Targeting someone because they had issue with a member of your leadership mugging their own faction member and threatening to DB whatever faction their in, affecting everyone else's halloweek just to satisfy your own damn ego certainly screams "toxic shitheads"
Posts archived: 374 / 374 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch
There’s a distinction missing here: the mugging between those two members was not brought to leadership as a dispute requiring intervention. As Zedrow explained, the member concerned said they had no issue with it. Had they raised a concern, it would have been addressed. That is different from leadership receiving a complaint about someone being mugged and deciding they should just put up with it.
Members being comfortable with an interaction between themselves doesn’t establish a blanket rule that everyone else has to accept it. Equally, someone else objecting on their behalf doesn’t automatically override their own account. The relevant question is whether the people involved were actually okay with it. Silence alone wouldn’t establish that, but the account given here includes the member explicitly saying they had no issue.
You’re right that whether we voted to kick Farcough doesn’t answer the mugging question. I brought that up in response to the wider characterisation of leadership, not as a substitute for answering it.
The later escalation matters too. The reported roughly $12b in merc contracts was directed at TDT members generally, including people who had no involvement in the original disagreement. That is a substantial expansion of a personal dispute, and it deserves scrutiny alongside our response.
As for the dirty bomb announcement, I understand why a faction housing him would read that as a threat against them, regardless of the stated intention. Saying our issue is with him doesn’t remove that consequence. But framing the next step as “drop it or admit you’re bluffing” also turns further escalation into a test of pride. I don’t think making the situation worse should become an obligation just to satisfy a forum audience.
You can question our response. My objection is to treating “leadership ignored an unwilling member’s complaint” as an established fact when that isn’t what the account presented says happened.
The buildup in the suspense about how good Nemesis is as a mugger, and then...
Dang, as newbie I didn't know that. That means, this announcement literally is threatening the whole player base and held the whole torn player base as hostages with a dirty bomb, especially during the special event like Halloween where playerbase could have fun.. it starts to get more concerning than it is.. potentially lost hundred thousand billions casualty and ruined game experience.
Was the mugging issue ever resolved then? Because this just sounds like it never was.
At least pay the victim back the money, 'Oh my bad I didnt realize you were in the same faction.'
but instead you keep doubling down on how brainless your leadership is. You know a member of your faction has been wronged, by a member of your leadership, and you hope they say nothing so you don't have to do something about it?
Spineless.
DBs are fun, don’t worry too much about it. The faction targeted lose their stacks, and maybe a few randoms that are unlucky.
The other things are temporary, something like 3-6 hours.
The DB isn’t the issue, in general DB drops are considered exciting. The issue here is the threat where the droppers are essentially owning up to being dicks, but thinking they’re the moral high ground.
That context has been in the original post from the start: those two members had a history before they were in the same faction, and the member being mugged explicitly said they had no issue with it and considered the argument unnecessary.
So this wasn’t leadership hoping someone would stay quiet. The person concerned did speak, and their account matters too.
You can disagree with allowing that arrangement between faction members. But that’s a different argument from claiming we ignored someone asking for help. Please address what was actually stated rather than a version where their own response disappears.
wheres holux with the popcorn?
in b4 grave no discussion
If your objection is that people uninvolved in a personal dispute shouldn’t be dragged into it, that’s a fair standard. It also applies to hiring mercs to hospitalise TDT members generally, including newer members who had nothing to do with the disagreement, instead of only leadership.
That doesn’t automatically justify the DB threat, and you’re entitled to criticise it. But describing this as targeting someone simply for objecting to mugging leaves out the faction-wide merc contracts that prompted the announcement.
You can disagree with our response without treating his escalation as justified. Ordinary members on either side shouldn’t become less relevant because one side has more public sympathy.
Yes, I'm sure the new member who was getting mugged by someone who either is leadership or clearly has leadership's ear had no reason to worry about reprisals if they complained about it. But we'll leave them aside, because it wasn't just them getting mugged, was it?
Was Farcough okay with getting mugged as well? Because there is a screenshot of Nemesis bragging about it in the OP.
Or did he just deserve it "for being annoying." Did leadership receive his complaint about being mugged and decide he should just put up with it?
He probably did go too far with the merc contracts and shouldn't have targeted them at the general membership. Kind of like TDT is threatening to ruin halloween for the entire membership of a faction because they don't like one of the members.
As for the bomb, the very first words posted in this topic were:
"I am here to announce on behalf of Atari [307651], That whatever faction is housing Farcough [2613589] when halloween starts, will have a dirty bomb dropped on their faction. "
Not a lot of wiggle room in that statement.
I dunno why I'm bothering to argue this since it's neither my circus nor my monkeys. I guess I'm just astonished that anyone there proofread the original post and said to themselves "Yes, this is the image we want to present to the community".
Erm not really. The last DB had over 1k casualties either rad poisoning losing E or trampled losing vital med CD. Also like I posted if dropped at the right/wrong (depending on your take) time then it would shut shops delaying year 1 players start times or it would shut airports delaying NPC fights
Love how TDT members / leaders keep making their own faction look worse and worse. As if the original post wasn't enough of a clusterfuck. At this rate, TDT will be on enough people's halloween list TNL won't even need to raid in retaliation to the DB (threat).
I’m adding context about FarCough’s conduct, because describing him as someone targeted simply for objecting to leadership mugging members leaves out a lot.
FarCough himself attacked and mugged fellow faction members on multiple occasions. He was given repeated chances to move past these disputes, but the behaviour continued. He eventually left wishing people, including me, well, then arranged merc contracts against the wider faction, including members who had nothing to do with his grievances.
There’s also behaviour I experienced directly: sometime he would say sexual names aimed at me, some of which clearly crossed personal boundaries. Separately, I saw him in chat threatening to flight-delay a member long before he was removed from leadership. I still got those screenshots too. So no he is not as innocent as you think.
None of that means he wasn’t entitled to raise a concern. It does mean that “he spoke up, so leadership turned against him” is an incomplete account. His concerns deserve consideration, but so does his treatment of other members.
And proof of this is where?
1. First of all, mugging a factionmate should NEVER have been tolerated, whether the victim personally complained about it or not. This of course doesn't include joking or friendly mugs, but this clearly wasn't the case.
Any faction member has the rights to question leadership because it could be them getting mugged in the future. This, again, proves to be a reasonable fear as Farcough got mugged after complaining about it, and none of leadership sided with him.
2. Not kicking Farcough doesn't say that your faction is friendly, it just says that you want to be on the moral high ground.
"We didn't kick him, he left on his own"
But the reason he had to leave was none other than yourselves, leadership, who told Farcough to shut the fuck up, and yet still allowing Nemesis to bully him as much as he wanted.
3. There are so many methods to take revenge on someone, and the one you chose was to threaten the faction they're in. So don't say that you have nothing against TNL.
You didn't choose diplomacy, you didn't choose mercs, you chose to threaten us and the rest of Torn with a DB.
Yo I’m not trying to derail your #metoo movement or anything. I just wanna know if you’re dumb enough to drop that db
Sure here is a good example.
Take a good look at the date there. A good fucking 3 years of ago where he got countless chances and repeated difficult behavior.
it's just genuinely mind-boggling how you and your stooges in crime decide that mugging your own members is acceptable
Brother, you literally scammed your faction mates and restarted your account -- and paid it back when they found your restart. Fuck off, lmfao.
Anyhows, The Drunk Tank are morons for allowing in-house mugs, The Next Level don't have a good track record of protecting their own during Halloweek. Something something popcorn emoji.
I don't think he's innocent. I don't know the guy at all. I'm going off of what TDT's leadership has posted on this forum, tonight. And I'll point out, I haven't even heard his side of the story. All I know is what TDT is saying.
So yes, I do question why you guys decided to start this all off with a deluge of screenshots that make him look innocent, when your argument is that he's not. If you have screenshots of the guy making inappropriate sexual comments to female members (let alone leadership) that would have done a hell of a lot more to make the case you were trying to make than a dump of screenshots of leadership talking shit behind his back and essentially letting a quazi-leader bully him "because that's just how he is."
Everything else you just described there is...a toxic faction environment.
If we had a member who was mugging other members and keeping the money, they'd be out on their ass.
If we had a member who was making inappropriate advances at our members, regardless of gender, they'd be out on their ass and on a lot of halloween lists.
If we had a member flight delaying other members over a dispute...well you get my picture.
You guys just aired out your dirty laundry very publicly, and now you seem to be wondering why the public is gawking.