| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Resident U-Head
|
|
Post subject:
|
 |
|
Gentlemen please, no more leaks or hints until the official release.
Seriously now - last warning.
_________________
  |
|
 Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:37 pm |
|
|
War at Sea Major League
Posts: 1739
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
ok I am sorry, but I had too.
No more though I promise, At least I did not post their Stats
_________________
 |
|
| Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:40 pm |
|
|
Has nothing to say.
AHF Silver-Rated Trader
Posts: 3847
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| extended_range wrote: | | Thank you, and apologies for spoiling stats early. Just gotta say that they really gave the Japanese some interesting abilities! And watch out for that Hellcat! |
Hey!!!!
You're the one who posted the list on the Gleemax boards, no?
_________________
I have to make a new sig because my old one is too wide for this new look... |
|
| Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:42 pm |
|
|
Resident U-Head
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
No, no you didn't have to 
Anyway (and I hope everyone concerned reads this), anybody else who leaks -or announces their intention to leak- information about the unreleased units can expect a temporary ban, lasting until the official release.
With all due respect to ND, I think we've been far too lenient already.
_________________
|
|
| Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:46 pm |
|
|
War at Sea Major League
Posts: 1739
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| EvilKobra wrote: | No, no you didn't have to
|
please don't Ban Me, I have a Tourny to run
Besides those are the only 2 Units I have any Knowledge on.
So you won't here anything from me on the Subject any More
So How Bout those Cowboys
_________________
|
|
| Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:56 pm |
|
|
War at Sea Major League
Posts: 1739
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
YOU Stay  , because you just  from the current conversation that has to deal with SET II.
I Believe Without seeing any SA's that the SET II List is Pretty Good. Could be better, and Also could be alot Worse.
JPN's Navy, even without the lack of a "NEW" Fleet Carrier has gotten a Pretty good Boost. Long Lance Fleets are going to be VERY Deadly. Especially with:
3 Different DD's to choose from,2 Dif. Light Cruisers, 3 Heavy Cruisers,
2 Battle Cruisers, A "REAL" BB, and 2 Heavy BB's. They Should of given us Soyru (sp) instead. 3 New Planes is Nice. in total 7 Planes to choose from. I think Japan is Shaping Up quite nicely.
I think they got the Kriegsmarine just about Spot on IMO.
The Hellcat could have waited.
Italy just went on Steroids.
UK, If you consider HMAS,HMCS, they got a real nice Bump in Numbers also. Glad to see a Level Bomber for UK and US finally.
I Love it and Can't wait for my 3 cases. 
_________________
|
|
| Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:13 pm |
|
|
War at Sea Major League
Posts: 1739
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
You erased it HA
_________________
|
|
| Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:14 pm |
|
|
Huskers 17-Wildcats 3, Big XII North Champions
Posts: 1081
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| EvilKobra wrote: | No, no you didn't have to
Anyway (and I hope everyone concerned reads this), anybody else who leaks -or announces their intention to leak- information about the unreleased units can expect a temporary ban, lasting until the official release.
With all due respect to ND, I think we've been far too lenient already. |
Firstly, ND himself said that he only promised not to post the gallery for set II, not necessarily restricting any other info from being released, so I think that threatening a temporary ban for releasing information is a bit over the line.
While it may only be 2 days or so away til a full disclosure and thus information flow is not necessarily going to be affected that much, I think your attitude regarding this issue is troubling. |
|
| Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:16 pm |
|
|
Resident U-Head
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Bondboy wrote: | Firstly, ND himself said that he only promised not to post the gallery for set II, not necessarily restricting any other info from being released, so I think that threatening a temporary ban for releasing information is a bit over the line.
While it may only be 2 days or so away til a full disclosure and thus information flow is not necessarily going to be affected that much, I think your attitude regarding this issue is troubling. |
Objection duly noted. I apologise for the harshness; frankly I don't find it pleasant to have to resort to these methods either, but nevertheless I fully believe the situation merits it. I will not get into a semantics argument about what ND did or did not promise, or about the letter vs. the spirit of the agreement. Suffice it to say the admins' policy at present is "no leaks, no hints".
You may be aware that numerous complaints have been received regarding people 'in the know' making comments or hints that frankly spoiled the excitement of those in the dark. We are doing our best to put an end to that - and, as you said, it's only a couple of days before all this is over and the tensions dissipate.
Naturally, if you are unsatisfied with this explanation and/or feel that my behaviour is inappropriate, you are welcome to file a complaint with ND upon his return. Rest assured it will be taken seriously.
_________________
|
|
| Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:34 pm |
|
|
Huskers 17-Wildcats 3, Big XII North Champions
Posts: 1081
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| EvilKobra wrote: | | Bondboy wrote: | Firstly, ND himself said that he only promised not to post the gallery for set II, not necessarily restricting any other info from being released, so I think that threatening a temporary ban for releasing information is a bit over the line.
While it may only be 2 days or so away til a full disclosure and thus information flow is not necessarily going to be affected that much, I think your attitude regarding this issue is troubling. |
Objection duly noted. I apologise for the harshness; frankly I don't find it pleasant to have to resort to these methods either, but nevertheless I fully believe the situation merits it. I will not get into a semantics argument about what ND did or did not promise, or about the letter vs. the spirit of the agreement. Suffice it to say the admins' policy at present is "no leaks, no hints".
You may be aware that numerous complaints have been received regarding people 'in the know' making comments or hints that frankly spoiled the excitement of those in the dark. We are doing our best to put an end to that - and, as you said, it's only a couple of days before all this is over and the tensions dissipate.
Naturally, if you are unsatisfied with this explanation and/or feel that my behaviour is inappropriate, you are welcome to file a complaint with ND upon his return. Rest assured it will be taken seriously. |
I have no desire to file any complaint, but merely wished to point out that I think that threatening a ban, I feel, has crossed a line and is not in the general amiable spirit of this forum. I am aware that people are not and have not been happy both with information being leaked and thus "spoiled" and also with some of those "in the know" being a bit tactless with regards to their reminders that they knew what was in the set list while most didn't. And that is why the one thread I have initiated regarding the set II list I did note a spoiler warning in both the thread title and in the opening sentences of the thread as to note spoil it for those who have chosen to not have revealed to them the set II contents.
I also agree a semantics argument very rarely ever accomplishes anything satisfactorily, however I would say that I think it is perhaps a bit foolish for the admins to try and enforce a policy of "no leaks, no hints" for the whole board. I can definitely understand if the admins do not wish for any leaks or hints to come from the forumini in an official capacity, however I do think that it is both not inherently the forumini's responsibility, nor is it its inherent right to squelch info from being leaked from other sources. And if you disagree, than I would direct you to the obvious example of the whole set list being posted once it was released outside of the control of the Forumini admins.
I understand I am not privy to the all of the discussion and decisions made by the admins and the discussions that have been had with RB, thus I would not go so far as to say that your policy is completely without base, however from what I have seen and read, it seems that perhaps a better way of dealing with this issue is to not release any information from the admins, however simply mandate that if any information is to be posted regarding set II, it should simply contain a spoiler notation in the thread. I think this would be a far more reasonable and friendly way of both not breaking any agreement that the admins have with WOTC, and also not having to resort to harsh tactics. To a certain extent though, anyone coming to this forum expecting not to read spoilers is not reasoning very well since this whole forum has been dedicated to spoilers. What we have been doing since the formation of the forum is to gather any intel regarding the upcoming sets and discussing them. I realize that's no the sole purpose of the general discussion forum, but that has been a main purpose. Thus to a great extent, anyone who didn't want to be "spoiled" should have been avoiding the General Discussion forum this whole time.
Perhaps it might be better to create a new Set III forum in the future to deal specifically with Set III, and thus there wont be this tension between people who wish not to be spoiled and those who do as there will be no ambiguity about the purpose behind the forum. And while, as I said, the tension will dissapate in a few days when all this is rendered moot, I think forming a more coherent, manageable, and friendly policy for dealing with set leaks like this would behoove the admins as in all likelihood we will be facing a repeat situation for Set III and IV and beyond. |
|
| Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:55 pm |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 388
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Bondboy wrote: |
Perhaps it might be better to create a new Set III forum in the future to deal specifically with Set III, and thus there wont be this tension between people who wish not to be spoiled and those who do as there will be no ambiguity about the purpose behind the forum. And while, as I said, the tension will dissapate in a few days when all this is rendered moot, I think forming a more coherent, manageable, and friendly policy for dealing with set leaks like this would behoove the admins as in all likelihood we will be facing a repeat situation for Set III and IV and beyond. |
I think a separate Spoiler Sub-Forum would be an excellent idea. It would allow us to collect spoilers without cluttering the main forum. |
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:12 am |
|
|
Resident U-Head
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Bondboy wrote: | I have no desire to file any complaint, but merely wished to point out that I think that threatening a ban, I feel, has crossed a line and is not in the general amiable spirit of this forum. I am aware that people are not and have not been happy both with information being leaked and thus "spoiled" and also with some of those "in the know" being a bit tactless with regards to their reminders that they knew what was in the set list while most didn't. And that is why the one thread I have initiated regarding the set II list I did note a spoiler warning in both the thread title and in the opening sentences of the thread as to note spoil it for those who have chosen to not have revealed to them the set II contents.
I also agree a semantics argument very rarely ever accomplishes anything satisfactorily, however I would say that I think it is perhaps a bit foolish for the admins to try and enforce a policy of "no leaks, no hints" for the whole board. I can definitely understand if the admins do not wish for any leaks or hints to come from the forumini in an official capacity, however I do think that it is both not inherently the forumini's responsibility, nor is it its inherent right to squelch info from being leaked from other sources. And if you disagree, than I would direct you to the obvious example of the whole set list being posted once it was released outside of the control of the Forumini admins.
I understand I am not privy to the all of the discussion and decisions made by the admins and the discussions that have been had with RB, thus I would not go so far as to say that your policy is completely without base, however from what I have seen and read, it seems that perhaps a better way of dealing with this issue is to not release any information from the admins, however simply mandate that if any information is to be posted regarding set II, it should simply contain a spoiler notation in the thread. I think this would be a far more reasonable and friendly way of both not breaking any agreement that the admins have with WOTC, and also not having to resort to harsh tactics. To a certain extent though, anyone coming to this forum expecting not to read spoilers is not reasoning very well since this whole forum has been dedicated to spoilers. What we have been doing since the formation of the forum is to gather any intel regarding the upcoming sets and discussing them. I realize that's no the sole purpose of the general discussion forum, but that has been a main purpose. Thus to a great extent, anyone who didn't want to be "spoiled" should have been avoiding the General Discussion forum this whole time.
Perhaps it might be better to create a new Set III forum in the future to deal specifically with Set III, and thus there wont be this tension between people who wish not to be spoiled and those who do as there will be no ambiguity about the purpose behind the forum. And while, as I said, the tension will dissapate in a few days when all this is rendered moot, I think forming a more coherent, manageable, and friendly policy for dealing with set leaks like this would behoove the admins as in all likelihood we will be facing a repeat situation for Set III and IV and beyond. |
I appreciate your constructive and well-reasoned response. Also I did note your spoiler warning in the BB thread, that too was a welcome gesture.
The actual nature of the agreement with WotC, as far as I have understood it, is that we will do our best to prevent leaked info to be posted in the foruMINI prior to the official release. Obviously, the set list was a matter of fait accompli - once disseminated externally, there was no longer any purpose to the secrecy. But to the extent that it is in our hands to prevent our users from leaking unreleased information, we have pledged to do so.
May I also remind you that the release of any such information is, directly or indirectly, in breach of a non-disclosure agreement with WotC, implicit or explicit. Not a criminal offense, to be sure, but one which may give rise to legal liabilities nonetheless.
Finally, I would like to make it clear that the strict policy I announced is solely my own initiative, taken in the absence of ND. Even if you may strongly disapprove of it, please do not think any less of the other admins and/or mods, who are all very capable and dedicated individuals with irreproachable attitudes.
_________________
|
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:23 am |
|
|
War at Sea Major League
Posts: 1739
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| EvilKobra wrote: | | ... please do not think any less of the other admins and/or mods, who are all very capable and dedicated individuals with irreproachable attitudes. |
Irreproachable Attitudes? I don't know if I should be offended or Not?
 
_________________
|
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:27 am |
|
|
Posts: 188
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I've seen the stats of the units as a favor before many of us but won't tell before friday. You will see them on friday.
But I want to say one thing, I've got nothing against american fleet they have a power of production which is more than any other nation so we can consider that their units cost less in that terms.
But the powers US units get for their cost is becoming ridiculous toward other nations. Just take a look to the Cleveland in open salvo 6 and check the real efficiency of radars at that time of history, then tell me if the Cleveland powers worth really 16pts.
Don't be worried for the other nations unit, there are playable ones against another and not "uber". Except possibly for the Jean Bart which is yuk! for it's cost. Take a Dunkerque instead! You will see on friday. I wish you won't draw one because it has no interest (its stats are not worth its points) except for collection. And that's not because I'm french . Trully, you'll decide by yourselves. |
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:29 am |
|
|
Huskers 17-Wildcats 3, Big XII North Champions
Posts: 1081
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
That sucks. I was hoping that minus 1 turret, that the Jean Bart would be costed as an expensive cruiser. But it seems like that may not be the case. Alas.
_________________
 |
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:56 am |
|
|
Posts: 7
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Sorry for posting spoilers...I'm new to these boards and did not know that there was a ban on spoilers on this site...I'm also a SWM player, and the boards are usually rampant with spoilers because people can't wait, I just assumed it was the same with WAS. I'll stop posting spoilers from now on. At least I didn't post all the stats and SA's right away!!! Dodged a bullet there!!! |
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:25 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5706
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
 Don't stress it.
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:01 am |
|
|
Posts: 6599
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Gross Admiral Raeder wrote: | 
we gots our Flotilla leader |
yo and compare it with the Us one...
yamato/zeke/I-19 fleet all other is sorry crap if you fight against the USN.
_________________
YVAN EHT NIOJ ! |
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:51 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5706
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
You know, I'm kinda sick of hearing that. Is the US tough? Sure. But I'm the #1 in the store league, and I've been fighting US fleets all along. It's NOT impossible to beat them, you just have to know how to use your units, and realize that NOTHING is expendable in the pursuit of victory.
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:00 am |
|
|
War at Sea Major League
Posts: 1739
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I love Beating US Fleets. Happens more often then not
_________________
|
|
| Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:16 am |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Donations are used for Forumini Olympics awards (donations admin: Aquarius)
| Forumini Gallery |
 |
|
