Can someone talk to Jerry and find out if he's interested at all in
running the BOTE?  Once we have a clear indication of which SysOps
would be interested, then it might be an easy to figure out where to
run it...

    Also, Talon's suggestion on a BOTE, conclusion sounds quite
reasonable.

    -Timbo.

--- In tradewars_2002@y..., "timborulz" <timbo@a...> wrote:
> --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Col Sanders" <colsanders@b...> wrote:
> > Heheh... If Mac really keeps FEN closed, I would be willing to
run
> BOTE.  I
> > had hoped Mac would stick around and run it indefinitely, but I
am
> prepared
> > to run it otherwise.  Don't know if Jerry wants it or not, it
> really is a
> > huge amount of work to run a game that big.  I guess Jerry and I
> can arm
> > wrestle over it or something <G>.
> >
> > Col Sanders
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@e...>
> > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> > > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the
BOTE,
> so no one
> > > can just step in and make a decision.
> > >
> > > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but
I
> think
> > there
> > > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting
> BOTE 2002.
> > >
> > > In no particular order...
> > >
> > > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > >   --  because no single winner could really be decided
> > >
> > > Coastgames
> > >   --  because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> > >
> > > Chicken Coop
> > >   --  because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> > >
> > >
> > > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a
> major
> > > tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken
Coop
> looks like
> > > the logical choice to me.  Of course, I am biased.
> > >
> > > Cherokee
> > > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > > http://tavern.homeip.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@t...]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >
> > >
> > > I'll second that
> > >
> > > about how I would place the game anyway
> > >
> > > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org  <G>
> > >
> > > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW
> players?
> > >
> > > Hekate
> > > hekate@t...
> > > ICQ: 10370329
> > > MSN: twhekate
> > > http://www.twlinks.com
> > > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@p...]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9
> proposal
> > still
> > > stands.
> > >
> > > 1st Place:  Corps 10 / 13
> > > - The two strongest and most active during the final years,
> erm.. months
> > of
> > > the game.  Let them argue where the game is to be played next
> year, if at
> > > all.
> > >
> > > 2nd Place:  Corps 21 / 3
> > > - We initially offered to take second place because the game
was
> in
> > > stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.
It
> still
> > suits
> > > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off
> everyone else
> > > even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> > >
> > > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible
> result
> > > considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all
> the teams.
> > If
> > > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win
> because we have
> > > the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed>  but
> last rules
> > were
> > > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting
third
> place to
> > a
> > > stardock camper with one death.
> > >
> > > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> > > -TK
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@c...>
> > > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > >To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
_________________________________________________________________
> > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

--- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Col Sanders" <colsanders@b...> wrote:
> Heheh... If Mac really keeps FEN closed, I would be willing to run
BOTE.  I
> had hoped Mac would stick around and run it indefinitely, but I am
prepared
> to run it otherwise.  Don't know if Jerry wants it or not, it
really is a
> huge amount of work to run a game that big.  I guess Jerry and I
can arm
> wrestle over it or something <G>.
>
> Col Sanders
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@e...>
> To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
> > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE,
so no one
> > can just step in and make a decision.
> >
> > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I
think
> there
> > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting
BOTE 2002.
> >
> > In no particular order...
> >
> > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> >   --  because no single winner could really be decided
> >
> > Coastgames
> >   --  because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> >
> > Chicken Coop
> >   --  because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> >
> >
> > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a
major
> > tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop
looks like
> > the logical choice to me.  Of course, I am biased.
> >
> > Cherokee
> > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > http://tavern.homeip.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@t...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> > I'll second that
> >
> > about how I would place the game anyway
> >
> > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org  <G>
> >
> > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW
players?
> >
> > Hekate
> > hekate@t...
> > ICQ: 10370329
> > MSN: twhekate
> > http://www.twlinks.com
> > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@p...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9
proposal
> still
> > stands.
> >
> > 1st Place:  Corps 10 / 13
> > - The two strongest and most active during the final years,
erm.. months
> of
> > the game.  Let them argue where the game is to be played next
year, if at
> > all.
> >
> > 2nd Place:  Corps 21 / 3
> > - We initially offered to take second place because the game was
in
> > stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.  It
still
> suits
> > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off
everyone else
> > even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> >
> > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible
result
> > considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all
the teams.
> If
> > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win
because we have
> > the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed>  but
last rules
> were
> > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third
place to
> a
> > stardock camper with one death.
> >
> > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> > -TK
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@c...>
> > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > >To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

Heh, I think editing the ferrengi was his point <G>.  Stock ships, stock
planets, stock ferrengi, if any ferrengi.  And, the rest could be modified.

Col Sanders

----- Original Message -----
From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 6:16 PM
Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001


> Yeh, in that case it doesn't need to "go back" to stock, as it was
> stock under the "I didn't enable gold" definition already.
>
> Dr. Bad
>
> --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Col Sanders" <colsanders@b...> wrote:
> > I think he is referring to what most ops mean when they say stock,
> which is
> > more specifically, stock ships and planets.  All the other settings
> are
> > generally modified to some degree...
> >
> > Col Sanders
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "bdavey3619" <davey@c...>
> > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 6:10 PM
> > Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> > > Define strictly stock. No offense intended, but most sysops don't
> > > have half a clue what strictly stock is- the current BOTE was as
> > > stock as any other game I've seen labelled as stock on a BBS.
> Stock
> > > seems to have been taken to mean "not gold" rather than anything
> > > that's really related to the stock settings in any way... Turns
> are
> > > edited, bust clears are edited, colo regen is edited, port regen
> is
> > > edited, photons are edited (to be turned on), cloak & haz clear
> > > edited, ships per fed are edited, rob/steal delay is edited-
> that's
> > > almost everything that you can edit without gold, yet people still
> > > call that stock. Do you really mean strictly stock or do you mean
> > > your conception of what you'd like strictly stock to be? (which
> seems
> > > to be the definition of stock every other sysop uses....)
> > >
> > > Dr. Bad
> > >
> > > --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "silver_dragon11720"
> > > <silver_dragon11720@y...> wrote:
> > > > I agree here, I think the host system should not be allowed to
> send
> > > a
> > > > team. I also think it should go back to a strictly stock game.
> > > Thats
> > > > just the way I see it. As for who hosts it maybe in future
> runnings
> > > > it could be a drawing or something like that I dont know hehe.
> > > > Silver
> > > > --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Gypsy" <Gypsy@t...> wrote:
> > > > > it should go back to the ORIGINAL rules and setup... i am not
> > > sure
> > > > why this winner decides
> > > > > where its hosted thing was put in anyway, it makes it too
> easy to
> > > > cheat... one of the original
> > > > > ideas of the BOTE was that it be played on NEUTRAL ground with
> > > > completely stock settings
> > > > > except for turns. No edited ferrengal, no extra
> colonists...Along
> > > > with that the host was not
> > > > > allowed to have a team playing. It's not a fluke that the
> > > original
> > > > rules and settings produced a
> > > > > clear winner and that after changes were made tie's and stand-
> > > > offf's started. I still can't figure
> > > > > out who decided it was ok to change the rules of the game
> anyway
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3 Apr 2002 at 16:40, Col Sanders wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to see Mac, as a last parting decree settle it.
> > > Heh.
> > > > I
> > > > > > will abide by his wishes, as BOTE still belongs to him in my
> > > view.
> > > > > > Earlier, before all this hoopla, he and I talked, and he
> asked,
> > > > if it
> > > > > > was draw, what would I want, I told him I would prefer he
> run it
> > > > > > again, given the hell the sysop is often subjected to, but,
> I
> > > > would do
> > > > > > it, if so chosen.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At any rate, your idea seems legitimate to you, if it gets
> > > Mac's
> > > > ok.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Col Sanders
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@e...>
> > > > > > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:29 PM
> > > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ahhh I see. Well then, it makes sense to me to have the 12
> > > > original
> > > > > > members
> > > > > > > of the Coastgames team and the Chicken Coop team decide
> where
> > > to
> > > > > > > host it. And have Mac cast the tiebreaking vote if
> necessary.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cherokee
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Gypsy [mailto:Gypsy@t...]
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:26 PM
> > > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had
> a
> > > > basic
> > > > > > > idea of
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > game, neither of
> > > > > > > them had anything to do with the original rules, setup,
> > > hosting
> > > > or
> > > > > > promotion
> > > > > > > of the game. This
> > > > > > > idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of
> the
> > > > rule
> > > > > > > changes that Mac put in.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at
> twgsdotorg
> > > > for
> > > > > > > > him to see..
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > SG
> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@e...>
> > > > > > > > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of
> the
> > > > BOTE,
> > > > > > > > > so no one can just step in and make a decision.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will
> be,
> > > > but I
> > > > > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > there
> > > > > > > > > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to
> > > > hosting
> > > > > > > > > BOTE 2002.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In no particular order...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > > > > > > > > -- because no single winner could really be decided
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Coastgames
> > > > > > > > > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Chicken Coop
> > > > > > > > > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames
> already
> > > has
> > > > a
> > > > > > > > > major tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the
> way).
> > > > Chicken
> > > > > > > > > Coop looks like the logical choice to me. Of course,
> I am
> > > > > > > > > biased.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Cherokee
> > > > > > > > > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > > > > > > > > http://tavern.homeip.net
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@t...]
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > > > > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'll second that
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > about how I would place the game anyway
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at
> terra.playtw.org <G>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of
> the
> > > TW
> > > > > > > > > players?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hekate
> > > > > > > > > hekate@t...
> > > > > > > > > ICQ: 10370329
> > > > > > > > > MSN: twhekate
> > > > > > > > > http://www.twlinks.com
> > > > > > > > > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > > > > > > > > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@p...]
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > > > > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the
> > > Cloud 9
> > > > > > > > > proposal
> > > > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > > stands.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
> > > > > > > > > - The two strongest and most active during the final
> > > years,
> > > > > > > > > erm.. months
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be
> played
> > > next
> > > > > > > > > year, if at all.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
> > > > > > > > > - We initially offered to take second place because
> the
> > > > game was
> > > > > > > > > in stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am
> > > > anymore.
> > > > > > > > > It still
> > > > > > > > suits
> > > > > > > > > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to
> hold
> > > off
> > > > > > > > > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest
> > > possible
> > > > > > > > > result considering the level of activity and
> dedication
> > > > shown by
> > > > > > > > > all the teams.
> > > > > > > > If
> > > > > > > > > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd
> win
> > > > > > > > > because we have the most remaining players that aren't
> > > <ship
> > > > > > > > > destroyed> but last rules
> > > > > > > > were
> > > > > > > > > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up
> > > getting
> > > > third
> > > > > > > > > place to
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > stardock camper with one death.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better
> idea.
> > > > > > > > > -TK
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@c...>
> > > > > > > > > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > > > >To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > > > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > > > > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > ________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print
> your
> > > > photos:
> > > > > > > > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of
> > > > > > > > Service.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > > >
> > > > > >                            ADVERTISEMENT
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > > Service.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

Yeh, in that case it doesn't need to "go back" to stock, as it was
stock under the "I didn't enable gold" definition already.

Dr. Bad

--- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Col Sanders" <colsanders@b...> wrote:
> I think he is referring to what most ops mean when they say stock,
which is
> more specifically, stock ships and planets.  All the other settings
are
> generally modified to some degree...
>
> Col Sanders
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "bdavey3619" <davey@c...>
> To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 6:10 PM
> Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
> > Define strictly stock. No offense intended, but most sysops don't
> > have half a clue what strictly stock is- the current BOTE was as
> > stock as any other game I've seen labelled as stock on a BBS.
Stock
> > seems to have been taken to mean "not gold" rather than anything
> > that's really related to the stock settings in any way... Turns
are
> > edited, bust clears are edited, colo regen is edited, port regen
is
> > edited, photons are edited (to be turned on), cloak & haz clear
> > edited, ships per fed are edited, rob/steal delay is edited-
that's
> > almost everything that you can edit without gold, yet people still
> > call that stock. Do you really mean strictly stock or do you mean
> > your conception of what you'd like strictly stock to be? (which
seems
> > to be the definition of stock every other sysop uses....)
> >
> > Dr. Bad
> >
> > --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "silver_dragon11720"
> > <silver_dragon11720@y...> wrote:
> > > I agree here, I think the host system should not be allowed to
send
> > a
> > > team. I also think it should go back to a strictly stock game.
> > Thats
> > > just the way I see it. As for who hosts it maybe in future
runnings
> > > it could be a drawing or something like that I dont know hehe.
> > > Silver
> > > --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Gypsy" <Gypsy@t...> wrote:
> > > > it should go back to the ORIGINAL rules and setup... i am not
> > sure
> > > why this winner decides
> > > > where its hosted thing was put in anyway, it makes it too
easy to
> > > cheat... one of the original
> > > > ideas of the BOTE was that it be played on NEUTRAL ground with
> > > completely stock settings
> > > > except for turns. No edited ferrengal, no extra
colonists...Along
> > > with that the host was not
> > > > allowed to have a team playing. It's not a fluke that the
> > original
> > > rules and settings produced a
> > > > clear winner and that after changes were made tie's and stand-
> > > offf's started. I still can't figure
> > > > out who decided it was ok to change the rules of the game
anyway
> > > >
> > > > On 3 Apr 2002 at 16:40, Col Sanders wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I would like to see Mac, as a last parting decree settle it.
> > Heh.
> > > I
> > > > > will abide by his wishes, as BOTE still belongs to him in my
> > view.
> > > > > Earlier, before all this hoopla, he and I talked, and he
asked,
> > > if it
> > > > > was draw, what would I want, I told him I would prefer he
run it
> > > > > again, given the hell the sysop is often subjected to, but,
I
> > > would do
> > > > > it, if so chosen.
> > > > >
> > > > > At any rate, your idea seems legitimate to you, if it gets
> > Mac's
> > > ok.
> > > > >
> > > > > Col Sanders
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@e...>
> > > > > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:29 PM
> > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Ahhh I see. Well then, it makes sense to me to have the 12
> > > original
> > > > > members
> > > > > > of the Coastgames team and the Chicken Coop team decide
where
> > to
> > > > > > host it. And have Mac cast the tiebreaking vote if
necessary.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cherokee
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Gypsy [mailto:Gypsy@t...]
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:26 PM
> > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had
a
> > > basic
> > > > > > idea of
> > > > > a
> > > > > > game, neither of
> > > > > > them had anything to do with the original rules, setup,
> > hosting
> > > or
> > > > > promotion
> > > > > > of the game. This
> > > > > > idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of
the
> > > rule
> > > > > > changes that Mac put in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at
twgsdotorg
> > > for
> > > > > > > him to see..
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > SG
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@e...>
> > > > > > > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of
the
> > > BOTE,
> > > > > > > > so no one can just step in and make a decision.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will
be,
> > > but I
> > > > > > > > think
> > > > > > > there
> > > > > > > > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to
> > > hosting
> > > > > > > > BOTE 2002.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In no particular order...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > > > > > > > -- because no single winner could really be decided
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Coastgames
> > > > > > > > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Chicken Coop
> > > > > > > > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames
already
> > has
> > > a
> > > > > > > > major tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the
way).
> > > Chicken
> > > > > > > > Coop looks like the logical choice to me. Of course,
I am
> > > > > > > > biased.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Cherokee
> > > > > > > > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > > > > > > > http://tavern.homeip.net
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@t...]
> > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > > > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'll second that
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > about how I would place the game anyway
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at
terra.playtw.org <G>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of
the
> > TW
> > > > > > > > players?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hekate
> > > > > > > > hekate@t...
> > > > > > > > ICQ: 10370329
> > > > > > > > MSN: twhekate
> > > > > > > > http://www.twlinks.com
> > > > > > > > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > > > > > > > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@p...]
> > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > > > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the
> > Cloud 9
> > > > > > > > proposal
> > > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > stands.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
> > > > > > > > - The two strongest and most active during the final
> > years,
> > > > > > > > erm.. months
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be
played
> > next
> > > > > > > > year, if at all.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
> > > > > > > > - We initially offered to take second place because
the
> > > game was
> > > > > > > > in stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am
> > > anymore.
> > > > > > > > It still
> > > > > > > suits
> > > > > > > > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to
hold
> > off
> > > > > > > > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest
> > possible
> > > > > > > > result considering the level of activity and
dedication
> > > shown by
> > > > > > > > all the teams.
> > > > > > > If
> > > > > > > > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd
win
> > > > > > > > because we have the most remaining players that aren't
> > <ship
> > > > > > > > destroyed> but last rules
> > > > > > > were
> > > > > > > > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up
> > getting
> > > third
> > > > > > > > place to
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > stardock camper with one death.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better
idea.
> > > > > > > > -TK
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@c...>
> > > > > > > > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > > >To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > > > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > ________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > > > _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print
your
> > > photos:
> > > > > > > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of
> > > > > > > Service.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > >
> > > > >                            ADVERTISEMENT
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > Service.
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

I think he is referring to what most ops mean when they say stock, which is
more specifically, stock ships and planets.  All the other settings are
generally modified to some degree...

Col Sanders

----- Original Message -----
From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 6:10 PM
Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001


> Define strictly stock. No offense intended, but most sysops don't
> have half a clue what strictly stock is- the current BOTE was as
> stock as any other game I've seen labelled as stock on a BBS. Stock
> seems to have been taken to mean "not gold" rather than anything
> that's really related to the stock settings in any way... Turns are
> edited, bust clears are edited, colo regen is edited, port regen is
> edited, photons are edited (to be turned on), cloak & haz clear
> edited, ships per fed are edited, rob/steal delay is edited- that's
> almost everything that you can edit without gold, yet people still
> call that stock. Do you really mean strictly stock or do you mean
> your conception of what you'd like strictly stock to be? (which seems
> to be the definition of stock every other sysop uses....)
>
> Dr. Bad
>
> --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "silver_dragon11720"
> <silver_dragon11720@y...> wrote:
> > I agree here, I think the host system should not be allowed to send
> a
> > team. I also think it should go back to a strictly stock game.
> Thats
> > just the way I see it. As for who hosts it maybe in future runnings
> > it could be a drawing or something like that I dont know hehe.
> > Silver
> > --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Gypsy" <Gypsy@t...> wrote:
> > > it should go back to the ORIGINAL rules and setup... i am not
> sure
> > why this winner decides
> > > where its hosted thing was put in anyway, it makes it too easy to
> > cheat... one of the original
> > > ideas of the BOTE was that it be played on NEUTRAL ground with
> > completely stock settings
> > > except for turns. No edited ferrengal, no extra colonists...Along
> > with that the host was not
> > > allowed to have a team playing. It's not a fluke that the
> original
> > rules and settings produced a
> > > clear winner and that after changes were made tie's and stand-
> > offf's started. I still can't figure
> > > out who decided it was ok to change the rules of the game anyway
> > >
> > > On 3 Apr 2002 at 16:40, Col Sanders wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would like to see Mac, as a last parting decree settle it.
> Heh.
> > I
> > > > will abide by his wishes, as BOTE still belongs to him in my
> view.
> > > > Earlier, before all this hoopla, he and I talked, and he asked,
> > if it
> > > > was draw, what would I want, I told him I would prefer he run it
> > > > again, given the hell the sysop is often subjected to, but, I
> > would do
> > > > it, if so chosen.
> > > >
> > > > At any rate, your idea seems legitimate to you, if it gets
> Mac's
> > ok.
> > > >
> > > > Col Sanders
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@e...>
> > > > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:29 PM
> > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Ahhh I see. Well then, it makes sense to me to have the 12
> > original
> > > > members
> > > > > of the Coastgames team and the Chicken Coop team decide where
> to
> > > > > host it. And have Mac cast the tiebreaking vote if necessary.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cherokee
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Gypsy [mailto:Gypsy@t...]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:26 PM
> > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had a
> > basic
> > > > > idea of
> > > > a
> > > > > game, neither of
> > > > > them had anything to do with the original rules, setup,
> hosting
> > or
> > > > promotion
> > > > > of the game. This
> > > > > idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of the
> > rule
> > > > > changes that Mac put in.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at twgsdotorg
> > for
> > > > > > him to see..
> > > > > >
> > > > > > SG
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@e...>
> > > > > > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> > > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the
> > BOTE,
> > > > > > > so no one can just step in and make a decision.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be,
> > but I
> > > > > > > think
> > > > > > there
> > > > > > > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to
> > hosting
> > > > > > > BOTE 2002.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In no particular order...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > > > > > > -- because no single winner could really be decided
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Coastgames
> > > > > > > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Chicken Coop
> > > > > > > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already
> has
> > a
> > > > > > > major tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way).
> > Chicken
> > > > > > > Coop looks like the logical choice to me. Of course, I am
> > > > > > > biased.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cherokee
> > > > > > > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > > > > > > http://tavern.homeip.net
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@t...]
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll second that
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > about how I would place the game anyway
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org <G>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the
> TW
> > > > > > > players?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hekate
> > > > > > > hekate@t...
> > > > > > > ICQ: 10370329
> > > > > > > MSN: twhekate
> > > > > > > http://www.twlinks.com
> > > > > > > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > > > > > > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@p...]
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the
> Cloud 9
> > > > > > > proposal
> > > > > > still
> > > > > > > stands.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
> > > > > > > - The two strongest and most active during the final
> years,
> > > > > > > erm.. months
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be played
> next
> > > > > > > year, if at all.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
> > > > > > > - We initially offered to take second place because the
> > game was
> > > > > > > in stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am
> > anymore.
> > > > > > > It still
> > > > > > suits
> > > > > > > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold
> off
> > > > > > > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest
> possible
> > > > > > > result considering the level of activity and dedication
> > shown by
> > > > > > > all the teams.
> > > > > > If
> > > > > > > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win
> > > > > > > because we have the most remaining players that aren't
> <ship
> > > > > > > destroyed> but last rules
> > > > > > were
> > > > > > > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up
> getting
> > third
> > > > > > > place to
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > stardock camper with one death.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> > > > > > > -TK
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@c...>
> > > > > > > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > >To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > > _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your
> > photos:
> > > > > > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > > > > Service.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > >
> > > >                            ADVERTISEMENT
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service.
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

Define strictly stock. No offense intended, but most sysops don't
have half a clue what strictly stock is- the current BOTE was as
stock as any other game I've seen labelled as stock on a BBS. Stock
seems to have been taken to mean "not gold" rather than anything
that's really related to the stock settings in any way... Turns are
edited, bust clears are edited, colo regen is edited, port regen is
edited, photons are edited (to be turned on), cloak & haz clear
edited, ships per fed are edited, rob/steal delay is edited- that's
almost everything that you can edit without gold, yet people still
call that stock. Do you really mean strictly stock or do you mean
your conception of what you'd like strictly stock to be? (which seems
to be the definition of stock every other sysop uses....)

Dr. Bad

--- In tradewars_2002@y..., "silver_dragon11720"
<silver_dragon11720@y...> wrote:
> I agree here, I think the host system should not be allowed to send
a
> team. I also think it should go back to a strictly stock game.
Thats
> just the way I see it. As for who hosts it maybe in future runnings
> it could be a drawing or something like that I dont know hehe.
> Silver
> --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Gypsy" <Gypsy@t...> wrote:
> > it should go back to the ORIGINAL rules and setup... i am not
sure
> why this winner decides
> > where its hosted thing was put in anyway, it makes it too easy to
> cheat... one of the original
> > ideas of the BOTE was that it be played on NEUTRAL ground with
> completely stock settings
> > except for turns. No edited ferrengal, no extra colonists...Along
> with that the host was not
> > allowed to have a team playing. It's not a fluke that the
original
> rules and settings produced a
> > clear winner and that after changes were made tie's and stand-
> offf's started. I still can't figure
> > out who decided it was ok to change the rules of the game anyway
> >
> > On 3 Apr 2002 at 16:40, Col Sanders wrote:
> >
> > > I would like to see Mac, as a last parting decree settle it.
Heh.
> I
> > > will abide by his wishes, as BOTE still belongs to him in my
view.
> > > Earlier, before all this hoopla, he and I talked, and he asked,
> if it
> > > was draw, what would I want, I told him I would prefer he run it
> > > again, given the hell the sysop is often subjected to, but, I
> would do
> > > it, if so chosen.
> > >
> > > At any rate, your idea seems legitimate to you, if it gets
Mac's
> ok.
> > >
> > > Col Sanders
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@e...>
> > > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:29 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >
> > >
> > > > Ahhh I see. Well then, it makes sense to me to have the 12
> original
> > > members
> > > > of the Coastgames team and the Chicken Coop team decide where
to
> > > > host it. And have Mac cast the tiebreaking vote if necessary.
> > > >
> > > > Cherokee
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Gypsy [mailto:Gypsy@t...]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:26 PM
> > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had a
> basic
> > > > idea of
> > > a
> > > > game, neither of
> > > > them had anything to do with the original rules, setup,
hosting
> or
> > > promotion
> > > > of the game. This
> > > > idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of the
> rule
> > > > changes that Mac put in.
> > > >
> > > > On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at twgsdotorg
> for
> > > > > him to see..
> > > > >
> > > > > SG
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@e...>
> > > > > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the
> BOTE,
> > > > > > so no one can just step in and make a decision.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be,
> but I
> > > > > > think
> > > > > there
> > > > > > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to
> hosting
> > > > > > BOTE 2002.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In no particular order...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > > > > > -- because no single winner could really be decided
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Coastgames
> > > > > > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chicken Coop
> > > > > > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already
has
> a
> > > > > > major tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way).
> Chicken
> > > > > > Coop looks like the logical choice to me. Of course, I am
> > > > > > biased.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cherokee
> > > > > > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > > > > > http://tavern.homeip.net
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@t...]
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'll second that
> > > > > >
> > > > > > about how I would place the game anyway
> > > > > >
> > > > > > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org <G>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the
TW
> > > > > > players?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hekate
> > > > > > hekate@t...
> > > > > > ICQ: 10370329
> > > > > > MSN: twhekate
> > > > > > http://www.twlinks.com
> > > > > > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > > > > > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@p...]
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the
Cloud 9
> > > > > > proposal
> > > > > still
> > > > > > stands.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
> > > > > > - The two strongest and most active during the final
years,
> > > > > > erm.. months
> > > > > of
> > > > > > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be played
next
> > > > > > year, if at all.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
> > > > > > - We initially offered to take second place because the
> game was
> > > > > > in stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am
> anymore.
> > > > > > It still
> > > > > suits
> > > > > > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold
off
> > > > > > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest
possible
> > > > > > result considering the level of activity and dedication
> shown by
> > > > > > all the teams.
> > > > > If
> > > > > > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win
> > > > > > because we have the most remaining players that aren't
<ship
> > > > > > destroyed> but last rules
> > > > > were
> > > > > > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up
getting
> third
> > > > > > place to
> > > > > a
> > > > > > stardock camper with one death.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> > > > > > -TK
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@c...>
> > > > > > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > >To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> ________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your
> photos:
> > > > > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > >
> > > > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > > > Service.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > >
> > >
> > >                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > >
> > >                            ADVERTISEMENT
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.

I agree here, I think the host system should not be allowed to send a
team. I also think it should go back to a strictly stock game. Thats
just the way I see it. As for who hosts it maybe in future runnings
it could be a drawing or something like that I dont know hehe.
Silver
--- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Gypsy" <Gypsy@t...> wrote:
> it should go back to the ORIGINAL rules and setup... i am not sure
why this winner decides
> where its hosted thing was put in anyway, it makes it too easy to
cheat... one of the original
> ideas of the BOTE was that it be played on NEUTRAL ground with
completely stock settings
> except for turns. No edited ferrengal, no extra colonists...Along
with that the host was not
> allowed to have a team playing. It's not a fluke that the original
rules and settings produced a
> clear winner and that after changes were made tie's and stand-
offf's started. I still can't figure
> out who decided it was ok to change the rules of the game anyway
>
> On 3 Apr 2002 at 16:40, Col Sanders wrote:
>
> > I would like to see Mac, as a last parting decree settle it. Heh.
I
> > will abide by his wishes, as BOTE still belongs to him in my view.
> > Earlier, before all this hoopla, he and I talked, and he asked,
if it
> > was draw, what would I want, I told him I would prefer he run it
> > again, given the hell the sysop is often subjected to, but, I
would do
> > it, if so chosen.
> >
> > At any rate, your idea seems legitimate to you, if it gets Mac's
ok.
> >
> > Col Sanders
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@e...>
> > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:29 PM
> > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> > > Ahhh I see. Well then, it makes sense to me to have the 12
original
> > members
> > > of the Coastgames team and the Chicken Coop team decide where to
> > > host it. And have Mac cast the tiebreaking vote if necessary.
> > >
> > > Cherokee
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Gypsy [mailto:Gypsy@t...]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:26 PM
> > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >
> > >
> > > Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had a
basic
> > > idea of
> > a
> > > game, neither of
> > > them had anything to do with the original rules, setup, hosting
or
> > promotion
> > > of the game. This
> > > idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of the
rule
> > > changes that Mac put in.
> > >
> > > On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:
> > >
> > > > well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
> > > >
> > > > Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at twgsdotorg
for
> > > > him to see..
> > > >
> > > > SG
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@e...>
> > > > To: <tradewars_2002@y...>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the
BOTE,
> > > > > so no one can just step in and make a decision.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be,
but I
> > > > > think
> > > > there
> > > > > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to
hosting
> > > > > BOTE 2002.
> > > > >
> > > > > In no particular order...
> > > > >
> > > > > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > > > > -- because no single winner could really be decided
> > > > >
> > > > > Coastgames
> > > > > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > >
> > > > > Chicken Coop
> > > > > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has
a
> > > > > major tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way).
Chicken
> > > > > Coop looks like the logical choice to me. Of course, I am
> > > > > biased.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cherokee
> > > > > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > > > > http://tavern.homeip.net
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@t...]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll second that
> > > > >
> > > > > about how I would place the game anyway
> > > > >
> > > > > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org <G>
> > > > >
> > > > > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW
> > > > > players?
> > > > >
> > > > > Hekate
> > > > > hekate@t...
> > > > > ICQ: 10370329
> > > > > MSN: twhekate
> > > > > http://www.twlinks.com
> > > > > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > > > > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@p...]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > > > > To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9
> > > > > proposal
> > > > still
> > > > > stands.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
> > > > > - The two strongest and most active during the final years,
> > > > > erm.. months
> > > > of
> > > > > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be played next
> > > > > year, if at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
> > > > > - We initially offered to take second place because the
game was
> > > > > in stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am
anymore.
> > > > > It still
> > > > suits
> > > > > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off
> > > > > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible
> > > > > result considering the level of activity and dedication
shown by
> > > > > all the teams.
> > > > If
> > > > > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win
> > > > > because we have the most remaining players that aren't <ship
> > > > > destroyed> but last rules
> > > > were
> > > > > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting
third
> > > > > place to
> > > > a
> > > > > stardock camper with one death.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> > > > > -TK
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@c...>
> > > > > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > >To: tradewars_2002@y...
> > > > > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
________________________________________________________________
> > > > > _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your
photos:
> > > > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > >
> > > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > > Service.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
> >                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >
> >                            ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.

Hello Gypsy,

Wednesday, April 03, 2002, 15:26:02 PM, you wrote:

G> Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had a basic
G> idea of a game, neither of
G> them had anything to do with the original rules, setup, hosting or
G> promotion of the game. This

Correct.

G> idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of the rule
G> changes that Mac put in.

Not correct. SG dragged BOTE back to life and made sure 3rd annual
happened by contacting me and Zoobar and getting things on the road.
SG suggested FEN to run the 3rd as the winners of the first BOTE
then the 4th was supposed to be run by Intergate not sure who decided
that. But when intergate shut down Zoobar suggested that the 4th BOTE
would be run by the Winning teams BBS or the BBS that was appointed by the
winning team this was put in a post to the ygroups (or egroups as it
still was back then).

G> On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:

>> well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
>>
>> Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at twgsdotorg for him to
>> see..
>>
>> SG
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@...>
>> To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>>
>>
>> > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE, so
>> > no one can just step in and make a decision.
>> >
>> > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I
>> > think
>> there
>> > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting BOTE
>> > 2002.
>> >
>> > In no particular order...
>> >
>> > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
>> > -- because no single winner could really be decided
>> >
>> > Coastgames
>> > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
>> >
>> > Chicken Coop
>> > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
>> >
>> >
>> > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a major
>> > tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop
>> > looks like the logical choice to me. Of course, I am biased.
>> >
>> > Cherokee
>> > The Lost Traders Tavern
>> > http://tavern.homeip.net
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
>> > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>> > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>> >
>> >
>> > I'll second that
>> >
>> > about how I would place the game anyway
>> >
>> > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org <G>
>> >
>> > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?
>> >
>> > Hekate
>> > hekate@...
>> > ICQ: 10370329
>> > MSN: twhekate
>> > http://www.twlinks.com
>> > http://www.playtw.org:90
>> > telnet://terra.playtw.org
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
>> > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>> > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9
>> > proposal
>> still
>> > stands.
>> >
>> > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
>> > - The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm..
>> > months
>> of
>> > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be played next year,
>> > if at all.
>> >
>> > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
>> > - We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
>> > stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore. It
>> > still
>> suits
>> > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off
>> > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
>> >
>> > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
>> > considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the
>> > teams.
>> If
>> > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we
>> > have the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed> but
>> > last rules
>> were
>> > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third
>> > place to
>> a
>> > stardock camper with one death.
>> >
>> > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
>> > -TK

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

it should go back to the ORIGINAL rules and setup... i am not sure why this
winner decides
where its hosted thing was put in anyway, it makes it too easy to cheat... one
of the original
ideas of the BOTE was that it be played on NEUTRAL ground with completely stock
settings
except for turns. No edited ferrengal, no extra colonists...Along with that the
host was not
allowed to have a team playing. It's not a fluke that the original rules and
settings produced a
clear winner and that after changes were made tie's and stand-offf's started. I
still can't figure
out who decided it was ok to change the rules of the game anyway

On 3 Apr 2002 at 16:40, Col Sanders wrote:

> I would like to see Mac, as a last parting decree settle it. Heh. I
> will abide by his wishes, as BOTE still belongs to him in my view.
> Earlier, before all this hoopla, he and I talked, and he asked, if it
> was draw, what would I want, I told him I would prefer he run it
> again, given the hell the sysop is often subjected to, but, I would do
> it, if so chosen.
>
> At any rate, your idea seems legitimate to you, if it gets Mac's ok.
>
> Col Sanders
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@...>
> To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:29 PM
> Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
> > Ahhh I see. Well then, it makes sense to me to have the 12 original
> members
> > of the Coastgames team and the Chicken Coop team decide where to
> > host it. And have Mac cast the tiebreaking vote if necessary.
> >
> > Cherokee
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gypsy [mailto:Gypsy@...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:26 PM
> > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> > Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had a basic
> > idea of
> a
> > game, neither of
> > them had anything to do with the original rules, setup, hosting or
> promotion
> > of the game. This
> > idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of the rule
> > changes that Mac put in.
> >
> > On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:
> >
> > > well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
> > >
> > > Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at twgsdotorg for
> > > him to see..
> > >
> > > SG
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@...>
> > > To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >
> > >
> > > > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE,
> > > > so no one can just step in and make a decision.
> > > >
> > > > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I
> > > > think
> > > there
> > > > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting
> > > > BOTE 2002.
> > > >
> > > > In no particular order...
> > > >
> > > > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > > > -- because no single winner could really be decided
> > > >
> > > > Coastgames
> > > > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> > > >
> > > > Chicken Coop
> > > > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a
> > > > major tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken
> > > > Coop looks like the logical choice to me. Of course, I am
> > > > biased.
> > > >
> > > > Cherokee
> > > > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > > > http://tavern.homeip.net
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > > > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'll second that
> > > >
> > > > about how I would place the game anyway
> > > >
> > > > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org <G>
> > > >
> > > > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW
> > > > players?
> > > >
> > > > Hekate
> > > > hekate@...
> > > > ICQ: 10370329
> > > > MSN: twhekate
> > > > http://www.twlinks.com
> > > > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > > > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > > > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9
> > > > proposal
> > > still
> > > > stands.
> > > >
> > > > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
> > > > - The two strongest and most active during the final years,
> > > > erm.. months
> > > of
> > > > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be played next
> > > > year, if at all.
> > > >
> > > > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
> > > > - We initially offered to take second place because the game was
> > > > in stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.
> > > > It still
> > > suits
> > > > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off
> > > > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> > > >
> > > > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible
> > > > result considering the level of activity and dedication shown by
> > > > all the teams.
> > > If
> > > > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win
> > > > because we have the most remaining players that aren't <ship
> > > > destroyed> but last rules
> > > were
> > > > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third
> > > > place to
> > > a
> > > > stardock camper with one death.
> > > >
> > > > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> > > > -TK
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
> > > > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > > > >To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > > > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________________________________________
> > > > _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > >
> > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > Service.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>                            ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Then put it in the main forum over there. There are rules for sysops to follow for running a League game...some are already posted in the Sysop forum over there also. All settings and such must be known 7 days ahead of time by some means of communication.
 
 
Fuseblown

----- Original Message -----

From: Brandi Valentine

To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 12:15 PM

Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Am I blind?

This isn't lethal lotto specific though... this should concern all league games

At 03:41 AM 4/3/2002 -0500, you wrote:

There's a Lethal Lotto-specific forum over at http://forum.twleague.com. Post any questions you have there and Stonewall will read em. And I'll keep the flamewars from occurring. ;)

 

Fuseblown

 

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

I would like to see Mac, as a last parting decree settle it.  Heh.  I will
abide by his wishes, as BOTE still belongs to him in my view.  Earlier,
before all this hoopla, he and I talked, and he asked, if it was draw, what
would I want, I told him I would prefer he run it again, given the hell the
sysop is often subjected to, but, I would do it, if so chosen.

At any rate, your idea seems legitimate to you, if it gets Mac's ok.

Col Sanders

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@...>
To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:29 PM
Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001


> Ahhh I see.  Well then, it makes sense to me to have the 12 original
members
> of the Coastgames team and the Chicken Coop team decide where to host it.
> And have Mac cast the tiebreaking vote if necessary.
>
> Cherokee
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gypsy [mailto:Gypsy@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:26 PM
> To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
> Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had a basic idea of
a
> game, neither of
> them had anything to do with the original rules, setup, hosting or
promotion
> of the game. This
> idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of the rule changes
> that Mac put in.
>
> On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:
>
> > well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
> >
> > Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at twgsdotorg for him to
> > see..
> >
> > SG
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@...>
> > To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> > > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE, so
> > > no one can just step in and make a decision.
> > >
> > > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I
> > > think
> > there
> > > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting BOTE
> > > 2002.
> > >
> > > In no particular order...
> > >
> > > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > > -- because no single winner could really be decided
> > >
> > > Coastgames
> > > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> > >
> > > Chicken Coop
> > > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> > >
> > >
> > > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a major
> > > tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop
> > > looks like the logical choice to me. Of course, I am biased.
> > >
> > > Cherokee
> > > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > > http://tavern.homeip.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >
> > >
> > > I'll second that
> > >
> > > about how I would place the game anyway
> > >
> > > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org <G>
> > >
> > > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?
> > >
> > > Hekate
> > > hekate@...
> > > ICQ: 10370329
> > > MSN: twhekate
> > > http://www.twlinks.com
> > > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9
> > > proposal
> > still
> > > stands.
> > >
> > > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
> > > - The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm..
> > > months
> > of
> > > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be played next year,
> > > if at all.
> > >
> > > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
> > > - We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
> > > stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore. It
> > > still
> > suits
> > > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off
> > > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> > >
> > > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
> > > considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the
> > > teams.
> > If
> > > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we
> > > have the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed> but
> > > last rules
> > were
> > > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third
> > > place to
> > a
> > > stardock camper with one death.
> > >
> > > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> > > -TK
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
> > > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > > >To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
> >                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >
> >                            ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

Ahhh I see.  Well then, it makes sense to me to have the 12 original members
of the Coastgames team and the Chicken Coop team decide where to host it.
And have Mac cast the tiebreaking vote if necessary.

Cherokee

-----Original Message-----
From: Gypsy [mailto:Gypsy@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 4:26 PM
To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001


Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had a basic idea of a
game, neither of
them had anything to do with the original rules, setup, hosting or promotion
of the game. This
idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of the rule changes
that Mac put in.

On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:

> well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
>
> Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at twgsdotorg for him to
> see..
>
> SG
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@...>
> To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
> > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE, so
> > no one can just step in and make a decision.
> >
> > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I
> > think
> there
> > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting BOTE
> > 2002.
> >
> > In no particular order...
> >
> > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > -- because no single winner could really be decided
> >
> > Coastgames
> > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> >
> > Chicken Coop
> > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> >
> >
> > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a major
> > tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop
> > looks like the logical choice to me. Of course, I am biased.
> >
> > Cherokee
> > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > http://tavern.homeip.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> > I'll second that
> >
> > about how I would place the game anyway
> >
> > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org <G>
> >
> > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?
> >
> > Hekate
> > hekate@...
> > ICQ: 10370329
> > MSN: twhekate
> > http://www.twlinks.com
> > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9
> > proposal
> still
> > stands.
> >
> > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
> > - The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm..
> > months
> of
> > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be played next year,
> > if at all.
> >
> > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
> > - We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
> > stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore. It
> > still
> suits
> > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off
> > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> >
> > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
> > considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the
> > teams.
> If
> > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we
> > have the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed> but
> > last rules
> were
> > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third
> > place to
> a
> > stardock camper with one death.
> >
> > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> > -TK
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
> > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > >To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>                            ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Zoobar isn't the founder of the BOTE, he and Maverick had a basic idea of a
game, neither of
them had anything to do with the original rules, setup, hosting or promotion of
the game. This
idea of the winning team picking the next host was one of the rule changes that
Mac put in.

On 3 Apr 2002 at 15:08, Space Ghost wrote:

> well bote does have a founder...his name is ...
>
> Zoobar and u would be better off posting this at twgsdotorg for him to
> see..
>
> SG
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@...>
> To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
> Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
> > It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE, so
> > no one can just step in and make a decision.
> >
> > I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I
> > think
> there
> > are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting BOTE
> > 2002.
> >
> > In no particular order...
> >
> > Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
> > -- because no single winner could really be decided
> >
> > Coastgames
> > -- because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
> >
> > Chicken Coop
> > -- because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
> >
> >
> > As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a major
> > tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop
> > looks like the logical choice to me. Of course, I am biased.
> >
> > Cherokee
> > The Lost Traders Tavern
> > http://tavern.homeip.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> > I'll second that
> >
> > about how I would place the game anyway
> >
> > but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org <G>
> >
> > cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?
> >
> > Hekate
> > hekate@...
> > ICQ: 10370329
> > MSN: twhekate
> > http://www.twlinks.com
> > http://www.playtw.org:90
> > telnet://terra.playtw.org
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> > To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9
> > proposal
> still
> > stands.
> >
> > 1st Place: Corps 10 / 13
> > - The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm..
> > months
> of
> > the game. Let them argue where the game is to be played next year,
> > if at all.
> >
> > 2nd Place: Corps 21 / 3
> > - We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
> > stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore. It
> > still
> suits
> > the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off
> > everyone else even if it was difficult to gain ground.
> >
> > I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
> > considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the
> > teams.
> If
> > the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we
> > have the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed> but
> > last rules
> were
> > obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third
> > place to
> a
> > stardock camper with one death.
> >
> > That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> > -TK
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
> > >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > >To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> > >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> > >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>                            ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

cuz everyone knows it was a standoff between Coastgames and Chickencoop



Hekate
hekate@...
ICQ: 10370329
MSN: twhekate
http://www.twlinks.com
http://www.playtw.org:90
telnet://terra.playtw.org



-----Original Message-----
From: Brandi Valentine [mailto:brandi@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 12:07 PM
To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001


If this bote doesn't come to a decision and Mac should leave the twgs off,
why don't we either go back to last years winners since this year never
finished and/or start new.. start bote over, take a vote and let members
from this years remaining corps make the final decision ......

At 02:50 PM 4/3/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE, so no one
>can just step in and make a decision.
>
>I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I think there
>are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting BOTE 2002.
>
>In no particular order...
>
>Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
>   --  because no single winner could really be decided
>
>Coastgames
>   --  because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
>
>Chicken Coop
>   --  because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
>
>
>As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a major
>tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop looks like
>the logical choice to me.  Of course, I am biased.
>
>Cherokee
>The Lost Traders Tavern
>http://tavern.homeip.net
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
>To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
>I'll second that
>
>about how I would place the game anyway
>
>but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org  <G>
>
>cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?
>
>Hekate
>hekate@...
>ICQ: 10370329
>MSN: twhekate
>http://www.twlinks.com
>http://www.playtw.org:90
>telnet://terra.playtw.org
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
>To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
>
>Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9 proposal still
>stands.
>
>1st Place:  Corps 10 / 13
>- The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm.. months of
>the game.  Let them argue where the game is to be played next year, if at
>all.
>
>2nd Place:  Corps 21 / 3
>- We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
>stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.  It still
suits
>the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off everyone else
>even if it was difficult to gain ground.
>
>I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
>considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the teams.
If
>the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we have
>the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed>  but last rules
were
>obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third place to a
>stardock camper with one death.
>
>That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
>-TK
>
>
>
> >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
> >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> >To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> >
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
>http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>---
>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]


---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

----- Original Message -----

From: Brandi Valentine

To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 12:15 PM

Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Am I blind?

This isn't lethal lotto specific though... this should concern all league games

At 03:41 AM 4/3/2002 -0500, you wrote:

There's a Lethal Lotto-specific forum over at http://forum.twleague.com. Post any questions you have there and Stonewall will read em. And I'll keep the flamewars from occurring. ;)
 
Fuseblown
 

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

well bote does have a founder...his name is ...

Zoobar  and u would be better off posting this at twgsdotorg for him to
see..

SG
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Massey <brianmassey@...>
To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001


> It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE, so no one
> can just step in and make a decision.
>
> I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I think
there
> are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting BOTE 2002.
>
> In no particular order...
>
> Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
>   --  because no single winner could really be decided
>
> Coastgames
>   --  because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
>
> Chicken Coop
>   --  because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
>
>
> As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a major
> tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop looks like
> the logical choice to me.  Of course, I am biased.
>
> Cherokee
> The Lost Traders Tavern
> http://tavern.homeip.net
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
> I'll second that
>
> about how I would place the game anyway
>
> but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org  <G>
>
> cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?
>
> Hekate
> hekate@...
> ICQ: 10370329
> MSN: twhekate
> http://www.twlinks.com
> http://www.playtw.org:90
> telnet://terra.playtw.org
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
>
> Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9 proposal
still
> stands.
>
> 1st Place:  Corps 10 / 13
> - The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm.. months
of
> the game.  Let them argue where the game is to be played next year, if at
> all.
>
> 2nd Place:  Corps 21 / 3
> - We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
> stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.  It still
suits
> the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off everyone else
> even if it was difficult to gain ground.
>
> I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
> considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the teams.
If
> the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we have
> the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed>  but last rules
were
> obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third place to
a
> stardock camper with one death.
>
> That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> -TK
>
>
>
> >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
> >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> >To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> >
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

If this bote doesn't come to a decision and Mac should leave the twgs off,
why don't we either go back to last years winners since this year never
finished and/or start new.. start bote over, take a vote and let members
from this years remaining corps make the final decision ......

At 02:50 PM 4/3/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE, so no one
>can just step in and make a decision.
>
>I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I think there
>are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting BOTE 2002.
>
>In no particular order...
>
>Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
>   --  because no single winner could really be decided
>
>Coastgames
>   --  because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
>
>Chicken Coop
>   --  because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
>
>
>As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a major
>tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop looks like
>the logical choice to me.  Of course, I am biased.
>
>Cherokee
>The Lost Traders Tavern
>http://tavern.homeip.net
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
>To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
>I'll second that
>
>about how I would place the game anyway
>
>but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org  <G>
>
>cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?
>
>Hekate
>hekate@...
>ICQ: 10370329
>MSN: twhekate
>http://www.twlinks.com
>http://www.playtw.org:90
>telnet://terra.playtw.org
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
>To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
>
>Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9 proposal still
>stands.
>
>1st Place:  Corps 10 / 13
>- The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm.. months of
>the game.  Let them argue where the game is to be played next year, if at
>all.
>
>2nd Place:  Corps 21 / 3
>- We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
>stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.  It still suits
>the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off everyone else
>even if it was difficult to gain ground.
>
>I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
>considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the teams.  If
>the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we have
>the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed>  but last rules were
>obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third place to a
>stardock camper with one death.
>
>That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
>-TK
>
>
>
> >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
> >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> >To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> >
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
>http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>---
>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Heheh... If Mac really keeps FEN closed, I would be willing to run BOTE.  I
had hoped Mac would stick around and run it indefinitely, but I am prepared
to run it otherwise.  Don't know if Jerry wants it or not, it really is a
huge amount of work to run a game that big.  I guess Jerry and I can arm
wrestle over it or something <G>.

Col Sanders

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Massey" <brianmassey@...>
To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:50 PM
Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001


> It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE, so no one
> can just step in and make a decision.
>
> I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I think
there
> are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting BOTE 2002.
>
> In no particular order...
>
> Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
>   --  because no single winner could really be decided
>
> Coastgames
>   --  because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place
>
> Chicken Coop
>   --  because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place
>
>
> As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a major
> tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop looks like
> the logical choice to me.  Of course, I am biased.
>
> Cherokee
> The Lost Traders Tavern
> http://tavern.homeip.net
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
> To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
> I'll second that
>
> about how I would place the game anyway
>
> but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org  <G>
>
> cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?
>
> Hekate
> hekate@...
> ICQ: 10370329
> MSN: twhekate
> http://www.twlinks.com
> http://www.playtw.org:90
> telnet://terra.playtw.org
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
> To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>
>
>
> Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9 proposal
still
> stands.
>
> 1st Place:  Corps 10 / 13
> - The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm.. months
of
> the game.  Let them argue where the game is to be played next year, if at
> all.
>
> 2nd Place:  Corps 21 / 3
> - We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
> stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.  It still
suits
> the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off everyone else
> even if it was difficult to gain ground.
>
> I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
> considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the teams.
If
> the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we have
> the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed>  but last rules
were
> obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third place to
a
> stardock camper with one death.
>
> That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
> -TK
>
>
>
> >From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
> >Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> >To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
> >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
> >
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

It seems to me that nobody is claiming "ownership" of the BOTE, so no one
can just step in and make a decision.

I have no idea what the best way to determine it will be, but I think there
are only a few servers that have ANY possible claim to hosting BOTE 2002.

In no particular order...

Fament, if Mac turns the TWGS back on
   --  because no single winner could really be decided

Coastgames
   --  because Corp 10 "probably" tied for first place

Chicken Coop
   --  because Corp 13 "probably" tied for first place


As it stands now, Fament is down and Coastgames already has a major
tournament, Chess (which is fantastic by the way). Chicken Coop looks like
the logical choice to me.  Of course, I am biased.

Cherokee
The Lost Traders Tavern
http://tavern.homeip.net




-----Original Message-----
From: Hekate [mailto:hekate@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:01 PM
To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001


I'll second that

about how I would place the game anyway

but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org  <G>

cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?

Hekate
hekate@...
ICQ: 10370329
MSN: twhekate
http://www.twlinks.com
http://www.playtw.org:90
telnet://terra.playtw.org



-----Original Message-----
From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001



Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9 proposal still
stands.

1st Place:  Corps 10 / 13
- The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm.. months of
the game.  Let them argue where the game is to be played next year, if at
all.

2nd Place:  Corps 21 / 3
- We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.  It still suits
the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off everyone else
even if it was difficult to gain ground.

I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the teams.  If
the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we have
the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed>  but last rules were
obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third place to a
stardock camper with one death.

That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
-TK



>From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
>Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
>




_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I'll second that

about how I would place the game anyway

but BOTE 02 should still be hosted at terra.playtw.org  <G>

cuz..what other sysop really wan'ts the headaches of the TW players?

Hekate
hekate@...
ICQ: 10370329
MSN: twhekate
http://www.twlinks.com
http://www.playtw.org:90
telnet://terra.playtw.org



-----Original Message-----
From: Talon Karrde [mailto:dab315@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:16 AM
To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001



Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9 proposal still
stands.

1st Place:  Corps 10 / 13
- The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm.. months of
the game.  Let them argue where the game is to be played next year, if at
all.

2nd Place:  Corps 21 / 3
- We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.  It still suits
the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off everyone else
even if it was difficult to gain ground.

I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the teams.  If
the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we have
the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed>  but last rules were
obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third place to a
stardock camper with one death.

That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
-TK



>From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
>Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
>




_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

TERRA.PLAYTW.ORG

Terra will be opening a new game called DUO  on April 6th at 9am PST (that's
April 6th GMT -8  or 6pm in London, USA: Noon Eastern, 11am Central, 10am
Mountain/AZ, 9am Pacific, April 7th 5am NZT, and 3am in Canberra, AU)

Now remember, extern will be at 2am PST, but the time changes April 7th to
one hour ahead (1:59am, 3:00am) so if extern runs, it runs, if it doesn't
run, it doesn't run, and it wont be run manual!

Now..with all that time flango outa the way..on with the settings!

DUO - so named cuz.....well....  2 players per corp!


Classic TW2002 - NO GOLD Enabled
Stock Ships
Stock Planets
No Photons
    2 players per corp
2500 sectors
  750 turns
1875 ports
    2 day port regen
1000 colos per hour
   15 deaths

Game Edit:
Ferrengi: Ferrengal is boosted to Class H planet, Level 5, 1.0mil Fuel Ore,
500k figs, 50k shields, 500k sector figs




notes:
1) Mega corping is not encouraged, and it is preferred if teams would
refrain from doing so (mega corping that is).  I do not baby-sit games
though and if it happens, it happens.

2) Blowing Stardock is against TERRA policy and it WILL be replaced as soon
as I notice or am informed it was blown.  I do not delete for blowing
stardock, but why waste your assets?

3) Dupes are not allowed! and will be deleted.  If you play from the same IP
you MUST email me stating login handles, email addresses, which game your
going to play, and your IP address. This is required for EVERY NEW GAME
PLAYED (so if you already send me an email, you have to send a new one for a
new game - or you may be subject to deletion)

4) Death limit will lock you out of game after you become ship destroyed
after your 15th death

5) Game is already banged and settings via S and * may be viewed at game D
menu.

Hekate
hekate@...
ICQ: 10370329
MSN: twhekate
http://www.twlinks.com
http://www.playtw.org:90
telnet://terra.playtw.org


---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

Well, not that anyone seemed to care before, but the Cloud 9 proposal still
stands.

1st Place:  Corps 10 / 13
- The two strongest and most active during the final years, erm.. months of
the game.  Let them argue where the game is to be played next year, if at
all.

2nd Place:  Corps 21 / 3
- We initially offered to take second place because the game was in
stalemate mode and we didn't want to wake up at 7am anymore.  It still suits
the result because both us and corp 21 were able to hold off everyone else
even if it was difficult to gain ground.

I believed and still do believe that's the fairest possible result
considering the level of activity and dedication shown by all the teams.  If
the game were to be decided by LAST years rules, we'd win because we have
the most remaining players that aren't <ship destroyed>  but last rules were
obviously not fair to everybody because I ended up getting third place to a
stardock camper with one death.

That's my suggestion in case someone has a better idea.
-TK



>From: "bdavey3619" <davey@...>
>Reply-To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>To: tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: Bote 2001
>Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 07:56:32 -0000
>




_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

There's a Lethal Lotto-specific forum over at http://forum.twleague.com. Post any questions you have there and Stonewall will read em. And I'll keep the flamewars from occurring. ;)
 
Fuseblown
 

I know it makes no difference at all, but I was there at the time and saw no posting of stardock, in fact I'm still wasting turns looking for it.
Dragon Tail

Timbo - If I could get a decent internet connection where I live, I
would probably try.  As it is, I can't keep the lag to my ISP under
100 ms, and my IP changed 4-5 times/day.  I don't like playing on
a 28.8 connection, and I know no one else would, either.

On 3 Apr 2002, at 13:48, timborulz wrote:

> Kemper,
>
>    Run a BBS starting today.
>    Accept any and all users.
>    Fight the Dupers.
>    Fight the abusers.
>    Fight the hackers.
>    Take complaints with a smile.
>    Take suggestions and comments for everyone on your BBS.
>    Respond politically correct to complaits and issues.
>    Keep the lag under 100 ms between you and everyone's ISP.
>    Host some big games.
>    Keep a good web site updated daily with news on games.
>    Don't mess up anything that might affect a game.
>    Don't let the server go down, even for upgrades.
>    Certainly don't make a mistake in anyone's opinion.
>
>    Do this for a year and then we will all commend you for your
> sorry ass BBS.
>
>    Why isn't your server up & running yet?  It's been atleast a few
> minutes, maybe hours since I posted this message.  How long is it
> going to take for you to respond???
>
>    :)
>
>       -Timbo.
>
> P.S.  This message was brought to you as public service announcement
> from the TW Comedian channel.
>
>
>
> --- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Kemper3" <kemper3@r...> wrote:
> > I'm sick of the sysops out there who think players should kiss
> their
> > ass because they're providing a server.  Big fucking deal.
> People
> > running a server do it because they want to, not because someone
> > is forcing them to.  I'm tired of hearing "It's free, you can't
> > complain."  How many of you bitch about yahoo email groups?
> > How much money do you pay them?  What is the difference here?
> > ABSOLUTELY NONE.  I've been told I need to take a step back,
> > perhaps the rest of you need to do the same.
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

<sigh of relief>

It's over... and with that I take my leave.  It was a great game, BG
and Guardian!

Lisa M. Wilson
aka Rave

--- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Barbara Cruz" <barbaracruz@c...> wrote:
> READ THE USO PAGE
>
> http://tradewars.fament.com/guardian/uso02.htm

Kemper,

    Run a BBS starting today.
    Accept any and all users.
    Fight the Dupers.
    Fight the abusers.
    Fight the hackers.
    Take complaints with a smile.
    Take suggestions and comments for everyone on your BBS.
    Respond politically correct to complaits and issues.
    Keep the lag under 100 ms between you and everyone's ISP.
    Host some big games.
    Keep a good web site updated daily with news on games.
    Don't mess up anything that might affect a game.
    Don't let the server go down, even for upgrades.
    Certainly don't make a mistake in anyone's opinion.

    Do this for a year and then we will all commend you for your
sorry ass BBS.

    Why isn't your server up & running yet?  It's been atleast a few
minutes, maybe hours since I posted this message.  How long is it
going to take for you to respond???

    :)

       -Timbo.

P.S.  This message was brought to you as public service announcement
from the TW Comedian channel.



--- In tradewars_2002@y..., "Kemper3" <kemper3@r...> wrote:
> I'm sick of the sysops out there who think players should kiss
their
> ass because they're providing a server.  Big fucking deal.
People
> running a server do it because they want to, not because someone
> is forcing them to.  I'm tired of hearing "It's free, you can't
> complain."  How many of you bitch about yahoo email groups?
> How much money do you pay them?  What is the difference here?
> ABSOLUTELY NONE.  I've been told I need to take a step back,
> perhaps the rest of you need to do the same.

Been there, done that, don't do it anymore.
BUT - I appreciate all those sysops that do - Thanks to all.
--{ Cowboy }--

----- Original Message -----
From: "silver_dragon11720" <silver_dragon11720@...>
To: <tradewars_2002@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 12:40 AM
Subject: [tradewars_2002] Re: A beautiful end to a beautiful game


> oh god this is gonna kill me but yeah I agree with sanders 100% here.
> Most players have no clue what it means to run a server. The time the
> money the headaches. You think we like it when our servers have
> problems? of course not. But man you got to understand something,
> this is a free game service. Let me repeat FREE. If you expect
> perfect service as sanders said donate pay contribute. other then
> that youre just consuming. Running a server is 10xs more complex then
> the average person realizes. it is a tremendous amount of work to
> keep it up to spec and running clean. Guess what shit happens!!!
> accounts get hacked shit breaks drives fail. Did you pay for any
> insurance? no you didnt. So step off right now and leave mac alone.
> He does his very best with his money and equipment. He provides free
> hosting to many many people. No one here has any right to give him
> shit about anything. So back off and go home. Its just a game and a
> FREE one at that.
> And guess what us sysops hav lives! jobs familly cars you name it!
> and guess where tradewars falls for the most part? at the bottom! it
> makes us no cash its just a hobbie. Some of us have more time then
> others. Geesh I am done but lay off sysops they do their best to
> bring you a good free game. You shouldnt expect anything from them
> really.
> Silver
> --- In tradewars_2002@y..., Col Sanders <colsanders@b...> wrote:
> > Ok, if I must refute, here goes...
> >
> > First, how much money have you paid Mac to provide you a
> professional
> > service?  What??  not a penny?  Then don't demand a professional
> > service.  Don't demand someone be available to you every waking
> hour of
> > every day, to answer yo your every question about a text game that
> HE
> > has to pay for, that HE has to supply the box to run, that HE has to
> > supply the internet connection for, that HE has to take shit over
> when
> > he downloads pr0n and slows down his connection (oh wait, wrong
> sysop
> > <G>).  Anyway, I think that is a very important point.  Demand
> > perfection from Jesus, and from people you pay A LOT of money too.
> If
> > you pay nothing, understand, you are guaranteed nothing.
> >
> > That said, there isn't lag caused by his BBS.  Prove there is... I
> have
> > seen and heard 0 evidence his BBS causes any lag.
> >
> > Apparently there were issues getting everyone into BOTE at the very
> > beginning, he fixed it.  Big deal.  Issues always pop up when you
> server
> > is under more strain and higher utilization than usual.
> >
> > The figs on ferrengal thing was an acknowledged mistake.  Hardly
> > something to still be bitching about.
> >
> > As for Mac being around often enough for you, see my first point.
> Dude,
> > if you are gonna take it so seriously that veigns bulge in your
> head,
> > maybe you ought to play a real game like Everquest or something,
> where
> > you pay X dollars a month and get a professional service, supported
> by
> > full-time employees that are there to do nothing but serve you.  I
> think
> > your attitude is all wrong.
> >
> > Col Sanders
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 2002-04-02 at 23:32, Kemper3 wrote:
> > > As a matter of fact, I had already made the decision not to play
> > > there.  I made it months ago.  I had no plans to ever play
> anything
> > > there again, whether it was a tournament or not.  I have played
> > > every day for the last 230 days on his server.  You failed to
> even
> > > attempt to refute ANY of the reasons I think it sucks as a
> server.
> > > Maybe "back in the day" it was cool, but it blows now.
> > >
> > > As for speaking from a point of anger, it is not anger speaking,
> but
> > > rather anger causing me to speak in public what I've thought for
> a
> > > long time. If you agree with mac that I have no idea what I'm
> talking
> > > about, refute it.  Explain to me that there isn't lag caused by
> his
> > > bbs.  Explain to me that he didn't fuck up and only allow 60
> people
> > > onto the twgs at once during the opening days of the bote.
> Explain
> > > to me that everyone would have been cby'd anyway if hosem hadn't
> > > been a sysop.  Explain to me how there were really 400k planet
> > > figs on ferrengal, but it's possible to kill them in 5 or 6
> invasion
> > > attempts.  Explain to me how mac REALLY responds to me, I just
> > > often don't get them.  Explain to me how mac was REALLY around
> > > between 9 pm and midnight on his server, but just didn't do
> > > anything.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2 Apr 2002, at 23:20, Col Sanders wrote:
> > >
> > > > I disagree with everything you said.  That said, Check this out
> Kav, its
> > > > your flame!!!  Kemper, I thought we were having a break
> through, I have
> > > > to back Mac on this stuff, I suspect you are speaking from a
> point of
> > > > anger at being told to shut up, if you don't like his server
> don't play
> > > > there, there are plenty of people that are going to be damn
> upset to see
> > > > Fament close down.
> > > >
> > > > Col Sanders
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 2002-04-02 at 23:14, Kemper3 wrote:
> > > > > You fucked up mac, don't blame me.  You shouldn't have given
> > > > > sysop access to someone untrustworthy.  You run a shit
> server,
> > > > > it's been a shit server as long as the bote has been
> running.  You
> > > > > lie about what you do in the game.  You're never around to
> actually
> > > > > DO anything with your server.  You don't respond to questions
> > > > > about your server.  This is just icing on the cake.  I for
> one am not
> > > > > a bit sorry to see you go.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2 Apr 2002, at 20:15, Macahan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > You just shut up kemper you have NO clue about shit.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Show it where the sun don't shine or just shut up.
> Especially when you
> > > > > > have NO idea what your talking about.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Monday, Monday, April 01, 2002, you wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > K> Great system, mac.  I like the added security that bbs
> gives:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > K> Gravedigr self-destructed!
> > > > > > K> [Pause]
> > > > > > K> Hollywood self-destructed!
> > > > > > K> Pixie self-destructed!
> > > > > > K> Master Time self-destructed!
> > > > > > K> Kemper3 self-destructed!
> > > > > > K> Ryukin self-destructed!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@e...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tradewars_2002-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

I might be one of the most disappointed to see FEN go down.  To
me, it was atleast tied with the best TW Servers out there.  I hope
that somehow it might re-open, but unfortunately the people who
complain often get most heard and wear on a SysOp.

    My word is this:

       FEN was a great BBS.  It handled lots of users and top
competition.  The BBS attracted a lot of TW players as well as other
games.  Mac did a ton of things for that BBS obviously go unnoticed.

       I ran a same single analog line BBS in the early 90's, and I
poured 10 hours a week into that tiny BBS.  I got annoyed by one
punk on my system, I have no idea how I would have handled if there
were two.  I can only image how many trouble makers gave Mac a hard
time.  Mac donated his equipment, internet bandwidth, spare time,
and money into running FEN.  Hundreds of people used this free
server and most of us had a good time there - I know I did.

       Mac, atleast know that there are many people who appreciate
FEN and everything you did for the community by hosting it. You
efforts are still of course going on with all the TW web sites you
host.

       I don't blame you one bit for shutting it down though.  A
SysOp's ends up getting criticism and judged on every last detail.
In the end, the criticism grows on and those who appreciate become
the seemingly small minority.

       If you for some odd reason decide re-launch FEN and bang a few
games, you might be surprised by the response you get.  However,
before you even think about hosting TWGS, again:  I would recommend
you drink atleast one full case of beer, two shots of absolute, and
get banged by three hotties a few times yourself first :)

       -Timbo.