Finn
-
Posts
1,135 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
25
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Finn
-
I'm sure that saying the ban is bullshit and not showing any form of contrition is a good way to get unbanned. -1 I trust Clorox and if he banned you it wasn't on a whim.
-
Bacta my beloved
-
it's very hard let the professionals like @Mystic and I handle it.
-
What is the standard for getting interview
Finn replied to DirtyDanLIT's topic in Questions & Answers
Must not have liked him enough if they denied him after. -
This is cap, Guac doesn't do anything.
-
No.
-
Woah Woke 212th was the best 212th we ever had!! Mazen and I worked hard to be the wokest battalion on the server, and it showed ;)
-
That's an insult to Mazen.
-
They took the shot.
-
+1 HVO has been effectively dead in every battalion for years now, they need something to better their kit and incentivize people to play them.
-
-1 Not a fan of your behavior after you left, and we only have your word it was a joke, which is what everyone says when they get caught. I think it's been too soon to consider an unban, especially since you don't seem too apologetic about the situation.
-
+1 I think he deserves a second chance!
-
Actually having a WILTOS Dev is really cool!
-
4 HA+ got involved and still this is open? Must be a very complicated case...
-
the cool CT models! I missed them so much!!!
-
It's a feature, not a bug!
-
Big Synergy strikes again!!!11!2!211 Grats on graduating!!
-
212th didn't exactly want him to get an interview either...
-
I would also like to know. It sure looks like this is bias in favor of current leadership, and I would hate to think that the High Command team would be so openly bias towards something as important as BCMD apps.
-
Nice update! (tbh smaller more frequent updates would be awesome!)
-
+1 more ships is good!
-
+1 I love new models
-
You can ask for it too, you know. Saying we shouldn't have something because you were told no years ago is kinda silly
-
This is not what Jayarr told us 2 weeks ago when we talked. When we talked, it was stated that there was a chance we might have to remove a subunit, but that it was likely a compromise could be made in what we remove in order for this to be added. I'm confused why we were led to believe there was a chance we wouldn't be forced to remove a subunit if that was the existing policy.
-
I was under the impression that the server was moving away from battalion standardization. I was also under the impression that a third subunit was ok to have. Can you give some explanation on the policy shift?
-
Who's Online 5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 126 Guests (See full list)
