Quote: Originally Posted By mitchrapp on 5/18/2010Back to the original OP. Why is a rescue Foxx mission any different than a new world?

Instead of helping out a bad world, why not use your money to fill other existing worlds that are successful. That are pretty good worlds? Let Foxx die and help fill a handful of worlds instead of just one?

Sweet thread btw.


Because, as previously noted, worlds don't die. As best I can tell, bornlosers had been doing the same thing for about 10-12 seasons. Despite double digit openings every season, the world filled.

Quote: Originally Posted By tropicana on 5/19/2010

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 5/18/2010
Just saying his "plan" seems like the same "plan" bornlosers used to keep that team dominant. It's very difficult for an owner needing a big bat to turn down that 6 year pro making 7m for the number five pick from two seasons ago.

And, again, I wouldn't find it so objectionable if he didn't pretend he was doing the HBD some favor by taking over a powerhouse. He's a bit self-serving in his goals. You're not stupid. I'm sure you know this.

Again, I don't necessarily disagree. But I do believe that anyone who took that team could be accused of the same, and I do believe in soxman's intentions. Maybe I'll be proven wrong. But I don't think so


As I said, somebody was getting a stacked team. It was going to happen unless you found someone who would dismantle the ENTIRE team. It just seems, to me, that a better choice could have been made. soxfan121 ****** all over the reclamation project, an option would have been to just not comment if it insulted your sensibilities, then jumped at the opportunity to take the super team. To top it off, he's acting as if he's on some great humanitarian mission to save Foxx and HBD.

THAT insults MY sensibilities.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 5/19/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By mitchrapp on 5/18/2010Back to the original OP. Why is a rescue Foxx mission any different than a new world?

Instead of helping out a bad world, why not use your money to fill other existing worlds that are successful. That are pretty good worlds? Let Foxx die and help fill a handful of worlds instead of just one?

Sweet thread btw. Because, as previously noted, worlds don't die.   As best I can tell, bornlosers had been doing the same thing for about 10-12 seasons.  Despite double digit openings every season, the world filled.

Quote: Originally Posted By philogenemay on 5/18/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By mitchrapp on 5/18/2010
Instead of helping out a bad world, why not use your money to fill other existing worlds that are successful. That are pretty good worlds? ..... help fill a handful of worlds instead of just one?

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 5/18/2010
It's akin to saying "I'd never sleep with Megan Fox. She's a miserable *****" and then slobbering all over the place because she actually spoke to you.

--------------------------------------------------------

This is NEVER going to happen, at least not to anyone on these forums

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 5/25/2010So you assume anyone who lost their team would just take another one? That no one would be ****** and say "To hell with HBD!!!"

Quote: Originally Posted By on 5/18/2010
I like to pretend this sheet is MikeT23. He's awesome

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 5/18/2010
I'm not calling you a cheater. I'm calling you a self-serving opportunist and a hypocrite. Big difference. You'd have to be really, really stupid to not know the difference.

Are you really, really stupid?

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 5/25/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By on 5/18/2010

I like to pretend this sheet is MikeT23. He's awesome.

Quote: Originally Posted By philogenemay on 5/25/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 5/25/2010
So you assume anyone who lost their team would just take another one? That no one would be ****** and say "To hell with HBD!!!"?

You're probably right about that.

Maybe the teams from the old defunct world could be imported into the other ones with the owners?

I don't know.

But if the world is losing 9 owners there is a problem.

If the stipulation is known beforehand, maybe they'd be more patient and selective in their recruiting efforts.

You would think at some point we'd reach an equilibrium where only stable worlds are and losing 9 or more owners would be a thing of the past...



I'm actually a proponent of carpetbombing worlds that continually need 8+ off the face of the HBD map. I just don't think it solves a problem. And they do fill eventually.