New Month New cheaters

[boelie22]

[attachment deleted by admin]

[ethan]

looks like atr vs atr...

are you pink?

[Navaros]

hahahahah new month new cheaters like you don't cheat ya hobbtz ROFL ain't THAT the pot (YOU) calling the kettle (any non-hobbtz) black!

[DjCiD]

i think you used it wrong...

maybe if bilbo called an x-hobbitz member a cheater, thats the pot (bilbbo) calling the kettle(x-hobbitz member) black

but you can edit your post to say any non-hobbitz cheater and then it would be less confusing and make more sense

so hug a peach kiddo! (did i use that one right :P ;D)

[Frodo]

lol, but even though i don't play emperor online, i think this cheating bit is getting out of hand. Frodo_I, when will the Westwood Exposed servers come out where they will be cheat free

[Fuzi0n]

looks like atr vs atr...

are you pink?

ROFLMAO

[rtz]

Bah....

I was kicking this guy so hard... he dc cheat me... hopefully he doesn't get any points

LOL yeah that zfsklave d/c me too yesterday when i had 10 minos in his entrace ;D but i got the points so ok

[boelie22]

hahahahah new month new cheaters like you don't cheat ya hobbtz ROFL ain't THAT the pot (YOU) calling the kettle (any non-hobbtz) black!

Hahahahahah navaros = cyrenius.... HAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry.... HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH

[ethan]

hahahahah new month new cheaters like you don't cheat ya hobbtz ROFL ain't THAT the pot (YOU) calling the kettle (any non-hobbtz) black!

uh, english?

[SurlyPIG]

See...Nav starts another flame war in someone else's thread. Exactly how much is enough to constitute a ban?...

[emprworm]

hahahahah new month new cheaters like you don't cheat ya hobbtz ROFL ain't THAT the pot (YOU) calling the kettle (any non-hobbtz) black!

Every pot that I've ever used in my life is silver. I see no problem with a silver thing taking interest in something else that is different- both in form and in color.

Of course, that is assuming that these inanimate objects could talk to begin with.

I believe I read once that in order for someone to accuse one of cheating on this forum, you need to post evidence. Boelie posted a pic of his accusation. Nav accused someone of cheating and posted nothing but flames without evidence. I think Nav needs to bring evidence of cheating before accusing or just shut up.

[emprworm]

Further talking about the pot calling kettle black, here is a piece I read worthwhile on this issue:

<--begin quote-->

let's get a 'given' out of the way; let's agree that, yes, both the pot and the kettle are, in fact, black in color.

Now, just think about the simple phrase: The pot calls the kettle black.

1) We assume that when the pot "calls" the kettle black, the connotation is of name calling - that is, the childish, belittling, hurtful way of taunting another. This immediately colors our view of the pot and it's place in the dialogue. The pot is mean, cruel, misunderstanding, short sighted, and narrow minded. Obviously, the pot is so focused on putting down the kettle that it misses out the fact that it insults something within it's own nature.

However, think about it this way: the pot isn't saying a single thing about itself here.

The focus is actually on the kettle, not the pot.

Moreover, the pot is, in fact, speaking truthfully. So where does the negative connotation really come from?

The pot calls the kettle like it is: black. And we automatically come down on the pot for sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong; for offering a voice of truth (perhaps unwanted truth?).

Ultimately, we all seem to depict the pot as the one in error, even though the pot has actually done very little wrong. As far as the statement goes (pot calls kettle black) we have no evidence whatsoever that the pot intends the statement of truth to in anyway reflect a difference between itself and the kettle. The pot does not say "you're black, that makes you bad" or "you're black and i'm not" or "you're black, therefore i'm better" or any other alternative that we commonly assume when we hear the common phrase.

It is possible that the pot does, indeed, know that it, too, is black. That, however, might not be the point of the pot's discussion with the kettle! The fact that the kettle is black does not in any way negate the blackness of the pot. The fact that the pot points out the kettle's blackness does not in any way indicate a concomitant denial of the pot's true coloring. Both pot and kettle may be simultaneously black.

We ought not read more into such a simple sentence without greater knowledge of the context.

Why are the pot and kettle talking? How has the day been? What relationship exists between the pot and the kettle? What preceeded the pot's statement? What was the kettle's response? What was the pot's tone of voice when it said that phrase to the kettle?

We just don't know.

In fact, we fill in the gaps we don't know with the baggage we've enculturated.

And, in that light, the connotations of this phrase get even scarier.

2) Not only do we assume that the 'pot calling the kettle black' is a belittling, taunting event, we support our reading of "calling a name" by the fact that "black" is nearly always a bad thing to be. This phrase is indicative of a certain level of stereotyping, prejudice - dare I say it? - racist sentiment that prevails even today in our culture!

The pot isn't just saying that the kettle is black (which, i remind you, is the TRUTH) The pot is using that blackness as leverage against the kettle and is simultaneously "ignoring" his own blackness as if 'black' were an insult, an indication of inferiority, freakishness, or inherent (negative) difference.

Why do we continue to use such a conotatively heavy phrase?

The worst part is that this phrase gets misused: should I be in a situation where, like the pot, I decided to speak a truth (call it as I see it) about another person, I would (like the pot) be rebuked for my "criticism." However, some criticism is constructive, if not necessary!

Moreover, it is a sign of immaturity for a person to reject open truth about him or herself simply on grounds that they shouldn't be alone in the scrutiny.

If we view the pot harshly for its childlike "name-calling" we are also required to similarly judge the kettle for its immature stubborn refusal to accept the Truth, regardless of whether or not the pot also gets it.

<--end quote-->

Yes, I know this thread went way off topic. But once Nav hurled the personal flames, I knew this thread was doomed, so I figured I'd try to calm it down by introducing a neutral element. But I still feel like its doomed...