Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I was moderately impressed.

Gwar! wrote:Because Google is not impressive

It is when you can't find the stuff and talk out of your ass for a dozen posts, only to have somebody prove you wrong with 10 minutes of research.

@ Orkeosaurus: Thanks. *takes a small bow.

Polonius wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Because Google is not impressive

It is when you can't find the stuff and talk out of your ass for a dozen posts, only to have somebody prove you wrong with 10 minutes of research.

Naw, you know I was just playing you along. Of course I would never ring the cops on someone for touching my models God-Emperor Sake. It DID happen here however and it was funny That was pretty much the only thing I was going on about.

Gwar! wrote:

Polonius wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Because Google is not impressive

It is when you can't find the stuff and talk out of your ass for a dozen posts, only to have somebody prove you wrong with 10 minutes of research.

Naw, you know I was just playing you along. Of course I would never ring the cops on someone for touching my models God-Emperor Sake. It DID happen here however and it was funny That was pretty much the only thing I was going on about.

Sorry, much like the earlier example with larceny at the pub, you can't change your intent when you're caught. Maybe you should add new row to your sig of people pointing out when you're 100% incorrect.

My intent was to string you along the whole time

Sheesh you (almost) lawyers, no sense of humour.

Gwar! wrote:My intent was to string you along the whole time

Sheesh you (almost) lawyers, no sense of humour.

Prove it. it's easy enough to say that now, but as this isn't your first day on the internet, you should know that it's not that easy.

Sheesh, you insufferable know it alls. No ability to handle being proven wrong.

Polonius wrote:Sorry, much like the earlier example with larceny at the pub, you can't change your intent when you're caught. Maybe you should add new row to your sig of people pointing out when you're 100% incorrect.

JD21290: I disagree 100% with Gwar. | orkishlyorkish: I disagree 100% with Gwar! | da gob smaka: I [...] disagree with GWAR [...] on this subject. | KaloranSLC: Just for fun, I'll chime in and disagree with Gwar | Jackmojo: Gwar's wrong | Drudge Dreadnought: Edit: What Gwar said was stupid. | Deff Dread red Edition: I disagree with Gwar! | Bran Dawri: And what Gwar! said [...] is 100% false. | s.j.mccartney: I disagree with GWAR | Green Blow Fly: Gwar! can't be very insightful. I don't appreciate his candour and find it annoying at times. | Ultrafool: You sir are incorrect. | nosferatu1001: He is very brusque all the time, sometimes going a little far, Gwar! is utterly incorrect. | Ozymandias: *Takes a deep breath* I disagree with [...] Gwar. | AllWillFall2Me: Gwar is incorrect | SeattleDV8: God I hate him......Gwar is incorrect | FoxPhoenix135: I can never count on Gwar! | Revan1: I have to disagree with Gwar! on this one. | Iron_Chaos_Brute: As usual, Gwar! is wrong. | The Green Skin Fryer: I disagree with Gwar on this one... | JohnHwangDD: Thanks, Gwar - now, *I* haet mudkipz! | Mike Leon: As much as I hate to disagree with Gwar (and I hate disagreeing with Gwar), I think he might be wrong. | Ghidorah: I disagree with Gwar. If for no other reason than to get into his sig. | Corum: I disagree with Gwar, but not with his Sig. | Myshlaevsky: Every fundamental particle of my being vibrates in wholehearted disagreement with Gwar! | Nobody_Holme: Gwar! is once more incorrect. Damn his hide. | Mars.Techpriest: At risk of ending up part of his signature, I find myself disagreeing with 'Gwar!' | bsohi: GWAR!'s answer is the wrong one. | Deffgob: It doesn't surprise me to say this, but Gwar! is wrong. | combo: I disagree with Gwar | bigdaddydreadnought: (as if this wasn't said a million times before) Gwar! is wrong | GuardChick: As I'm already feeling left out of Gwar!'s sig, he's wrong...as usual | Vassakov: I'll submit to the ignorance of Gwar! | Wehrkind: Gwar is incorrect | Lordhat: Gwar! is 100% not right. | Tri: 100% against Gwar on this. | nintendoeats: Gwar fails.

Accusation: Me Changing my Agenda

Innocent until proven guilty, and the Onus is on you to prove my guilt, not for me to defend my innocence.

@Ork: Lawl. Watch it, I could Sue you for some imaginary reason I'll get polonius to represent me

Gwar! wrote:@Ork: Lawl. Watch it, I could Sue you for some imaginary reason I'll get polonius to represent me

Oh Gwar!

I think you're mistaken yet again!

Gwar! wrote:Accusation: Me Changing my Agenda

Innocent until proven guilty, and the Onus is on you to prove my guilt, not for me to defend my innocence.

this isn't a criminal matter, it's a civil matter. I can point to a mountain of posts and other evidence that make you look ignorant. You claim you were joking. Take that to a jury, and see what they decide by a simple preponderance of the evidence.

Even if it were a criminal matter, I would point out the same evidence, and you have none. In particular, you're response to dirkthe1 regarding the intent to return shows a strong interest in perpetuating your position, not a devil's advocacy position.

Polonius wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Accusation: Me Changing my Agenda

Innocent until proven guilty, and the Onus is on you to prove my guilt, not for me to defend my innocence.

this isn't a criminal matter, it's a civil matter. I can point to a mountain of posts and other evidence that make you look ignorant. You claim you were joking. Take that to a jury, and see what they decide by a simple preponderance of the evidence.

Even if it were a criminal matter, I would point out the same evidence, and you have none. In particular, you're response to dirkthe1 regarding the intent to return shows a strong interest in perpetuating your position, not a devil's advocacy position.

I have NO idea what you just said :(

Anyway, back on topic:
NO TOUCHY MODELS!

To be fair, I'd count the troll avatar as evidence.

Gwar! wrote:

Polonius wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Accusation: Me Changing my Agenda

Innocent until proven guilty, and the Onus is on you to prove my guilt, not for me to defend my innocence.

this isn't a criminal matter, it's a civil matter. I can point to a mountain of posts and other evidence that make you look ignorant. You claim you were joking. Take that to a jury, and see what they decide by a simple preponderance of the evidence.

Even if it were a criminal matter, I would point out the same evidence, and you have none. In particular, you're response to dirkthe1 regarding the intent to return shows a strong interest in perpetuating your position, not a devil's advocacy position.

I have NO idea what you just said :(

Anyway, back on topic:
NO TOUCHY MODELS!

Which I think is further evidence that your aformentioned ignorance vis a vis the legality of your hypothetical actions was in both law and equity valid corpus that furthers the case set forth in the current action.

Corpses? She was like that when I found her! HONEST!

And people say lawyers don't have a sense of humor....

Polonius wrote:And people say lawyers don't have a sense of humor....

I know not these "people". You Should sue them! Isn't that what lawyers do? go Around Screaming "OBJECTION!" and Suing people?

I ask, only because I know the utter idiotic nerd rage a lot of gamers have over this issue. It doesn't bother me. You break it, I fix it. I don't care. It's just a little toy soldier, not anything that is actually important.

Mattlov wrote:I ask, only because I know the utter idiotic nerd rage a lot of gamers have over this issue. It doesn't bother me. You break it, I fix it. I don't care. It's just a little toy soldier, not anything that is actually important.

I think you should ask out of common courtesy. I don't think it is idiotic nerd rage to expect people to use reasonable care and show courtesy when handling something that you invested time and effort in the creation of.

It depends. Other gamers, I let touch my stuff, the general public absolutely not. Someone I'm playing against understands the fragility of my stuff as well as the monetary value of it, a witless onlooker will not.

Always, ALWAYS ask. It might be fragile, or still a little wet from a touch-up. Better to have asked and not needed to, than NOT asked and needed to and offend the guy.

I always ask before picking up a model, because I HATE people touching mine without asking.
The way I see it, it's like touching a guy's car or girlfriend, or their tools. It's just not done without permission.

Skorpion wrote:The way I see it, it's like touching a guy's ... girlfriend

This made me laugh a little, as it is impossible

Modquisition on:
Wow I opened this thread to read and the first thing I saw was ass-from Polonius!

Lets all take a breath and remind ourselves of (sigh) Rule#1 and maintain coolness people.

Gentlemen lets also note that, prior to my barging in, we have persons from at least three different countries here. In the US alone, each state's legal system is somwehat different. Differences between countries can be massive.

Pfft, such bile from people here. Breaking my nose if I touch your models? Please, give it a rest, I'll break yours too.

I'm proud of my models. I only expect them to be handled using the base, since this is one of it's functions. If you end up crying because a 12 year old dropped your Chaplain find an older opponent who has the maturity to recognise the point of a base. Although I agree many older people in GW stores are somewhat lagging in the age-to-sense ratio.

People who use violence to make ammends about dropped models are most definitely part of the latter category.

I just ask, and if my opponent says yes, then I move them.

I just don't see a reason why you should touch someone's models, especially after reading all of this. It can all be easily avoided. Let your opponent do his pile-in moves and such. I will generally offer to move models if they're closer to me than to my opponent or if he's a friend I don't need to ask.

It really doesn't seem worth it to risk someone flipping out or breaking something. Enough models get broken by people walking around and say, pushing your spiky chaos rhino with their backpack to the floor as they walk past (ugh)

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:This can be particularly annoying for using Lash. I've only had 1 guy be a tool about it, but in theory I move the models. That doesn't translate to I touch them automatically in my book, but it does translate into "don't be a douche and undermove your own models, or start moving them really quickly so that they're huddled in an odd way so I can't get all of them under my flamer and we can't remeasure from where they were." I really like to have the option to physically slide them if possible in this case.

For the lash I suggest you use excess dice to mark where I want the models to go. It lets you "place" them but w/o the controversy of touching your opponents models . But in terms of just picking them up ask first it is safer... lol.

"Never rub another man's rhubarb!"