Whats the error?Logic error
its a bit of a leap to go from, because the leader of an alliance cheats all become suspect, to, everyone in my alliance thinks the same as me, looks the same, eats the same food and wears the same clothes..Based on his logic, think it's safe to assume that all of EN advocate that same thing.
Your assumption is incorrect. I should think that much would be obvious. Think about it logically, K?I need to remember sometimes that I am conversing with 3rd graders for whom english is not their first language.
@James.... take sloth off the christmas list.... bad sloth...no cookies for u !I was on mobile, Jamez seems to have become obsessed with me in my absence, a new fan?
I really didn't need the help, but thanks, anyway!11 - TUATHA - 643 cities. Decent core But it seems their biggest enemy is the dead sea in their backyard.
12 - Blood Thirsty - 484 cities. See 4.
Just to help him out.
Anyway nice try, Hugo.
its the same players dude (numbers) lol. were just doing some shifting of players. the other 3 you mention have nothing to do with us as far as I am aware.Perhaps very soon we will need a new thread on forum, named the Top-12 Blood alliances
Written in Blood, Blood Frenzy, Blood Thirsty, Blood Chaos, Blood Bath.
Total = 5. What's the point in that?
And I optimistically assume BloodTies, Blood Brothers II, Blood Brothers are not WIB related.
Society do realize that blood is very important substance for human body and life
But it's MRA level 100.
Have you reported said leader for cheating?Whats the error?
Did I say that anyone associated with that person WOULD automatically be guilty?
But it is human nature, that should one person in an alliance, namely the leader of that alliance, be found to have been cheating, or at least the suspicion of cheating been so conclusive that they were banned, it is human nature, that anyone in that alliance, who showed similar characteristics would be considered suspect. Nothing illogical about it.
If Someone on my alliance was banned for using a bot that enabled them to land 10 attacks in a 2 second window, then, logically, anyone else on the same alliance who was able to repeat said feat, and showed similar characteristics, automatically, by association, would be considered suspect. Is that fair, maybe not, but nevertheless, guilt by association.
But thats not illogical, otherwise Guilt by association wouldnt be a phrase.
I need to remember sometimes that I am conversing with 3rd graders for whom english is not their first language.
its a bit of a leap to go from, because the leader of an alliance cheats all become suspect, to, everyone in my alliance thinks the same as me, looks the same, eats the same food and wears the same clothes..
but again, im conversing with someone who happens to come from the alliance led by a cheat, it clouds your perspective, clearly.