Cultural Lotting Changes, now with no risk of being closed

[Korpg]

My linkshell lots by the exisiting free lot rules and therefore cant ninja lot what is already a free lot.

That is your linkshell. Your linkshell is limited by order however, since everyone can lot everything and nobody can really get anything done. Tell me, does your linkshell do any emp weapons?

I can see a need for linkshell rules to be displayed if they have them and that there is no current system in place for this.

There doesn't need to be a system for this. Do you want everything to be controlled by Square Enix?

I can also see a linkshell leader not having anything in place to stop anyone ninja lotting if their rules dont allow it.

A) I thought you didn't believe in ninja lotting?
B) Most successful linkshells have a system for ninja lotters. Anyone take an item they weren't supposed to have? Automatic kick and a player warning thread on the usual 4 forums.

I can also see no one wants changes to the existing format as they are all happy to post ninja warnings outside of se.

Slander! You are making it sound bad that people rather go to forums that have existed for years and are well known to have a good source of information about other players than having Square Enix forums do it for them. You are defaming everyone who uses outside sources for information about other players now! Slander!

Now that I got that out of the way, why would you care? Unless your name is on that "name and shame" list you are so adamantly against, why are you even bothered about it? Note that the last two sentences were questions, not statements.

[Korpg]

The only person who needs to back track is the person who has decided my point of view for me that wasnt me.

Why do I need to backtrack? I have not said anything to conclude a new set of rules at all. I pointed out the flaws of your argument and you keep changing them to suit the latest need, even when it means contradicting yourself. Then you delete all your posts and try again.

[katz]

Is it that people believe the lotting system need to be overhauled so that Leaders have to right to assign "winnings" to people? If you could change the lotting rules how would you do it?

Wonder really how you came to believe I said Leaders cant write their own rules when I asked do you think the lotting system needs overhauling to allow leaders to do exactly that.

Im sorry you believe making everyone happy to use existing forums is a slanderous statement. Why do I care about improving a system, I do wonder myself, maybe I care to help others rather than leave it.

[Korpg]

Is it that people believe the lotting system need to be overhauled so that Leaders have to right to assign "winnings" to people?

So far the consensus is no.

If you could change the lotting rules how would you do it?

Why change the lotting rules when the rules aren't broken or being severely misused? It is being misused yes, but not to the point that it needs any changed.

Wonder really how you came to believe I said Leaders cant write their own rules when I asked do you think the lotting system needs overhauling to allow leaders to do exactly that.

You said that, not me. I'm not putting words in your mouth here.

[Korpg]

Im sorry you believe making everyone happy to use existing forums is a slanderous statement

You were the one accusing people of slanderous remarks. Not me. I was just showing you your own slanderous remarks in your context.

[katz]

You were the one accusing people of slanderous remarks. Not me. I was just showing you your own slanderous remarks in your context.

OK then for the 3rd time today,I apologize for any unintentional slanderous statements that I make in error of understanding other peoples points of view.

[katz]

Why do I need to backtrack? I have not said anything to conclude a new set of rules at all. I pointed out the flaws of your argument and you keep changing them to suit the latest need, even when it means contradicting yourself. Then you delete all your posts and try again.

Did I accuse you, if you read it that way then I apologize.

[Korpg]

OK then for the 3rd time today,I apologize for any unintentional slanderous statements that I make in error of understanding other peoples points of view.

I'll only accept your apology if you stop throwing out the word "slander" or anything that goes off the word "slander" which includes but not limited to: malicious, defame, derogatory.

[Korpg]

Did I accuse you, if you read it that way then I apologize.

The only person who needs to back track is the person who has decided my point of view for me that wasnt me.

Seeming how in the last 5 pages only you and I have spoken, then yes, you did accuse me.

Seeing as we were the only two talking at the time of your statement. And you even said that it wasn't you who decided your point of view. By logic, that someone has to be the person of the two people who wasn't you. Since I am the only other person talking, that had to be me. Logic dictates so.

[Trumpy]

Is it just me or is every post by Katz before post #74 blank and then a few here and there since. I see the quotes from Katz posts but the actual post are blank til the more recent ones. Did Katz edit and delete the content?

There is no message saying they were edited or changed by a moderator either. Just curious cause i do see these empty posts now and then.

EDIT: the post directly above this one is blank.