:19 am

as said, i was busted and i fessed up and paid my dues. skittles was already cleared.

dogwillhunt · Post by **dogwillhunt** » Fri May 11, 2007 1:19 am

LetGodSortThem wrote:Read This....
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... o+skittles

These aren't the most clever girls. Fucking losers. I swear they keep multiplying. They really need to understand the effects of inbreeding.

Iliad · Post by **Iliad** » Fri May 11, 2007 1:42 am

dogwillhunt wrote:
LetGodSortThem wrote:Read This....
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... o+skittles
These aren't the most clever girls. Fucking losers. I swear they keep multiplying. They really need to understand the effects of inbreeding.

Guys stop posting, this guy is a retard and will never even listen to you. Stop posting here.

simtom · Post by **simtom** » Fri May 11, 2007 6:36 am

funiboy wrote:
simtom wrote:
But then again, you are sticking up for simtom in another thread..so

lol, whats so bad about that seing as I've not broken any rules?

nothing personal man lol

=p

Dancing Mustard · Post by **Dancing Mustard** » Fri May 11, 2007 7:10 am

funiboy wrote:"Your claim is one of the most baseless I've seen to date. If I were you I'd just drop it before you embarass yourself further... don't you understand that not just letting you win doesn't equal cheating? "

How about you learn to quote next time? It makes you look like somebody who actually knows what they're talking about; as opposed to a retarded illiterate.

funiboy wrote:First and foremost i think most would agree it is very cheap to play a 3 man game with your buddy.

Incorrect. There's nothing wrong with playing with somebody you know, so long as you don't form a secret alliance with them. Just saying something and asserting that other people might believe it, doesn't make it true.

funiboy wrote:2nd supermango attacked skittles a total of 2x in 5 rounds that dog was playing. 2x & that was in the same round. I guess there is an expectation in this game that you dont let your friends build up their bonuses.

But for some reason you expected him to let DWH build up his? He didn't attack Skittles, because Skittles was in a weaker position than DWH. Friends doesn't come into it; I read the game log and SM's moves were perfectly logical.
The point is, that the attack was done as retaliation for bonus-breaking, and to break the strongest players bonus. If you don't understand that concept, then perhaps Risk isn't the game for you.

funiboy wrote:That is cheap. If this is the way you play dancing mustard then i wouldn't worry about dog being embarrassed, i'd worry about you. But then again, you are sticking up for simtom in another thread..so

Oh wow, a whole raft of assumptions and baseless statements, where to begin?
I do not play in the way you suggest (dishonestly). I do however make every attempt to play logically, like SuperMango did. If you are saying I play logically, then thank you. If you are saying I play dishonestly, then you'll need some kind of logical argument to back that up. You haven't come up with one of those so far in this thread, so I doubt you're about to pull one out of the bag now.
Number two, what's wrong with sticking up for Simtom? Didn't you understand my argument there either? Simtom's is a unique case which I feel has been dealt with poorly by the mods. You can try to use the word 'Simtom' as synonymous with the word 'cheater' if you like; but it doesn't make you look too bright, and it certainly doesn't help your argument here.
So no. No embarrasment for me then?

The point stands however that DWH is being a big crybaby because the two players he played against didn't do what he wanted them to. I.e. they didn't just ignore him and let him win the game. Any other two decent players would have done the same as S and SM, and neither you nor DWH has come up with any logical argument to the contrary.
If you want to call them cheaters, then you will have to identify what they actually did to cheat. Simply knowing each other is not cheating. They played impartially, and I've yet to see a shred of evidence to the contrary.
Next time you post in response, try not to be so polemic; try instead to come up with a logical argument about why the moves in the game in question suggest collusion.
Remember: Simply knowing another player in the game is not cheating; you're going to need something better than that if you don't want to keep looking like an idiot.

funiboy · Post by **funiboy** » Fri May 11, 2007 11:47 am

Your comprehension of the English language leaves alot to be desired, Dancing Mustard. I never assumed you play that way, i never said you play that way, what i said was "if". I am positive "if" is in the dictionary, look it up. And also i never said Simtom was cheating, the whole basis of my arguement is the cheapness of this game & Simtom's as well. I am also positive "cheapness" is in the dictionary. So before you point out how bright i do or don't look, you should realize that you obviously either A. not as bright as you think or B. not comprehending what was written or C. flat out not reading it or D. all of the above (made it like a multiple choice for you high school kids). & i am sure if you played a 3 man game & you opponents were friends, you would also be upset.

firth4eva · Post by **firth4eva** » Fri May 11, 2007 12:44 pm

funiboy wrote:Your comprehension of the English language leaves alot to be desired, Dancing Mustard. I never assumed you play that way, i never said you play that way, what i said was "if". I am positive "if" is in the dictionary, look it up. And also i never said Simtom was cheating, the whole basis of my arguement is the cheapness of this game & Simtom's as well. I am also positive "cheapness" is in the dictionary. So before you point out how bright i do or don't look, you should realize that you obviously either A. not as bright as you think or B. not comprehending what was written or C. flat out not reading it or D. all of the above (made it like a multiple choice for you high school kids). & i am sure if you played a 3 man game & you opponents were friends, you would also be upset.

seriously! f*ck off

DirtyDishSoap · Post by **DirtyDishSoap** » Fri May 11, 2007 12:59 pm

can we just let this thread die? shit

Dancing Mustard · Post by **Dancing Mustard** » Fri May 11, 2007 4:07 pm

funiboy wrote:Your comprehension of the English language leaves alot to be desired, Dancing Mustard. I never assumed you play that way, i never said you play that way, what i said was "if". I am positive "if" is in the dictionary, look it up. And also i never said Simtom was cheating, the whole basis of my arguement is the cheapness of this game & Simtom's as well. I am also positive "cheapness" is in the dictionary. So before you point out how bright i do or don't look, you should realize that you obviously either A. not as bright as you think or B. not comprehending what was written or C. flat out not reading it or D. all of the above (made it like a multiple choice for you high school kids). & i am sure if you played a 3 man game & you opponents were friends, you would also be upset.

Oh dear. Didn't do so well at this logical argument business did you?
Your first misguided rant, about your use of the word 'if', is some what disarmed by the fact that I said 'play in the way you suggest' in my response. You did not say I played that way, but you were making an insinuation with your use of the word 'if', which I rebuted. You either know that, or else are just awful at written communication. So perhaps you should keep your dictionary?
This however is all just semantic quibbling. It's plain that you're only doing it to attempt to score cheap points (which I'm afraid you're not doing so well at). The problem is that you don't have any logical response to the actual content of my post. I've demonstrated why S+SM weren't cheating, and you know that you're dead in the water. Whinging about the word 'if', is all you have left.
The nearest you get to attempting a genuine rebutal is in guessing that I might be upset if it transpired that my two opponents in some fictional 3-man game, were friends. I would indeed be upset if they colluded, but I would not be upset simply because they were friends.
So lo and behold, your argument has been dispatched; once again. That was a pretty weak performance from you, I think you'll agree.
As for your multiple choice 'question', I'd like to choose E: "Dancing Mustard, you are being responded to by somebody who has failed to understand your original post, and is attempting to find some bizarre and fictitious semantic point to engage over, in order to distract from the fact that he has absolutely no sane response to the fact that you utterly dismantled his pathetic excuse for an argument. He is probably about 9 years old, and will fail to do so no matter how many times he tries."

Pwnt. Thank you. Please come again.

funiboy · Post by **funiboy** » Fri May 11, 2007 5:02 pm

Ah you have completed 12 games & have 881 pts, that is why your not grasping this.

When Dog broke Sm's bonus, it was because SM played next. Prevented him from picking up those extra armies. next turn SM claims she was too busy trying to recalim her bonus to break Shittles....Shittles held Queendland. SM had previously held Victoria. Here is Sm's turn right after Dog broke her....2007-05-08 05:38:14 - SuperMango receives 3 armies for 11 territories
2007-05-08 05:38:23 - SuperMango deployed 3 armies on Warburton
2007-05-08 05:38:39 - SuperMango attacked Goldfields from Port Hedland and conquered it from dogwillhunt
2007-05-08 05:38:59 - SuperMango fortified Warburton with 6 armies from Goldfields
2007-05-08 05:39:01 - SuperMango gets a card

That is nowhere near Queensland nor Victoria. And SM had armies in Tamworth. 2007-05-08 05:27:00 - SuperMango fortified Tamworth with 2 armies from Lake Eyre
Check the log, these were never used nor taken. She also held Broken Hill wich also borders Queensland. 2007-05-08 05:26:38 - SuperMango fortified Broken Hill with 2 armies from Arnhem Land
These also were not used nor taken. So holding Victoria & New South wales & instead of fighting for it back or breaking someone with a bonus of 5 directly north of there...you go to the other side of the map...I wouldnt expect you to understand this Private...But there IS basis to these facts. Now add supermango's comment 2007-05-08 05:41:06 - SuperMango: now i'm determined to suicide myself on you
Throw that in with Supermango's histroy & it adds more basis. I am now done with this thread, Private. Your dissmissed.