YOU are the one being incredibly dishonest and pathetic here by completely ignoring what she actually said and its implications, for the sole reason that you happen to believe she must have meant something else, even though all the evidence proves I went exactly by what she said, no more, no less, whereas you have nothing, absolutely nothing, to back up your beliefs…
There is absolutely no way it would be possible to accomplish what she said she wants without a chance based mechanism that ensures a minimum 50% failure rate regardless of how well the ganker does his job. That you cannot see this just proves how unqualified, dishonest and pathetic YOU are.
But there is more. This is what she herself said in reply to the post where I said whether a gank succeeds or not shouldn’t be chance based:
But at this point I’m pretty sure you still won’t get it and will continue ignoring the facts and pretending it’s the rest of us who are pathetic and dishonest here…
Oh, and dodging the questions asked to yourself too.
Yes, you were referring to some irrelevant AFK in low sec stuff… I already knew that, thank you very much… only that’s not the issue here… the issue is that you said you did that in reply to me having talked about sitting AFK in low sec first… only I never did that, it was all in your mind and nowhere else…
But you’re completely and conveniently ignoring that and dodging the question by repeating the same nonsense that we all knew already, hoping nobody will notice that this little detail is just another proof that it’s YOU who doesn’t read and is dishonest about what others say in the posts you reply to…
Amazing! I quoted what she said, so you may clearly see yourself… and you completely ignore the fact that she said she wants a minimum 50% chance of failure, which is what we’re all saying here is wrong, and pretend she meant something else… and then you call us all dishonest and pathetic for going by what she said and not by what you believe she meant instead… Really?
I wish I had words to describe what I think of you without risking this post being removed for breaking the forum rules…
ROFLMAO. 