Majority will play without guild banks.
3 Likes
Whoās alt are you?
See you went to LaRata School of Circle Discussiin for the Gifted too.
Edit: oh gawd another 9 day avatar skin thatās been here since the beginingā¦
No oneās. Iām me.
Nope. Just showing you that what you say about guild banks is equally true on the other sideā¦i.e. - moot points, not a good enough excuse for guild banks.
Quite honestly, Iāve seen you paint yourself as smart person on the forums but Iām surprised I STILL had to type my point out for you in the end.
5 Likes
Youāre point is to run the conversation in a circle and then claim everything cancels everything else out. So the discussion seems pointless. Got it.
Yup. Graduated top of the class.
3 Likes
If, as you want to claim, all of the āConsā had been countered, what need is there to negotiate for redesigning the guild bank system?
No one said anything about negotiating terms of guild banks.
What pro guild advocates are negotiating for is guild banks, even if those guild banks are redesigned to function in a manner in which guild banks have NEVER functioned previously.
Iām not confused, but somebody is being willfully obtuse.
1 Like
Iām not trying to negotiate anything. That would be the pro guild bank advocates who are showing their desperation.
you just scored some major points with me for your past. /respect
1 Like
At this point, someone could actually make a chart of Ratsā ālogicā, predicting how heāll respond.
But the point stands - he will NOT have a conversation with anyone. His job is to discredit everyone with said chart.
5 Likes
Alright, Iām going to explain it to you simply.
A negotiation requires at least two participating parties. Blizzard is not negotiating anything right now. Show me where theyāre negotiating with us on Guild Banks.
Me, obtuse.
GUFFAW!
5 Likes
Let me explain it to you. Negotiation does require two parties. It does not require that both parties give and take. It does not even require that both parties even entertain the idea of considering compromise.
One side āoffering suggestionsā and the other side not agreeing to those āsuggestionsā makes it no less an attempt to negotiate by the first side.
Itās kind of like when a five year oldās mother says āNo, you canāt have those cookies before dinnerā and that 5 year old āoffers a suggestionā of something like āwhat if I promise to eat all my dinner?ā.
How did this ānegotiationā tangent start? Nobodyās negotiating anything, weāre just offering opinions.
7 Likes
Yeah butā¦in that situation both parties are aware of the negotiation taking place.
Blizzard can not be said to be negotiating when we donāt even know that theyāre watching the thread, let alone making concessions or not.
Itās kind of like a group of schoolkids discussing what they want to be when they grow up, and some old guy busting in every 5 minutes and yelling that not everyone can be astronauts.
2 Likes
Ofc it started with a rat. I do believe him when he says has experience in union negotiations.
The way he derails, runs in circles, deflects, and then plays the idk what youāre talking about card. The fact he will misrepresent anything then feign ignorance is exactly how union negotiations go.
Donāt fall for it. Give him a piece of cheese and let him run on his wheel. Itās sorta like starving a troll.
2 Likes
It started when red decided to negotiate a new guild bank system to get around the flaws of the current one to make them more reasonable to be added. We going to pretend that didnāt happen?
1 Like
How did this ānegotiation tangentā start?
I suggest you look at the attempts to bargain with Blizzard by made by many of the pro guild bank advocates who have āsuggestedā ways to completely redesign the guild bank system for classic.
These attempts to bargain have included, but are not limited to:
having guild banks in only one city per faction
requiring guilds to have 40 level 60 players top purchase a guild bank
changing the clickable interface object to an NPC or ātreasure chestā
changing guild banks to use bags instead of tabs
changing the cost of guild banks
requiring guilds to have x number of members in order to purchase guild banks
We going to pretend it didnāt start with the no changeās inventory management/personal guild bank concern way back in thread 1?
Ok. Dont modify them or add restrictions to deter personal guild banks. Just add them because even without restrictions they are still a minor impact that deters a scam and gbanks are in the spirit of Vanilla because they encourage community building.
1 Like
Like i just said. None of that needs to be done.
We can go with the original idea of just adding them.
How is stating the facts about guild banks negotiating? Red started the negotiating by addressing those concerns and suggesting ways to improve on that which is how the negotiation ātangentā started. I honestly donāt get how itās a tangent because if god forbid guild banks did get added I would say it would make those ideas more relevant than ever.
1 Like
Direct that question to Fez. Heās trying to make that correlation.
Also youāre backing him up so maybe you two should work that out in a different thread.
Unless ofcā¦
Hereās the kicker. Fez is derailing this by trying to claim itās a negotiation. Itās not. Itās a discussion.
Neither side has any authority in this and that is what is missing for it to be a negotiation.
Iām not here to talk about negotiations. Iām here to discuss gbanks.
If you and Fez want to start a thread about negotiations be my guest.
That is not what this discussion is about.
Thatās my last word on negotiations. Iāll leave you and Fez to your Waltz.
Padre exits as Hank Williams āIām so Lonesome I Could Cryā plays for Fez and Avarond to continue their waltz
2 Likes