I would like to formally request...

[PeLlE]

oh just ignore para or spam him with uber long posts
And cbs are very funny from time to time

[P-51]

A supermajority of players voted for the removal of the ability to tribute to fix the resource glitch. I did EXACTLY what they wanted.

That doesn't mean it is right to take an important of the game away, also I am almost positive (correct me if I'm wrong) that you said it was temporary so we should at least have another vote.

Explanation on why I pretty much ignored the first request. You guys requested something that's already there.

One of two things were possible here. Either you're a moron who doesn't know how to read or you were trying to be an asshole like I said. When we made comments like "disperse our resources among our friends and allies" and "If you got rid of it because of glitching, try fixing the glitch maybe rather then getting rid of total tribute screen." I don't see how you could have possibly gotten confused about what we were requesting.

Why I pretty much ignored the second request is that 39 days ago, a supermajority of players from this game stated what they wanted, and that was what we have now.

Well you could at least explain to us why it seems so necessary to take away tributes. This and custom chat were nice additions of the game and to have them taken away seems kind of wrong. They weren't really being much of a problem.

Perhaps I've come off as a bit flippant, but the reason for that is threefold:
1) My reasons are obvious (or should be) to anyone who's read this forum
2) It seems likely the only reason you+nicoly+jushe+HK are doing this is because you've all been recently banned for violating the ToU, and 3 are still banned.

No we actually care about our game and the direction its community is headed in. We have all been playing EE for at least 5 years and we like to be involved in the community. This is an issue I have been wanting to talk about but have never done it because I never had a name on these forums. It seems to me that because we have been banned you choose to take us less seriously than the people in your inner circle.

3) I know for a fact that you guys are arranging these posting campaigns via xfire, so it seems pretty "fake".

First of all how do you know this? I don't recall any of us ever mentioning xfire.

Second of all this should make no difference in the validity of this request. We all happen to be xfire friends and share similar views about our game so we are on xfire talking about what goes on in the game. There is no reason to think there is anything "fake" about this.

I locked only the first thread. I locked it because the request was for something to be the way it currently is, which is a non-request, and thus there's no point in discussing it at all.

Again, you were either being an illiterate fool or being a sarcastic asshole, either way you have proven you are unfit to be an administrator.

As for almost no one glitching anymore, as you claim, this is a claim without evidence. I can't provide evidence that many players glitch, either. I will say that based on the low amounts of reports of glitchers, that one of the three following things is probably true:

Indeed there is little evidence on the subject but since the WON servers were shut down I have never encountered any glitchers, hexers, etc. on the game. Very few of the people that did that kind of stuff are still around on EE, h4x0rz move on. Even if someone found someone glitching there was nothing wrong with the old method we used on the VUG forums. If people are too stupid to know how to report cheaters I'm sure there are people that will be willing to volunteer to tell them how.

Well, the smartass remark on the first request was clearly warranted. Somehow you all completely failed to realize that what you were requesting is EXACTLY how things are.

Again learn to read lawl, you make yourself look so silly.

The second smartass remark, was directed entirely at P-51, for things he said that are demonstrably false. Lying (i.e. saying demonstrably false things that are very obviously false to anyone who was paying attention) is worthy of a smartass reply in my book.

Pics or it didn't happen.

The last vote finished 39 days ago. I don't think that many people actually changed their minds since then. The reason I think this is that aside from the few requesting the tribute ability back on the fourm, only two people have asked for this in the lobby. So far, the people asking for it back haven't even been the people who voted to get rid of it.

Again these people wanting to take it away doesn't make it entirely right when we have not exhausted all other options. Some of these people may just be indifferent and want to try something new. There are other ways of solving almost nonexistent problems. And if you still continue to ignore us and leave at the tribute screen please give some reason supporting this instead of just saying that its what you wanted.


That was the first vote on the issue. That vote was to see if enough people were even interested in TRYING it. That vote succeeded, and we tried it with no tribute screen. Another poll was run in a week (bit less than actually), and the result of that poll was that most people wanted to continue testing. We kept testing. We then ran a final poll, and the result was a supermajority of the community wanted the ability to send tributes removed, but the tribute screen to remain.

And if your deplorable reading skills require us to use your exact word order.

WE ARE REQUESTING THE ABILITY TO SEND TRIBUTES PLEASE

[Omega]

A supermajority of players voted for the removal of the ability to tribute to fix the resource glitch. I did EXACTLY what they wanted.

That doesn't mean it is right to take an important of the game away, also I am almost positive (correct me if I'm wrong) that you said it was temporary so we should at least have another vote.

I've already corrected this, in this very thread. The first vote was about whether or not to try it (it being no tribute screen) for a week. The second vote could have been final, but wasn't because people voted to continue testing. The third vote was final.

I'll now quote the times I corrected this same thing.

Responding to you:

If you haven't been paying attention, there were three polls. The first poll was to test or not, test won. The second poll was a vote on the change, and "keep testing" won. The third was the final poll, that resulted in the change.

I'm probably done responding to this thread, or any future threads you guys may create, as it seems there's very little point in doing so.

Also responding to you:

That was the first vote on the issue. That vote was to see if enough people were even interested in TRYING it. That vote succeeded, and we tried it with no tribute screen. Another poll was run in a week (bit less than actually), and the result of that poll was that most people wanted to continue testing. We kept testing. We then ran a final poll, and the result was a supermajority of the community wanted the ability to send tributes removed, but the tribute screen to remain.

They're both responding to you! In two separate posts! The second one, is even from the same post where the quote you were responding to here comes from! How on earth did you miss it, since, surely, you read the whole post? Even if you didn't read the whole post, the second post was much shorter, and part of it included me quoting you (screenshot included!), if you had browsed through the posts even, how did you miss that one?

Explanation on why I pretty much ignored the first request. You guys requested something that's already there.

One of two things were possible here. Either you're a moron who doesn't know how to read or you were trying to be an asshole like I said. When we made comments like "disperse our resources among our friends and allies" and "If you got rid of it because of glitching, try fixing the glitch maybe rather then getting rid of total tribute screen." I don't see how you could have possibly gotten confused about what we were requesting.

I was responding (well, your quote is PART of my response, anyway) to your mini-rant of:

You being a sarcastic asshole like this is exactly why you are hated outside of your oligarchy. Why don't you just accept the fact that you are an awful admin and let the game go back to where it once was? At least give us some answers to why you are saying "no" instead of bullshit remarks like that.

In the whole response, I say at the end:

Perhaps I've come off as a bit flippant, but the reason for that is threefold:
1) My reasons are obvious (or should be) to anyone who's read this forum
2) It seems likely the only reason you+nicoly+jushe+HK are doing this is because you've all been recently banned for violating the ToU, and 3 are still banned.
3) I know for a fact that you guys are arranging these posting campaigns via xfire, so it seems pretty "fake".

#2 and #3 there also go to accounting for my reason to basically ignore the first request. Let's face it, you guys made a request that wasn't exactly sincere, without bothering to understand the basic history of what led to what you're seeking to undo, without putting in any effort to even ensure you were accurately or effectively communicating your request, and without putting any real thought into why you think the request should seriously be considered. When you take those things, and then, on top of that, actually look at the history of how things came to be the way they are, it seems extremely arrogant on your part to think that a request by 4 players, 3 of which were currently banned, were going to overturn the recently stated wishes of a supermajority of the entire Empire Earth community.

No offense, but anyone who was in my position (i.e. knowing what I knew) who even remotely valued their time was going to lock that thread, delete that thread, move it to the basement, or otherwise regard it as a joke. Deleting things isn't my style if I can help it, as I'm a big fan of leaving public posts where everyone who wants to see them can, eliminating confusion in the future and preserving a historical record. Moving it to the basement seemed inappropriate, as it was at least a request and I'd rather keep things where they belong for that historical record. Otherwise regarding it as a joke, would in this case mean deeming it not serious enough to even reply or do anything, which is a level reserved for Faith's posts on 'alien technology' or his cat.

So, I locked it, with a reply that said:

Blame the community if you don't like the outcome of the vote on tributes. Oh, and request granted, because the Tribute Screen is still there.

It's short and to the point, although all the points it hits on are things that you apparently missed. The second sentence is a sarcastic quip, but a well deserved one--you weren't even careful enough to actually request what you wanted in your request for it. If pointing out your inability to actually request what you thought you were requesting makes me an asshole, then so be it.

Why I pretty much ignored the second request is that 39 days ago, a supermajority of players from this game stated what they wanted, and that was what we have now.

Well you could at least explain to us why it seems so necessary to take away tributes. This and custom chat were nice additions of the game and to have them taken away seems kind of wrong. They weren't really being much of a problem.

That is still part of my response to:

You being a sarcastic asshole like this is exactly why you are hated outside of your oligarchy. Why don't you just accept the fact that you are an awful admin and let the game go back to where it once was? At least give us some answers to why you are saying "no" instead of bullshit remarks like that.

No where in what I was responding to did you ask for any sort of explanation for what you are looking for now. You wanted to know why I said "no" to your request. I answered that. You didn't mention anything about custom chat at all.

To fairly answer exactly the question you've asked, I would have to say that it is not necessary to take away the ability to tribute, or custom chat. I've also never said that it was. I'd also like to point out that I was not the person who made the decision to remove tributes, as the community decided that.

I can't speak for the community, as if I could there would have been no need for a poll (actually, a series of polls). I would however think, that nearly everyone in the community would agree removing tributes, or custom chat, was not necessary. They still voted for both changes though, because they felt that whatever the benefits were, outweighed the downsides. The principal benefits being stopping unit glitching in all games, and killing off covert trainer use in team games, respectively.

As for the assertions of wrongness, and that glitching units and trainer use were not much of a problem, the community clearly disagrees with you on both counts. The community could have just as easily disagreed with me on either, or both counts, but in that case I wouldn't be trying to assert that the community made a wrong decision, I'd just accept it and move on.

Perhaps I've come off as a bit flippant, but the reason for that is threefold:
1) My reasons are obvious (or should be) to anyone who's read this forum
2) It seems likely the only reason you+nicoly+jushe+HK are doing this is because you've all been recently banned for violating the ToU, and 3 are still banned.

No we actually care about our game and the direction its community is headed in. We have all been playing EE for at least 5 years and we like to be involved in the community. This is an issue I have been wanting to talk about but have never done it because I never had a name on these forums. It seems to me that because we have been banned you choose to take us less seriously than the people in your inner circle.

While what you're saying may be true, it certainly does not appear to be true. You (and here I'm using 'you' in the sense of referring to the 'we' you're talking about) claim to care about the game, and yet 3 out of 4 of your group is currently banned, and not for the first time either, with the reaction to the ban coming off as 'we don't care about ee that much, we'll just go play other games'. You claim to care about the direction the community is headed, but from your lack of understanding of basic things, such as that there were 3 votes involved in the removal of the tribute screen (and somehow completely missing the two that involved lobby popups?), it seems clear that you're not paying much attention to where things are going or why they're going there. Registering on these forums takes 1 minute, maximum, and posting usually doesn't take that long either, so the fact you (JUST you in this case) haven't created an account until now also does not look very good, and the fact that the rest of the group has had accounts before and hasn't participated looks even worse for the accuracy of this claim.

As for the claim I'm not//was not taking you (again as a group) seriously due to the bans, this is partly the reason, yes. I judge people on the internet by their actions, just like I do in real life. The multiple bans for some members of this specific group, generally immature behavior, and so on, really don't lend me to taking any of you seriously. I am however taking you, P-51, somewhat seriously now, since I've decided there's a chance you're actually trying to be serious. As far as Jushe, Nicoly, and HK, at this point it would take a miracle for me to even consider taking them seriously any time in the near future, and this is based solely upon their own actions.

3) I know for a fact that you guys are arranging these posting campaigns via xfire, so it seems pretty "fake".

First of all how do you know this? I don't recall any of us ever mentioning xfire.

Second of all this should make no difference in the validity of this request. We all happen to be xfire friends and share similar views about our game so we are on xfire talking about what goes on in the game. There is no reason to think there is anything "fake" about this.

How I know is irrelevant to what we're discussing. Furthermore, I hope I've already made it clear you won't ever find out how I know from me.

By valid here, you seem to be meaning "having weight, force, or cogency". I'll go with weight as it fits the intended usage of valid well, and I'd argue that the motivations behind a request, along with the request its self, do have bearing as to the weight of the request (i.e. how seriously the request is considered).

Imagine you're a bigshot Venture Capitalist and two essentially identical startups are requesting to be funded, but you can only pick one. The only meaningful difference between them is that the founders of one startup have only the motivation of getting rich, whereas the founders of the other simply believe in making a great product. Which one would you pick? Of course you're going to carefully consider each, and weigh it against the other, but the one with the most weight wins, and it's the guys who believe in making a great product. Clearly motivations have some bearing on the weight, and therefore the validity in the sense you're using it (you can of course, use the same set of circumstances to show the same thing for force and cogency, which is why I say 'therefore the validity in the sense you're using it').

Now take the same set of circumstances, except this time the only difference is it is clear that one startup hardly put any effort in, whereas the other put in a modest amount or a good amount. Again, it's obvious, just as obvious as the case where one didn't think about what they were going to say, or how to communicate it, and the other did. Clearly, if you don't think or put effort in, a proposal carries less weight, it's less forceful, and less cogent.

I've already gone into my reasons to dismiss your first request elsewhere in this post, and the short version of them is that you (collectively--excluding White Fang) had poor motivations (insincere request), put essentially zero effort in to the proposal, and put essentially zero thought in to the proposal. Any of those three, and especially all three combined, do make your request less weighty, less forceful, and less cogent, and thus, in the sense you're using it, less valid.

I locked only the first thread. I locked it because the request was for something to be the way it currently is, which is a non-request, and thus there's no point in discussing it at all.

Again, you were either being an illiterate fool or being a sarcastic asshole, either way you have proven you are unfit to be an administrator.

I think you're not exactly viewing this in context, so I'll put what I was replying to with it:

Omega, i think you should stop locking every single thread we make, i think people should be able to comment and specualte on their opinions as well. Instead of locking every the thread every time we bring the subject up. I think you should maybe just stay out of a least one thread and acually let people have a disscussion about it.

Please consider it instead of shutting us out immediately. Thank you.
o_o

What I said was essentially a time-saving version of going through his entire post point by point, with essentially the same effect. I could have pointed out to him the NUMEROUS avenues on these where people can and did comment, speculate, and post their opinions on the very subject in question BEFORE the change even occurred, and I could have pointed out that the discussion on this has been over and done with since before the change of no tributes even occurred. I could have explained, in-detail, all the considerations done on the subject by myself and others LONG BEFORE the no tribute change went into effect, and pointed out all those things in excruciating detail. That's pretty much a waste of time though, and the fact he apparently missed the first two because he wasn't paying attention, and didn't even think to consider that perhaps, the issue had already been considered to death really isn't something I'd love to write a huge long post about.

I don't see how the reply that doesn't hammer HK on his numerous shortcomings here makes me an asshole. I suppose it's because it's still pointing out the fact that you, and everyone else in that thread, couldn't even manage to take the effort to correctly specify what they were talking about, which isn't exactly courteous either, but it's still completely true, just like what I said is completely true.

I don't see how a reply designed to avoid writing a multi-page essay on how inept someone is makes me unfit to be an administrator. So what, you don't like the reply. Big deal. Get over it and grow up. It points out a mistake on your part. Fine. That's not a big deal either. Everyone makes mistakes. I don't care that you made a mistake and didn't communicate effectively, one way or the other, but, I'm not going to pretend like you did communicate effectively, and not mention it at all.

Essentially, the problem we're running into here is that the request was a failure on so many levels it's almost impossible to list them all in a logical manner using words, especially explaining why they're failures. You failed to consider the reasons for the change, the history that led up to it such as all the discussion, debate, consideration, and votes, as well as failed to communicate effectively, present a strong reason for why we'd pay much attention to your request due to the community disagreeing with you by a large majority (i.e. more than a supermajority) very recently, and so on and so forth. Just because you didn't even THINK to consider, didn't consider or completely ignored these things, and are now apparently having trouble comprehending them, does not make me in any way unfit to be an administrator. Sorry, that's just not the way it works.

As for almost no one glitching anymore, as you claim, this is a claim without evidence. I can't provide evidence that many players glitch, either. I will say that based on the low amounts of reports of glitchers, that one of the three following things is probably true:

Indeed there is little evidence on the subject but since the WON servers were shut down I have never encountered any glitchers, hexers, etc. on the game. Very few of the people that did that kind of stuff are still around on EE, h4x0rz move on. Even if someone found someone glitching there was nothing wrong with the old method we used on the VUG forums. If people are too stupid to know how to report cheaters I'm sure there are people that will be willing to volunteer to tell them how.

I certainly won't disagree with the majority of what you say here, because most of it is agreeing with what I was saying, stating your own experiences, or talking about VUGs way of doing things. However, I do not agree with "Very few of the people that did that kind of stuff are still around on EE, h4x0rz move on."

• PeterPanini a.k.a. {Bc}Be+Cool
  Glitching (Multiple counts)
• PRE_PLAYER
  Glitching
• Dark Samus
  Glitching (Multiple counts)
• -XtC-
  Everything you can think of.
• Smooth
  Glitching
• NW_Rulez
  Trainer
• namor
  Trainer
• Chicken^
  Glitching
• Lavenger
  Hex civ
• Alesana a.k.a. Dr Donahue a.k.a. Skylar
  Glitching
• [̲̅¤̲̅P̲̅e̲̅o̲̅ฬ̲̅¤̲̅]
  Glitching
• pri_REİS
  Trainer
• [-eG-] AvI
  Trainer
• _H_E_R_O_
  Glitching (& ghosting others while doing so)
• Jossos
  Glitching
• rAtZoR
  Glitching
• NikE
  Trainer
• sMLsIzE
  Glitching
• TuG ¦ -Jamaica-
  Glitching
• Black-Cobra
  Trainer
• arab-lord
  Hexed civ
• tramp87
  Glitching
• \<(^_^<)I IZ DA BIZZLE (>^_^)>/
  Glitching
• ][≈◦פิโдвﻈǿ Oriol (ECUADOR)™◦≈]
  Glitching
• kozar
  hexed civ

That's the hall of shame for this lobby. That means the people who, on this system, have cheated, cheated noticeably enough to get noticed, and were reported with sufficient evidence to ban them. The bar to ban someone has been MUCH higher than the bar on VUG here, as for a large amount of time the lobby did not have a working, easily accessible locate, making proving that someone actually cheated virtually impossible. Hardly anyone had the knowledge, desire, or expertise actually needed to prove that someone in your game really cheated during this time, even though people certainly did cheat, and even though the information on what to do was out there. About half of those on that list are, as far as anyone can tell, new offenders, meaning they never cheated on the old system.

It should also be noted that there are a ton of players on this game, that I know did cheat at some point in the past on the old servers, and some were reported/banned, others never were due to various reasons. Either way, most of them probably don't cheat anymore, but it still doesn't agree with the assertion that very few of the people that did "that kind of stuff" are still around.

Again, however, there isn't any hard evidence here, so it's pretty much pointless to speculate exactly how many ex-cheaters//cheaters are still playing ee, and their relative abundance compared to legit players, because at the end of the speculation you still don't actually know anything.

Well, the smartass remark on the first request was clearly warranted. Somehow you all completely failed to realize that what you were requesting is EXACTLY how things are.

Again learn to read lawl, you make yourself look so silly.

From viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2555
You start with...
"Topic: I would like to formally request
Post: A tribute screen. ..."

Nicoly chimes in with "I too wish for the Tribute screen back", and later in his posts says "...rather than getting rid of the total tribute screen."

Jushe chimes in with "...And a Tribute Screen would be nice again"

HK47 chimes in with "Yeah teh trib screen would be an absolutely astounding deature. To uh, put back into the game."

White Fang weighs in with "yeah getting trib screen back would be nice"

You weigh in again with "I would tend to agree the tribute screen is a most useful feature and wish to have it reinstated."

Every single post on that thread, except your second one where you claim without any evidence to indicate anything one way or the other, that no one cares enough to glitch anymore (assuming that they could still glitch units, I suppose...), and my post, people don't realize that they're not requesting what they think they are. Reading the entire posts looks even less flattering for your case, as there is only one indication that you meant the ability to tribute, from you, in the original post.

Perhaps you're the one who needs to learn to read. What I said in the quote that supposed makes me look silly for not being able to read, was simply that the smartass remark about the ineptitude of everyone in that thread to properly communicate was, in fact, warranted, because that kind of ineptitude does in fact warrant a smart ass remark. The fact that I read the thread, recognized the actual content of every post, and realized the intended content of every post, shows that I certainly CAN read, which means I don't look silly after all. You look moronic for that remark, though.

The second smartass remark, was directed entirely at P-51, for things he said that are demonstrably false. Lying (i.e. saying demonstrably false things that are very obviously false to anyone who was paying attention) is worthy of a smartass reply in my book.

Pics or it didn't happen.

Directed at you? Yeah, I quoted you.
Demonstrably false? See my post, it demonstrates that the argument is clearly false, and so much so that it's obviously false to anyone paying any attention at all.

The argument being, in essence, 'an important part of the game was removed because of few random noobs', which completely ignores:
1) The entire active EE community isn't few, especially when we're using few as a relative term RELATIVE TO THE ENTIRE ACTIVE EE COMMUNITY. Unless few is almost equal to 100% which it's clearly not, then it's wrong.
2) What amounts to a complete sampling of an entire group can't be described as random. That's clearly wrong.
3) He doesn't have any data on who voted for what, so this claim can't even be made in the argument as it's, to him and everyone who's reading the argument and not an Administrator, unverifiable. If anyone is willing to take my word for it, though, it's false too--but even if I'm lying, the argument is still obviously fallacious due to 1 and 2, and even if 1 and 2 were magically fine 3 doesn't exactly work because there's no data from which to draw a conclusion.

I certainly equate making an argument that's clearly so obviously false that even a minor amount of checking the argument you're making is false as lying, because even if you weren't sure it was false initially, you should really know better. Even people who copy/paste tired proven false arguments for things off the internet are better than that, because at least they're not making the shit up, they're just expecting that their source is correct.

The last vote finished 39 days ago. I don't think that many people actually changed their minds since then. The reason I think this is that aside from the few requesting the tribute ability back on the fourm, only two people have asked for this in the lobby. So far, the people asking for it back haven't even been the people who voted to get rid of it.

Again these people wanting to take it away doesn't make it entirely right when we have not exhausted all other options. Some of these people may just be indifferent and want to try something new. There are other ways of solving almost nonexistent problems. And if you still continue to ignore us and leave at the tribute screen please give some reason supporting this instead of just saying that its what you wanted.

We have not exhausted all other options? Who is we? AFAIK I'm the only person in the community who's even tried to do anything about fixing the resource glitch, and I actually have exhausted *all* other options with regards to the patch. Why don't you go spend a few hours of your time doing extremely tedious work trying a probably hopeless workaround to fix the resource glitch, to have it blow up in your face again and again, then imagine multiplying that time by twenty or thirty and let me know how you'd feel when someone makes a comment as dumb as 'we have not exhausted all other options', or what Nicoly said in the 2nd post of the 1st thread... "try fixing the glitch maybe rather then getting rid of total tribute screen". The fact that people even assume that hasn't been tried is really just insulting.

You're absolutely right about some of the people who voted for it might not care about glitching, and voted for it for other reasons. You don't really have a point here, though. They voted for it for other reasons than it stops glitching, so what? I'm sure *some* people who voted for each option had strange and unusual motives guiding the decision, in whole or in part, and again, so what?

The assertion that resource glitching is an almost nonexistant problem has no evidence to back it up, and even if it did it wouldn't matter. What's the point? The community was able to weigh the pros and cons, as they saw fit, and decide. They decided. And you're not even forced to live by the choice. You can unpatch. It's extremely easy.

"And if you still continue to ignore us and leave at the tribute screen please give some reason supporting this instead of just saying that its what you wanted."

It's clearly not what you, personally wanted. It's what the community wanted. I don't know what reason I can give you that will satisfy you. You're not satisfied with it stops people from glitching units. You're not satisfied with people voted for it. You're certainly not going to be satisfied with other, fringe, benefits such as promoting more proactive teamplay in both offensive and defensive occurrences, et cetera. The benefits, all of them, and the drawbacks, all of them, have been discussed, publicly, openly, to death. And then some. And then some more. And then some more. And now, we're discussing some of them YET AGAIN. If you want discussions of these things, go read old posts discussing them, there are enough to keep you busy for a long time. And again, since all of these reasons have already been stated, it's not like me stating them again for your convenience does any good, as it doesn't seem you want to accept any of them anyway (in a sense, it's practically a forum version of the 'Why don't you yes but' game, which makes me LOL), but that doesn't really matter. The community decided. Deal with it. In the future, they might decide differently, and I'll gladly go along with it. Maybe they decide, hey lets go back to vanilla. I'm fine with that, too.

And if your deplorable reading skills require us to use your exact word order.

WE ARE REQUESTING THE ABILITY TO SEND TRIBUTES PLEASE

1) My reading skills are perfectly fine, and it's evident to anyone with a brain. Your communication skills, and those of others, in that one topic, were SORELY lacking. The fact you keep coming back to this bullshit ad hominiem that isn't even an accurate representation of reality really says a lot, though.
2) We've been over this.... No.

This is probably my last reply here, because, honestly, this is more time than it's worth, especially because you just keep repeating the same stuff over and over again, as well as ignoring things that have been pointed out. Should you or someone else reply with interesting, new things that haven't already been answered or discussed somewhere on these forums, I might actually reply. Either that or there's a ridiculously poor-reasoned argument or post...

[Ghost]

I had some chicken for lunch.

[Omega]

I had some chicken for lunch.

Damn, I was pretty sure the first post after his+mine would be "tl;dr"

[Moo]

This happened

[HK47]

Omega, i'm very sorry to say. But thats way to much to read. And, you say our threads are not worth jack squat, yet you write more than i wrote for my entire English class XD

And maybe there is a way to like, edit in a new tribute screen button and kinda like, rewrite the actual like trib screen a new format? o_o

._.

[Jushe]

Dang Omega That was a Lot... Calm Yourself O_O...

[X warrior411]

Omega, i'm very sorry to say. But thats way to much to read. And, you say our threads are not worth jack squat, yet you write more than i wrote for my entire English class XD

And maybe there is a way to like, edit in a new tribute screen button and kinda like, rewrite the actual like trib screen a new format? o_o

._.

Dang Omega That was a Lot... Calm Yourself O_O...

If your going to debate on why you want the tribute screen back, be prepared to read tl;dr-s. Also, it seems your 'group' is one of three things.
1. At a very young age.
2. Have no intelligence.
3. Retarded.

More likely, it's all three.

[Omega]

I'd like to state you can easily get through my post in 14 minutes.

[HK47]

Omega, i'm very sorry to say. But thats way to much to read. And, you say our threads are not worth jack squat, yet you write more than i wrote for my entire English class XD

And maybe there is a way to like, edit in a new tribute screen button and kinda like, rewrite the actual like trib screen a new format? o_o

._.

Dang Omega That was a Lot... Calm Yourself O_O...

If your going to debate on why you want the tribute screen back, be prepared to read tl;dr-s. Also, it seems your 'group' is one of three things.
1. At a very young age.
2. Have no intelligence.
2. Retarded.

More likely, it's all three.

At least i know the difference between my 2's and 3's

[X warrior411]

Omega, i'm very sorry to say. But thats way to much to read. And, you say our threads are not worth jack squat, yet you write more than i wrote for my entire English class XD

And maybe there is a way to like, edit in a new tribute screen button and kinda like, rewrite the actual like trib screen a new format? o_o

._.

Dang Omega That was a Lot... Calm Yourself O_O...

If your going to debate on why you want the tribute screen back, be prepared to read tl;dr-s. Also, it seems your 'group' is one of three things.
1. At a very young age.
2. Have no intelligence.
2. Retarded.

More likely, it's all three.

At least i know the difference between my 2's and 3's

This just in,

Scientists have discovered something called a 'typo'.

[HK47]

Actually i think it was the grammar police who thought of that.....

BY THE WAY@ Omega, i do understand where you are coming from. Maybe if you kinda showed me more into how to mod files such as those i could help >.<

[X warrior411]

I might have had a small fail but what do you call this?




This fail is bigger.

[HK47]

I might have had a small fail but what do you call this?




This fail is bigger.

Nope, you still fail. Because those were not provided by you nor did you give credit to the provider. And, they were already shown earlier. So, i still think you fail.