Scioly.org

AlphaTauri wrote:

illusionist wrote:WOAH. NO ONE TARGETS CHALKER OR CHALKER7. I WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS.

Alpha's ghost wrote:If you're not going to stand for that, I highly suggest you sit down.

Too late. I'm already standing.

/me pushes illusionist down.
There now you are laying.
Why are you standing while by the computer?
Don't most people sit down???

Littleboy wrote:/me pushes illusionist down.
There now you are laying.
Why are you standing while by the computer?
Don't most people sit down???

I'm cool like that.

Thanks to east for this great idea.
New rule that I think should be implemented in the next few games: All officers must have either a.) won a game or b.) played at least x (possibly 5?) games and have protected for x% of the clues.

Littleboy wrote:Thanks to east for this great idea.
New rule that I think should be implemented in the next few games: All officers must have either a.) won a game or b.) played at least x (possibly 5?) games and have protected for x% of the clues.

And get sassys' who will be online more then once every three days.

Littleboy wrote:Thanks to east for this great idea.
New rule that I think should be implemented in the next few games: All officers must have either a.) won a game or b.) played at least x (possibly 5?) games and have protected for x% of the clues.

Your wording is ambiguous, but I read it as no new people can ever be officers and if someone loses their privileges once (by protecting under x%), they can never regain it.

I don't think the problem you guys are having with the game is going to be solved by adding more rules, because the problem is there are too many rules and too many people caught up in loopholes and winning and weird stuff like that.

The game is intended to be fun and intellectually challenging. It has since become a game that is all about winning and if you didn't win, then clearly someone cheated. Eh, it's been better lately but it has been frustrating to watch people complain about clues that I think are perfectly acceptable, if people actually put the effort into the game that they used to. Just remember that this game is all for fun. There's nothing to be gained or lost by winning or losing. Sometimes you get that officer that spends all their time in the donut shop.

Squanto wrote:

Littleboy wrote:Thanks to east for this great idea.
New rule that I think should be implemented in the next few games: All officers must have either a.) won a game or b.) played at least x (possibly 5?) games and have protected for x% of the clues.

Your wording is ambiguous, but I read it as no new people can ever be officers and if someone loses their privileges once (by protecting under x%), they can never regain it.

Yeah, I am really against this idea (not only because it excludes me from playing.... but....... it doesn't seem that fair to others.)

Squanto wrote:

Littleboy wrote:Thanks to east for this great idea.
New rule that I think should be implemented in the next few games: All officers must have either a.) won a game or b.) played at least x (possibly 5?) games and have protected for x% of the clues.

Your wording is ambiguous, but I read it as no new people can ever be officers and if someone loses their privileges once (by protecting under x%), they can never regain it.

Thats why I said next few games.

Yea, I guess its not the greatest idea.

Squanto wrote:

Littleboy wrote:Thanks to east for this great idea.
New rule that I think should be implemented in the next few games: All officers must have either a.) won a game or b.) played at least x (possibly 5?) games and have protected for x% of the clues.

Your wording is ambiguous, but I read it as no new people can ever be officers and if someone loses their privileges once (by protecting under x%), they can never regain it.

Unless you've won a game

Jk I'm retired.