Re: Re: Game history aproximation...

I'm not going to attempt to lay out all the "what if's", but if I 
couldn't play with people who lie to me, I would not be playing Diplomacy!

mczet wrote:

>Yet, because you may not, do you then jump on the table and become
>flabbergasted and offended when someone else actually does? Do you instantly
>trash your game because you cannot play with people who lie to you? Or, do
>you simply file this away and return to doing whatever you think might be
>necessary for you to do to win?
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Michael D. Ashland" <[email protected]>
>To: <[email protected]>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 10:26 AM
>Subject: Re: [CAT23-Gchat] Re: Game history aproximation...
>
>
>  
>
>>Ahhhh, yeesss, my Preeeccccioussssssss.
>>
>>I may play that role on occasion, but then, I disagree with your
>>conclusion that "the whole point of the game is one of give and take."
>>
>>The whole point of the game is "I win." :-)
>>
>>As for lying, I know many players who go to great lengths to never tell
>>a direct lie. I'm one of them. Really! ;-)
>>
>>mczet wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>The Smeagols are the players who clutch their dots to their breast,
>>>whispering Preeeeeessssssious. Never understanding that the whole point
>>>      
>>>
>of
>  
>
>>>the game is one of give and take. And if you sink so low as to ever grab
>>>      
>>>
>any
>  
>
>>>dots from them, they will instantly brand you a liar, shouting for all to
>>>hear how the nasty Baggens lied to them and now they must attack you
>>>forever.
>>>(snip)
>>>      
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>