So many playerworlds...

[zell12]

So little players.

The majority of players play Graal Kingdoms, United Nations, Era, Babylon, and now Zone. However, there are many more other servers with 0 players constantly, even the classic playerworlds. I think that mabey this is a waste of peoples money. Some people should get together, and combine ideas, then make one server. It would do better then 3 or 4 different ones. Would probably attract more players to Graal as well.
What do you guys think the Graal Administration can do to help? Mabey the players can combine ideas and make one playerworld? What do you think?

[osrs]

If people make original servers, i'm pretty sure that they will get a good count of players. I think the playerworld-renting thing is for you improve your skills and know more how to manager/work on a playerworld, not to get players.

[WHIPENIE4]

half of them wasted their money. more then half. all they are is wasted space ready to fail. because all the good Developers are taken

[DMRenegade]

Originally posted by WHIPENIE4
half of them wasted their money. more then half. all they are is wasted space ready to fail. because all the good Developers are taken

wasted or not, you can't deny them the chance to try

[zell12]

No, but we can offer them jobs on our own servers for free.

[Milkdude99]

Originally posted by DMRenegade

wasted or not, you can't deny them the chance to try

We all choose what we want to spend our money on and who are we to deny someone , even if it is a waste of time , it is their money to waste if they choose so? I agree with DM on this.. Making one big playerworld defeats the purpose of variety, that would be fine if we all liked the same thing but we don't and so we have many different Playerworlds to feed our own personal taste. Are their too many? I tend to agree there are too many to support the player base but then again you cannot limit the players like that. It has it's good points and bad points so we just have to make the best of it as it is.

[ETD]

Originally posted by zell12
What do you guys think the Graal Administration can do to help? Mabey the players can combine ideas and make one playerworld? What do you think?

I think that Private worlds should be rated by their potential. Then those with high potential should recieve scripting help from the GST
:P
and maybe other help, if they need it... to help them get off their feet, and develop faster.

[--Chris--]

Personally I believe they need to be of a certain quality to reach the Classic tab, not just throw in whatever is best even though their standards are low. I'd like to see the tab only have the following:

Graal: The Adventure
Graal 2001
Era
Zone
Valikorlia (only because it's an RP server which doesn't neccessarily have to excel content wise and like MG said, variety is good.)

Other than the above, only the things with worthwhile, good quality content such as Archiac, Sanstrata, Oasis and New World should go up. The tab should also be limited to the amount of servers that can be up at one time, I'd personally say somewhere around 5 (not including "Stefan servers.")
Not only will it be easier to determine when a PW is actually being disliked (if it has no or a low playerbase with a fairly small amount of PWs on the tab, then you know something is definately wrong) and needs to be replaced but they'll be easier to moderate by the GGT, GST and PWA, motivate UC playerworlds to better their production and give a good impression to new comers when they see the type of player-made servers chosen to represent Graal.
I believe the 5 servers I mentioned that can currently go up will have a pretty nice playerbase (which they all essentially need, especially Graal 2k1) and over-all more players would have a good time.

[Kristi]

Originally posted by --Chris--
Personally I believe they need to be of a certain quality to reach the Classic tab, not just throw in whatever is best even though their standards are low. I'd like to see the tab only have the following:

Graal: The Adventure
Graal 2001
Era
Zone
Valikorlia (only because it's an RP server which doesn't neccessarily have to excel content wise and like MG said, variety is good.)

Other than the above, only the things with worthwhile, good quality content such as Archiac, Sanstrata, Oasis and New World should go up. The tab should also be limited to the amount of servers that can be up at one time, I'd personally say somewhere around 5 (not including "Stefan servers.")
Not only will it be easier to determine when a PW is actually being disliked (if it has no or a low playerbase with a fairly small amount of PWs on the tab, then you know something is definately wrong) and needs to be replaced but they'll be easier to moderate by the GGT, GST and PWA, motivate UC playerworlds to better their production and give a good impression to new comers when they see the type of player-made servers chosen to represent Graal.
I believe the 5 servers I mentioned that can currently go up will have a pretty nice playerbase (which they all essentially need, especially Graal 2k1) and over-all more players would have a good time.

Yes, this is the perfect idea because everyone likes your opinions.
Its funny how you didnt include Unholy Nation in your list... take a hint. They have the highest playerbase, they did something right! Obviously your opinions arent good enough if they including taking down something that holds a lot of players.

If everything was removed and the serverlist shortened, and they made it policy to keep it small, then what? When you make a server do you have to "bump" another off to get yours up? thats a rediculous system. Public servers would have loyalty. Why would I be inspired to pay for and start a new server if i knew id have little chance ever getting it up no matter how good it was?

[davidpsy]

Originally posted by Kristi


Yes, this is the perfect idea because everyone likes your opinions.
Its funny how you didnt include Unholy Nation in your list...
take a hint. They have the highest playerbase, they did something right! Obviously your opinions arent good enough if they including taking down something that holds a lot of players.

Un is ok. I think they do so well because they have a player base.
I remember before graal went all p2p practially no body was on UN. That might of been because it was a p2p server.

Originally posted by Kristi

If everything was removed and the serverlist shortened, and they made it policy to keep it small, then what? When you make a server do you have to "bump" another off to get yours up? thats a rediculous system. Public servers would have loyalty. Why would I be inspired to pay for and start a new server if i knew id have little chance ever getting it up no matter how good it was?

If your server was better then everyone elses it would stay up. I personally think the servers that are up should stay up and just let more and more on.

[--Chris--]

"Yes, this is the perfect idea because everyone likes your opinions. "

What in the blue hell are you talking about?

"Its funny how you didnt include Unholy Nation in your list... take a hint. They have the highest playerbase, they did something right! ."

Unholy Nation only has a high playerbase because it has been around for quite some time, sure their playerbase is one of the highest but that's only due to past player loyalty while it was actually considered something new + great back in the day. UN's gameplay isn't original nor appealing now, it's like a lacking integration of Graal 2001 and Graal: The Adventure and there isn't really much of a point to playing it.
Newbies notice the high playerbase (due to past loyalty) and play there over other PWs with the same dull, unoriginal concept and first impression making it always stay at the top - it's like a never ending cycle. Now their content is outdated and not really entertaining. Unholy Nation is like the Graal dating service, no-one does anything there except sit around in levels "[looking 4 g/f]" ;x
Also, if I recall correctly they once had an npc that saved attributes on trial accounts (could be wrong but I heard something of this once.) <--That would have attracted alot of players.
Taking it UC a bit is motive for improvements and if it's good enough to get back up (by meeting higher neccessary standards if this is applied) then it'll surely get an even greater playerbase See if UN maintains this playerbase when previously mentioned PWs like Oasis are released

"Obviously your opinions arent good enough if they including taking down something that holds a lot of players. "

Seriously, learn to word yourself better, that makes just about no sense. I wonder if there's "Hooked On Phonics For Dummies" available in stores now.

"If everything was removed and the serverlist shortened, and they made it policy to keep it small, then what? When you make a server do you have to "bump" another off to get yours up? thats a rediculous system."

I'm sorry to burst your bubble but that's the current system. If you look at the playerlist you'd see 7 PWs not including Graal 2001 and Graal: The Adventure, I believe the max is 10 or so and every month Spark switches around which goes up and which goes back down. The ones "bumped" are usually the ones with a small amount/least amount of players or by request. My suggestion is only putting up the ones of good quality rather than anything that passes minimum requirements to be considered a "completed" PW, reasons/benefits are in my previous post.

"Public servers would have loyalty."

Neat, you helped backup my point about UN:

Basically you're saying if you want to get your server up you can't because the ones up at the time, even if not very good quality should always remain up because they only maintain a decent playerbase due to loyalty. What you're stating here is basically what you argued against when refering to UN, refer to: "Its funny how you didnt include Unholy Nation in your list... take a hint. They have the highest playerbase, they did something right!" <---Consider that's in response to me stating only PWs with good quality should go up.

"Why would I be inspired to pay for and start a new server if i knew id have little chance ever getting it up no matter how good it was?"

Again you're making no sense. Good servers go up, bad servers go down but then again, that system is "r_e_diculous" remember?

Edit for Donald:
"I personally think the servers that are up should stay up and just let more and more on."

I disagree and I'm sure I could find alot more reasons why it's more of a bad idea than good, here are two:
1)It would just be that much harder for globals to moderate them.
2)Wide-spread small playerbase = unhealthy servers.

[WHIPENIE4]

heh Classic is 4th active Playerworld according to graal.net, Kingdoms would probably fall in at second so..... Lately we've had a player count above 50 each day from about 4 till 9PM

[syltburk]

It would only be conflicts by the staff

[Kristi]

Chris, you speak as if quality is the only issue and it's irrevelvant to what the players want. Your weak arguements are coupled with attacks on my grammer (a sure sign of a lack of arguement.)

Take UN down and force them to become even greater? They have the highest playercount, hense they are both keeping customers satisified and drawing in money for graal. Until that changes, they have no need. I remember why I play graal, and its because i like to spar, pk, talk, maybe play a fun game or two, etc. UN provides great sparring, fun pking, and their CTF is incredibly fun, they inbody timeless interests and aspect. As amazing as oasis may be (or any other server), and make you ooh and aah, you will not ooh and aah forever. Why do you think Levi has been selling the same generic jeans for over 100 years and Paco Jeans died when so popular at a time?

I do agree with Donald; let worthy things up without taking others down if they're good enough.

[syltburk]

Graal2001
UN
Graal Kingdoms
Classic (cuz its history and everybody know that Classic is the place for the old people)
babylon

[Lance]

Originally posted by Kristi
Chris, you speak as if quality is the only issue and it's irrevelvant to what the players want. Your weak arguements are coupled with attacks on my grammer (a sure sign of a lack of arguement.)

It's your own fault for not taking the time to form a proper sentence. You should focus on debating against his points. Consider this: if you were correct in saying that his attack on your grammar was a sure sign of a lack of argument, then it would also be correct that your attack on his attack is such a sign.

Take UN down and force them to become even greater? They have the highest playercount, hense they are both keeping customers satisified and drawing in money for graal. Until that changes, they have no need. I remember why I play graal, and its because i like to spar, pk, talk, maybe play a fun game or two, etc. UN provides great sparring, fun pking, and their CTF is incredibly fun, they inbody timeless interests and aspect. As amazing as oasis may be (or any other server), and make you ooh and aah, you will not ooh and aah forever. Why do you think Levi has been selling the same generic jeans for over 100 years and Paco Jeans died when so popular at a time?

You will most certainly agree that most new people start playing at UN because it's got the highest player count.

Once they have started there and looked around, some of them stay. This results in the maintained high playercount. However, what about all of those that dislike UN? What about those who view it to be a pitiful excuse for a server (and, to the newbie's perspective, a pitiful excuse for a game as well)?

You are counting those who stay - I am counting those who leave.

Wouldn't you want people to have the best first impression of Graal, rather than (as Chris pointed out) a dating service, a hotbed of insults, attacks, and inconsiderate players? I would.

[bo0ey]

I think Graal2001 shouldn't be in the classic list because frankly it sucks and is not going to go anywhere. Classic sucks too, who cares if its history, so was Nixon, and we don't love him now because he was here in the past.

UN is the most popular playerworld, 'nuff said. It should stay in classic tab. Any playerworld that keeps a constant 30 players or higher should stay in the classic tab. Others need to rethink their plans and have some more work done.

[--Chris--]

"Chris, you speak as if quality is the only issue and it's irrevelvant to what the players want. "

You really have no idea what the hell you're talking about. That makes absolutely no sense. Quality = everything, gameplay included. Can you even define irrelevant?

"Your weak arguements are coupled with attacks on my grammer (a sure sign of a lack of arguement.)"

Weak arguements? Stop with the crap talk and try to prove my arguements weak. On another note, you threw the first stone (or tried to) "Yes, this is the perfect idea because everyone likes your opinions. " <---example.

"drawing in money for graal."
Dude, it's a _classic_ server and I doubt anyone upgrades to play UN.

" I remember why I play graal, and its because i like to spar, pk, talk, maybe play a fun game or two, etc. UN provides great sparring, fun pking, and their CTF is incredibly fun, they inbody timeless interests and aspect."

That sounds all dandy but what part of Graal does not offer sparring, pking, talking "maybe a fun game or two, etc." Just about every other server has a CTF game and it isn't original, refer to Graal 2001. "Timeless interests and aspect"...um...can you name something there that you won't find anywhere else with more?

"As amazing as oasis may be (or any other server), and make you ooh and aah, you will not ooh and aah forever."

Doesn't the same apply for just about everywhere else? Irrelevant.

"Why do you think Levi has been selling the same generic jeans for over 100 years and Paco Jeans died when so popular at a time?"

How in the blue hell do you make a comparison between a real life, huge industry with so many other aspects and outside influences? Dude, THINK.

Everything else is addressed in my previous post but I don't think you're even capable of understanding simple concepts.

[bo0ey]

Originally posted by Lance
Wouldn't you want people to have the best first impression of Graal, rather than (as Chris pointed out) a dating service, a hotbed of insults, attacks, and inconsiderate players? I would.

That's what Graal itself is, you can't change that. You yourself are a good example of this.

And the only way to give graal a good impression for new players would be to make something worth playing on Graal, which at this point there is not, so the real argument is not about first impressions with you guys, you are jealous or are mad about something, grow up.

[Lance]

Originally posted by bo0ey
I think Graal2001 shouldn't be in the classic list

It isn't.

because frankly it sucks

It doesn't.

and is not going to go anywhere.

It will.

Classic sucks too, who cares if its history, so was Nixon, and we don't love him now because he was here in the past.

Cute reference, but it's so full of fallacies that I don't know where to begin.

Please note that serverbashing is not permitted. Keep that in mind before posting more foolish tripe. Have a nice day!

[Lance]

Originally posted by bo0ey

That's what Graal itself is, you can't change that. You yourself are a good example of this.

I'm a dating service? Whoaaa.

You completely missed the point, though. ^_^

And the only way to give graal a good impression for new players would be to make something worth playing on Graal, which at this point there is not,

But you said UN was worth playing. Zing!

so the real argument is not about first impressions with you guys, you are jealous or are mad about something, grow up.

You have such a lack of an idea of what you're talking about, it's apalling.

[bo0ey]

Originally posted by --Chris--
"Chris, you speak as if quality is the only issue and it's irrevelvant to what the players want. "

You really have no idea what the hell you're talking about. That makes absolutely no sense. Quality = everything, gameplay included. Can you even define irrelevant?

Ok, now you're just being a *******. Try thinking before you post. There is such a thing as quality, and such a thing as comfort.

For example, I purchased a CD/MP3 player which worked fine,
but had a little static in the playback of audio. I paid 40$ for it,
but I could have dished out double and bought a high class
player.. Want to know why I didn't, even though I had the money
and it would have been no problem? Because I was more comfortable with the one I was buying. Quality doesn't matter,
its what people want that is important. So start using your brain
and quit being a dipstick.

[syltburk]

Originally posted by Lance


It will.

how do you know that??? Graal2001 have had meny chances know and they havnt succed, they wont again. I can tell it people will go online and it will probably have the highest player count in a few days, but later people will leave, as they did before.

[bo0ey]

Originally posted by Lance


I'm a dating service? Whoaaa.

No, you're a *******. Your way of thinking strikes me as idiotic.

But you said UN was worth playing. Zing!

No I didn't, that was Kristi. *****. I said UN was popular.
So again I will reiterate, you're a *******.

You have such a lack of an idea of what you're talking about, it's apalling.

........ HAHAHAHAHhahahahaha...

[Lance]

My apologies if you consider logic to be idiotic.

I consider willful ignorance to be idiotic.

With that said, I hope you enjoy your blissful life.

[syltburk]

Originally posted by Lance
My apologies if you consider logic to be idiotic.

Some times yes.
But i havn't seen anyone being logic so far, where

[bo0ey]

Originally posted by Lance
My apologies if you consider logic to be idiotic.

I consider willful ignorance to be idiotic.

With that said, I hope you enjoy your blissful life.

k, I'll take that as a white flag.
Gg. :grin:

Incase you are unable to understand what I meant by
white flag... White flag = surrender. I figured I had better
explain it, seeing how you completely screwed up at comprehending
the other posts.

[syltburk]

Lance would never retire as he cannot acept fact.

[--Chris--]

"'I think Graal2001 shouldn't be in the classic list because frankly it sucks and is not going to go anywhere. Classic sucks too, who cares if its history, so was Nixon, and we don't love him now because he was here in the past. UN is the most popular playerworld, 'nuff said. It should stay in classic tab. Any playerworld that keeps a constant 30 players or higher should stay in the classic tab. Others need to rethink their plans and have some more work done."

Graal 2001 offers more than most PWs. Kingdoms, a good economy, many mini-games. Most PWs just happens to use all of their ideas, refer to; dolls, hats. It doesn't "suck", it just consistantly need about 60+ players to be ran efficiently. Classic does kind of suck but it's a "Stefan server" for one, so it stays and it still offers more content than just about every PW (see all those quest and NPCs?) UN, Delteria, whatnot are all Classic rip offs with stolen 2k1 concepts and at a much lower standard when you really look at it. Variety is neccessary, 2k1 offers both economy and kingdoms/rping and lots of originality (like bomys and their bodies.) The reason why it doesn't thrive is because of the amount of things on the tab with the playerbase cycle I mentioned in a previous post using UN.

As for your flawed, poor excuse for a point using a silly comparison to a radio, I'd just quote Tseng/Lance:

"You have such a lack of an idea of what you're talking about, it's apalling."

"it's so full of fallacies that I don't know where to begin. "

[zell12]

Anyway, the topic is about the rented playerworlds that have 0 players, not about Lance being Manager of Graal2001.

Oh Chris, why do you make big long quote-replies (without adding the quotes brackets) and reply to every 2-3 lines someone posts?

[--Chris--]

I add quotation marks, that's sufficient.

I like to address things specifically.

[zell12]

People carry their points across their whole message. So sometimes, most times, you are only addressing half their point.

[--Chris--]

Er...I address each point individually and usually their entire message. Why are you posting this in this thread or on the forums at all?

[Proteus_XP]

Anyway,

If someone decides to purchase a server and development it in any legitimate way they want to, they're completely entitled to that: no individual or playerworld itself should be isolated and singled out because some kid comes along, parsimoniously rating its quality and conceptual method. In the end, Graal in and of itself is a concept that can only be expanded but so much in ANY playerworld before becoming completely intangible to the engine altogether. Furthermore, the audience of this GAME should be considered: there is a predominate number of pre-teens/teenagers who play this game, and -- hypothetically -- if they were to purchase a server, they would center it on logical, common factors including personal perference, which will ALWAYS be, in some way, contrasted or antagonized by popular inter-playerworld driven propaganda. What's more, the progression of any given server's physical and player volumes is entirely chaotic and unpredictable conclusively, because though a social relationship exists in between playerworlds you can never deicde if the next day one random outsider views a server that some would call substandard, but loves it so much they bring hordes of account-buyers to Graal the very next week and THEY become the new superpower of player population. So that defeats the whole player-potential complex and proves that "bumping", exclusive lists, and weeding out the weak are all spawned from ******* folishness. That's where it stops.

Establishing some twisted server quota based off of snide, derivative analysees that some kid pulled out of their ass is like regrouping the planets in the solar system based off of how they appeal to some random hobo on the street: it doesn't make sense and it's not going to happen: people need to understand that there is a COST associated to owning, orchestrating, and maintaining a massively multiplayer network such as Graal. There are some servers in development that I've seen that I completely adore simply because of the atmosphere and how it feels to play it -- 100 people don't have to feel the same way as I do to sustain this server and keep it open to the public. That's some seriously discriminative bull if its rebuttled. Eliminating the ever-so-important central factor of acquiring capital to continue driving the basis of the game's existence itself is like throwing your alienware off of a 37-story building to see how durable it was -- it's nothing but some randomly conjured experiment that'll do nothing but immediately resolve in loss. How's that for wasting money?

[Milkdude99]

Originally posted by Proteus_XP

Establishing some twisted server quota based off of snide, derivative analysees that some kid pulled out of their ass is like regrouping the planets in the solar system based off of how they appeal to some random hobo on the street: it doesn't make sense and it's not going to happen: people need to understand that there is a COST associated to owning, orchestrating, and maintaining a massively multiplayer network such as Graal. There are some servers in development that I've seen that I completely adore simply because of the atmosphere and how it feels to play it -- 100 people don't have to feel the same way as I do to sustain this server and keep it open to the public. That's some seriously discriminative bull if its rebuttled. Eliminating the ever-so-important central factor of acquiring capital to continue driving the basis of the game's existence itself is like throwing your alienware off of a 37-story building to see how durable it was -- it's nothing but some randomly conjured experiment that'll do nothing but immediately resolve in loss. How's that for wasting money?

I find your off beat yet symmetrical humor a breathe of fresh air among the stale and yet never ending refuse dump you normally see posted here. Bravo!

[--Chris--]

Wow! How ignorant.

"If someone decides to purchase a server and development it in any legitimate way they want to, they're completely entitled to that: no individual or playerworld itself should be isolated and singled out "

What's stopping them? "because some kid comes along, parsimoniously rating its quality and conceptual method." That isn't really a valid reason; how many players like it is dependant on it's quality. Quality doesn't neccessarily imply nicer graphics or so, merely something to offer that players enjoy. What is a PW without a concept?

"Furthermore, the audience of this GAME should be considered: there is a predominate number of pre-teens/teenagers who play this game, and -- hypothetically -- if they were to purchase a server, they would center it on logical, common factors including personal perference, which will ALWAYS be, in some way, contrasted or antagonized by popular inter-playerworld driven propaganda."

Word.

"What's more, the progression of any given server's physical and player volumes is entirely chaotic and unpredictable conclusively, because though a social relationship exists in between playerworlds you can never deicde if the next day one random outsider views a server that some would call substandard, but loves it so much they bring hordes of account-buyers to Graal the very next week and THEY become the new superpower of player population."

"Entirely chaotic and unpredictable"? Take a look around, the player-base is small and people are loyal to certain servers. Not once in Graal history has that happened, sure it'll be all dandy if someone can miraculously add a couple 100 players to the playerbase but not only are the chances of that practically nothing but there are other factos to consider such as people having different preference and the same applying for a quality playerworld. Wouldn't this work better also if new comers got a better first impression by seeing quality PWs?

" So that defeats the whole player-potential complex and proves that "bumping", exclusive lists, and weeding out the weak are all spawned from ******* folishness."

Nice try but not only was this little theory of yours formed through ignorance but it's quite flawed.

"Establishing some twisted server quota based off of snide, derivative analysees that some kid pulled out of their ass is like regrouping the planets in the solar system based off of how they appeal to some random hobo on the street: it doesn't make sense and it's not going to happen:"

Yes, it was just as unthought as this response of yours. Like I mentioned before, this is the current system - I just want to see less junk on the tab. Either way you take it, it is going to happen when those UC PWs like Oasis are released. I'm not just "some kid", my word happens to be more recognised than many on this game and you don't know what I've done for myself in life Secondly, what kind of fool calls someone "kid" when they're merely a year older? What's up with all these extreme, obscur comparisons X_x

"people need to understand that there is a COST associated to owning, orchestrating, and maintaining a massively multiplayer network such as Graal."

What stopped them from covering it before PW hosting? What's stopping the people from buying more UC PWs?

"There are some servers in development that I've seen that I completely adore simply because of the atmosphere and how it feels to play it -- 100 people don't have to feel the same way as I do to sustain this server and keep it open to the public."

Many servers do require 100 people to feel the same way hence my suggestion. I look forward to many of the UC PWs myself.


"That's some seriously discriminative bull if its rebuttled. Eliminating the ever-so-important central factor of acquiring capital to continue driving the basis of the game's existence itself is like throwing your alienware off of a 37-story building"

Refer to "What's stopping the people from buying more UC PWs?"
Also note that's a rhetorical question and if you haven't caught on yet; the answer is "nothing."

"to see how durable it was"

Where the hell did that part come from?

"it's nothing but some randomly conjured experiment that'll do nothing but immediately resolve in loss."

Yes, it's a randomly conjured experiment that's been going on and managing quite well for some time now, it totally wasn't logical. Implementing my few changes is beneficial and I believe is more likely to result in greater profits (refer to previous posts.)

"How's that for wasting money?"

*Applaud*

"I find your off beat yet symmetrical humor a breathe of fresh air among the stale and yet never ending refuse dump you normally see posted here. Bravo!" - MG

I agree but it's sad his colorful vocabulary couldn't help him prove a valid point.

[Proteus_XP]

You've found the right one to screw with.

I won't quote any of your half-assed, desperate attempts to redeem yourself, seeing it was completely SELF-CENTERED to reply to a post intended to shut up cumulative arguments with absolutely no merit. Agitation.

I've proven my point as 100% of anyone who reads anything I write, albeit articles or eloquated posts in a pathetic forum where KIDS take on forces they cannot win versus -- especially since all of their perspective is derived from their own biased, premature, and underdeveloped minds, will agree. I am essentially always right about everything. This is fact - don't argue against it. I don't even NEED to establish "a valid point" to completely destroy that retarded, deformed excuse for a playerworld evaluation system. It's starting to hurt.

Now, let's say that in some bizzare planet called Hoocares, I would want to waste my time by calling individual people out in my rages: if I REALLY wanted to direct my condenscending wrath on some doltish, crooked, small-minded twit, whose arguments are lame, REPETITIVE, and suspect, lacking any implict form of parallelism, who dissects contexts they cannot understand, who uses apostrophes more than premature girls take the pill to plea inconsistent, subjective dribble, and who completely contradicted themselves by agreeing with the very definitive clause of my entire argument, while negating everything else with grammatical atrocities and a lack of englightenment, then I would just call out there name and say it. It's not like I, of all people, don't have the charming impertinence to do it. Feel the burn.

Realize that EVERYTHING and I mean absolutely EVERYTHING has a progress. It's a logical law that applies to anything real or abstract. Realize that COSTS are progressive and that money didn't fall out of the ****ing sky INTO STEFAN AND UNIXMAD'S HANDS SAYING, "PLEASE SPEND ME ON GRAAL!" YOU ******* BOY. Realize that antagonizing a server purchaser (i.e., customer of Graal's services whereas he/she is subjected to Graal's ToS and are now in a legal agreement) LOOSES MONEY as any random slave chimpanzee in Libya could tell you that. This is why corporations, in general, of any volume, spend LOTS of MONEY on advertising, and making their SERVICES APPEAL TO CUSTOMERS. This is why most mature companies don't have some adolescent chairman who cannot keep track of his saliva; and, finally, this is why you should keep your mouth shut and your tail in between your legs when you're corrected about something, being careful not to throw yourself into nasty little traps like me that life will give you. They really hurt.

Now take these points and shove them.

[davidpsy]

All right children calm down calm down, its time for your nap .

[haunter]

Chris, please atleast bold-i-fy what you're quoting from the other person! @_@; It'll just be alot easier to understand that way... <3

[Lance]

Originally posted by Proteus_XP
You've found the right one to screw with.

Hey, buddy, what's up?

I won't quote any of your half-assed, desperate attempts to redeem yourself, seeing it was completely SELF-CENTERED to reply to a post intended to shut up cumulative arguments with absolutely no merit. Agitation.

Mmm. To me, it seemed like your intentions were just to make as big a fool of yourself as you possibly could.

Maybe I'm wrong - it could have been unintentional.

I've proven my point as 100% of anyone who reads anything I write, albeit articles or eloquated posts in a pathetic forum where KIDS take on forces they cannot win versus -- especially since all of their perspective is derived from their own biased, premature, and underdeveloped minds, will agree.

I don't agree. Cool. 100%, indeed.

I am essentially always right about everything.

You were just disproved, 'sir.'

This is fact - don't argue against it.

Snicker.

I don't even NEED to establish "a valid point" to completely destroy that retarded, deformed excuse for a playerworld evaluation system.

Ah, so you will argue against it with invalid points? Excellent choice of debating strategy.

It's starting to hurt.

You said it, brother.

Now, let's say that in some bizzare planet called Hoocares, I would want to waste my time by calling individual people out in my rages:

Let's say that someone is so completely out in left field that they feel motivated to make up zome bizarre hypothetical situation to somehow explain their own hypocrisy:

Wait. Hey! It's true!

Feel the burn.

I'm feelin' it, man. That little tingly feeling that I get when someone completely ignores logic can so well be described as a burning feeling, too.

Realize that EVERYTHING and I mean absolutely EVERYTHING has a progress.

A 'progress'? I highly doubt that you intended to say that everything shows a steady improvement, especially considering your other statements. Perhaps consulting a dictionary (or, alternatively, attempting to use your brain) would assist you?

It's a logical law that applies to anything real or abstract. Realize that COSTS are progressive and that money didn't fall out of the ****ing sky INTO STEFAN AND UNIXMAD'S HANDS SAYING, "PLEASE SPEND ME ON GRAAL!" YOU ******* BOY.

...Wow. Someone may have taken a high school economics course. Emphasis on the may - if you did, it doesn't sound like you paid too much attention.

Realize that antagonizing a server purchaser (i.e., customer of Graal's services whereas he/she is subjected to Graal's ToS and are now in a legal agreement) LOOSES MONEY as any random slave chimpanzee in Libya could tell you that.

The word is loses, by the way.

But, anyway. There's a difference between antagonizing a server and possessing an acceptable standard of rules which the server must abide by.

This is why corporations, in general, of any volume, spend LOTS of MONEY on advertising, and making their SERVICES APPEAL TO CUSTOMERS.

Wow, someone knows something basic about business. I'm so impressed.

This is why most mature companies don't have some adolescent chairman who cannot keep track of his saliva;

What does your all-knowing self have to say about adolescent fools who are a disgrace to humanity? I'd like to hear your autobiography, you know. I could use another good laugh.

and, finally, this is why you should keep your mouth shut and your tail in between your legs when you're corrected about something, being careful not to throw yourself into nasty little traps like me that life will give you.

Shrug. You were just corrected, and you didn't keep your mouth shut and your tail in between your legs, but instead throwing yourself into a nasty little trap of your own creation.

They really hurt.

Do they? You should know, from experience.

Now take these points and shove them.

You're far too dull (and dim) to have a point. Good day.