Edition 327

[Will 4,660]

3 minutes ago, STZ said:

 

Says the guy in alias...

 

Can't say I didn't alert the admin though! 

[BOOM 8,746]

Fuck. I'm going to be quoting a lot of shit in this when I reply.

[STZ 5,360]

7 hours ago, BOOM said:

Fuck. I'm going to be quoting a lot of shit in this when I reply.

 

You just replied without a quote

 

[BOOM 8,746]

I iz a failyur.

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 3:26 AM, Smarch said:

Now i await @BOOM repsonse 

 

Don't get too excited.

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 4:39 AM, eaglesfan036 said:

I wrote that before Boom came out as HFD and made a joke of it. If a member wants to make an alias for whatever reasons and it's not a multi, I am fine with that. I was more upset over the fact that I didn't know HFD was Boom, while @Smarch somehow knew that ahead of time and drafted HFD and bragged about knowing it was Boom. Instead, when I sent my draft PM to new member HFD, I was pretty much told not to bother drafting him and that he was going to go inactive. My problem isn't really with Boom making an alias, more that it seemed like he purposely tanked his draft stock to be drafted by Davos. 

 

You may have asked that question before you knew about the alias, but you still took a shot in chat afterwards. If Smarch knew, it wasn't because I told him. I didn't tell a single GM, except for Devise because they were talking about in a pajodcast and I was hoping they'd steer away from it. As for the PM response, I don't remember if it was every GM, but at least 8 or 9 got that PM about possible/probable inactivity, and that included Smarch. As for your final point, Smarch wasn't even the GM and I had zero, yes, zero contact with him until I'd been added to the Dynamo locker room, post-draft. I may have tanked my draft stock, but it wasn't to end up on a certain team. It was to see how low I could be drafted and to try and limit the expectations placed on the BOOM username. I doubt I would have gone higher then 10 anyway, so what's the big deal?

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 5:09 AM, Smarch said:

I had the same information as you, only difference it when scouting draftees I went through the updates and noticed a lot of similarities between Boom and HFD. I never had knowledge other than my own assumptions. I never bragged about knowing it was Boom. You were shit talking my choice at 11th overall and I said to you "You know who that is right"? "It's not a first-gen". So again not bragging, just trying to get you to shut your mouth about a player I drafted. 

 

I also had the same information on his draft status that every other GM had. He said he didn't know what he was gonna do activity wise and I reached out to him after taking over, he said the same thing about being non-active that he did to you. I literally took him as BPA and at the time hoped that Reinholdt would drop to me in the 2nd Round cause I was sketcy on his activity. I lucked out amd that's all it is to it, you seem slightly butt hurt by his decision to have a preference. 

 

FWIW, this is 100% accurate. Only contact prior to draft was a chat message very early in S53 VHLM season saying that Davos was interested. Same message basically that 3 or 4 other GM's sent me either in chat or by PM. After that, he found out when locker rooms were updated and I was added to Davos. Also, for a veteran GM to ignore the resumption of point tasks and updates and continual progression on Kendricks rookie ratings, even after they have gotten a PM about inactivity from said member, goes towards that GM's ability to scout potential draftees or communication skills. Did @eaglesfan036 not even check prior to the draft, or was the inactivity PM taken as gospel and a "new" player was able to dictate terms re draft position? A simple PM could have confirmed I was active and updating again. Not my fucking fault you didn't check.

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 7:09 AM, Higgins said:

 

I'm with @eaglesfan036 here.

 

I only messaged 6 draftees (Didn't message @Devise he can totally vouch for me!) and only 2 of those 6 were in the area of 7th overall. I got the feeling that HFD (BOOM) was interested in coming to Helsinki at 7th overall.

 

Then a couple days later I receive a message from HFD (BOOM) saying that, He appreciated my messages and help and that he was not going to retire his player, but that he wouldn't be coming to the site much anymore.

 

That appears to not be the case at all now. Helsinki had 7th overall and Calgary had 9th and 10th with Davos picks at 8th and 11th. Anyone could see where this starts to look a little strange, because he told both Helsinki and Calgary he was going inactive with Fujimoto. I think you can see why it would @Smarch

 

Ultimately I would not have drafted Fujimoto because I had Rudolph ranked higher based on his response to the draftee PM so it didn't affect me at all, but I totally get @eaglesfan036 point of view.

 

 

 

You were correct, I had no issue with playing for Helsinki and had that same opinion for every other team. Easy for me to say, but absolutely true. In fact, and I apologize if you didn't have a clue about the user connection between HFD-BOOM, but when you drafted Odinsson, I gave you the same guarantee regarding career length with the Titans, in part due to the ridiculousness of the "Tordahl World Tour" and the way I was swayed by Victor(but was my decision admittedly) to head to Davos. I was happy to stay a Titan for as long as you needed, but ironically it was the GM's turn to move me along, firstly to Quebec and then shockingly, to Seattle. Also, you got the same PM as most other GM's including Smarch regarding activity, so it wasn't a ploy to target a specific team in the draft. Even if the Wranglers GM hadn't even noticed my resumption of updates and PT's, if he still had me in the vicinity of 9 or 10, he could have checked. I don't trust that process.

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 7:17 AM, Devise said:

 

Yeah I still had it in my inbox and I hadn't used it yet. I kinda felt like it was a good time even if opinions had changed to highlight the difference between the two. I'm sure most know what it is, but it's still good we make known that in the wake of a lot of this surfacing we do still have rules against multi's, we do not against aliases. 

 

But I really don't think Boom was trying to tank his draft stock. Even to argue your point here Higgins, sure Boom may of just multiple messages out to multiple different GM's, his thoughts that he may retire went out to everyone. While it may not of been common league knowledge that he was in fact Boom by draft time, I feel like most had an inkling that he was someone else. I know for a fact that like a month before he even came out and revealed it was him I PM'd him asking if it was Boom. But the Pajodcast guys kinda all figured that out pretty similarly. But none the less the overall message coming out of HFD at draft time was "I don't know if I"m going to be super active, I'm inconsistent, I like the league but I don't know if I want to stick out serious with a player or be a super active." While that may drive his draft stock down, I don't think it negates that Davos still takes a risk with this pick. Boom has retired before. It's not like it's a blanket steal because Boom has history, or that had everyone known it was Boom he'd of gone higher. (Which negates the entire reason he decided to have an alias btw) It's only that everyone saw we had this obvious former member who still didn't know how active he was going to be and because of that he fell. The risk on the pick isn't negated because of him coming out, nor from his PM messages imo. He's still risky for Davos, regardless of the fact that he fell there. But he could also work out. It's a classic hockey gamble. I don't see an issue with it from any perspective, and it's a type of narrative that actually helps give drafts more intrigue. Something all in all this past draft didn't lack in any regard, for a litany of reasons that like this one have little to do with specific player builds or team fit and more to do with member narratives. 

 

Why do you write so fucking much man?

 

I was positive several prominent members, including some with close ties to GM's, including STZ and Boubabi who definitely knew, were aware, so I was surprised that only Devise sent me a PM to actually ask if HFD was an alias. One point though, I was in fact trying to lower my draft ranking, but not to a specific team. I didn't know who would take a chance and it's not as if I didn't update or churn out TPE prior to the draft. GM's should notice that shit IMO. I have retired early before yes, but Koenig was only because I didn't want to deal with depreciation, and then the Odinsson farce that saw me drafted, traded then traded again, despite wanting to stay for a career with the team that picked me. I've given Smarch the exact same promise that I gave Higgins, and after the break I had, which I needed badly, I'm back and looking to make Fujimoto the player that Odinsson could have been. The fact that Smarch gambled and waited for BPA say's a lot about his style of GM'ing and why I'm more than happy to give him my player for as long as he needs. If he uses me in a trade, that's fine because I trust in him to do what's best for Davos, but if Fujimoto is moved, it won't be me instigating the request. It's also obvious around here that I'm not the member I used to be, or at least be held in that same regard and that's OK too(there's some members here that my opinion has changed about as well), but I am still capable of making an elite player here in the VHL(fuck modesty) and instead of people complaining about a legal multi(I admit to aliases that didn't work previously...hey look, Calgary got screwed again!) they should be at least positive about a member recreating and adding to the high-level TPE player pool.

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 7:19 AM, Smarch said:

Except as I stated earlier no I had the same message as you did that he wasn't gonna update and looking to retire. Which btw was sent to gms before I became one, so according to your logic he started this great scheme to come to Davos before I even messaged will to become GM

 

it literally makes no sense and is a member with hurt feelings trying to point fingers 

 

Point made in previous reply, so you don't get a big response. Sorry boss.

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 7:27 AM, Higgins said:

 

In my own option I think it looks strange and I gave a reason why I have that opinion. I'm not saying it's true or not true, but the circumstances now with @eaglesfan036 having the same thing happen to him, certainly makes me question it. There's really no way for me to 100% know one way or the other.

 

Like I said it didn't matter to me either way I was drafting Rudolph at 7th no matter what.

 

Answered.

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 11:58 AM, Will said:

I think the whole alias thing treaded on a fine line. I'm okay with people wanting a fresh start or whatever the reasons, I'm less okay with it being hidden from the admins as there is clearly a lot of potential questions that could come up like the ones here regarding the draft and those are things we would want to monitor if someones passing themselves off as a new member. 

 

Well, I did chat with you, in regards to returning as an alias, despite having another username. You didn't seem to give a shit, as long as it wasn't a multi. True, it was HFD asking the question, but why would it matter if it was BOOM instead? It's somewhere in the chat logs if you need to check. I appreciated your response.

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 1:03 PM, STZ said:

 

Says the guy in alias...

 

At least you knew.

[ASIANBOUBABI 173]

On 4/21/2017 at 3:02 PM, BOOM said:

Fuck. I'm going to be quoting a lot of shit in this when I reply.

 

No one cares you dickhead.

[BOOM 8,746]

On 21/04/2017 at 10:13 PM, STZ said:

 

You just replied without a quote

 

 

[BOOM 8,746]

5 minutes ago, ASIANBOOM said:

 

No one cares you dickhead.

 

Also, in case further issues arise from this crap, ASIANBOOM will only be used to update the original post in Fujimoto's update thread, which is used to keep track of TPE totals, and attribute levels. This has been discussed with a blue team member and no problem was seen.

 

 

 

[BOOM 8,746]

This shit's finished as far as I'm concerned.

 

[RomanesEuntDomus 442]

Boom.

[Higgins 3,618]

2 hours ago, BOOM said:

 

You were correct, I had no issue with playing for Helsinki and had that same opinion for every other team. Easy for me to say, but absolutely true. In fact, and I apologize if you didn't have a clue about the user connection between HFD-BOOM, but when you drafted Odinsson, I gave you the same guarantee regarding career length with the Titans, in part due to the ridiculousness of the "Tordahl World Tour" and the way I was swayed by Victor(but was my decision admittedly) to head to Davos. I was happy to stay a Titan for as long as you needed, but ironically it was the GM's turn to move me along, firstly to Quebec and then shockingly, to Seattle. Also, you got the same PM as most other GM's including Smarch regarding activity, so it wasn't a ploy to target a specific team in the draft. Even if the Wranglers GM hadn't even noticed my resumption of updates and PT's, if he still had me in the vicinity of 9 or 10, he could have checked. I don't trust that process.

 

I can confirm I was not GM of Titans in S49 when Odinsson was drafted, that was all Daniel. I had to trade you when I took over in S51 to begin a full rebuild based on S52 and younger players. Just the way the league works with 8 season players. At the time I could have never predicted trading for Axelsson and Velvet and speeding the rebuild up.

[Will 4,660]

4 hours ago, BOOM said:

 

Well, I did chat with you, in regards to returning as an alias, despite having another username. You didn't seem to give a shit, as long as it wasn't a multi. True, it was HFD asking the question, but why would it matter if it was BOOM instead? It's somewhere in the chat logs if you need to check. I appreciated your response.

 

Well if a new member like I thought HFD was creates a new account it's basically just another new member as he wasn't even drafted yet. What I meant on page 1 is that certain questions are bound to be asked like in this thread when your dealing with an experienced member who has prior connections. We would want to keep an eye on it to make sure for example that there wasn't some GMs who had more information than others. I'm not trying to say that's what happened here at all, I'm more just talking about going forward if anyone got any ideas from this it's best to just to talk to us.

[gorlab 4,321]

link is down

 

didnt realize this was released on 4/20, i missed any weed references in the mag, was there any?

[Victor 10,942]

On 4/23/2017 at 0:43 PM, BOOM said:

I was swayed by Victor(but was my decision admittedly) to head to Davos.

[Devise 4,475]

I feel like @Victor is going to randomly create the most legendary player of all time on us here at some point.