Not so bright

[Sakurato]

I like the 180 degree turn of events.

if youre complaining that we're making honest reviews, then you should take a look at something called freedom of speech.

What the LW guild disagree with may honestly be what the reviewer thinks of. If you value your own freedom of speech so that you can speak about the server, at least be consistent and let others have their "freedom of speech" about a particular guild in the server.

There's a difference between this review and the ones teOx and I posted.

We have a slight amount of evidence to back it up though it may or may not be TRUE??it is however still there to support our review.

The lag issue: If he's been playing for four months then obviously he would have realized that what happened yesterday(us getting hacked ~) rarely ever happens.

As for him saying the GMs give LW overpowered items? can he show any evidence of that? I don't think he can because its never happened.

Most player reviews can probably be pulled out and represented to the author and they can provide some sort of evidence that back up their statements.

In my opinion this person wrote a bad bad review because obviously he has no clue what's going on. I highly doubt he's played the server for four months. They need a better system to post a review on RMS ):

[GM-Ayu]

He doesn't really need to have 'evidence; or not. Review in RMS is 100% subjective. As long as it reflects what he thinks and passes what the RMS staff's guidelines are, the review is as valid as yours, teOx, mine or anyone's.

Sometimes you "know" what's going on, and you face others who claim otherwise, but you just have to live with it anyway and let the 3rd person party decide whose side are they siding on.

[Général_Argos]

I'm not happy to see this review, but it brings some sort of

~Irony~

To some of the people who made biased reviews this week

[Bloody]

If this review frustrates you, welcome to the GM boat?

It's not frustrating at all. If anything, it boosts my morale to see that LW is doing THAT good. It's also good that he is attacking the GMs so now you have more of a reason -beside LW's complains- to become better GMs.

What that guy says here or on RMS will affect us in -absolutely- no way. It will, however, give bad reputation to the server/GM team. I hope he practices his freedom of speech more often, I could use mentally disorted people like him for my amusement.

You aren't telling me not to call him stupid when he is running around with STUPID written on his forehead, are you =( ?

[teOx]

holy crap ayu.

you almost seem like you think LW cares. O____________O

fyi we dont its something we're laughing about on vent

and krim stop making yourself look stupid. our reviews were subjective based on true events lol. LW didnt get GM help ever so even you should be able to notice a difference between the review styles. there is a difference between a biased comment and a lie. this goes for you too ayu

and like bloody said, its flattering to hear people accuse us of cheating. sorry people, we're just good.

the review is as valid as yours, teOx, mine or anyone's.

right. say it more you might believe it. lol this thread is win.

[Général_Argos]

In case of a score spectrum with no objective standart, the way to judge a score is to compare it to the rest of the mass.

Teox, check out the score of all other low rate server on first rms page.

The score you gave to hero is lower than what the crappiest of the low rate got.

By rating hero that way you are assuming it is the crappiest of all low rates on the first page.

Wich is clearly untrue.

--> A low rate selling Lord's Kaho horns or mvp cards can score as good as 80 easily.

Wich clearly mean you didn't think enough before doing your review or that you purpusly made a biased review to express your anger. Same applys to all bad reviews that hero got this week.

[teOx]

difference is some are based on truth and some are based on lie.

GM giving LW items is a lie, thus the review is based on lie.

yes my review was subjective (by definition of a review? lol) ,

but i based it on my experiences, which ayu will explain to you, makes my review valid.

[Général_Argos]

difference is some are based on truth and some are based on lie.

GM giving LW items is a lie, thus the review is based on lie.

yes my review was subjective (by definition of a review? lol) ,

but i based it on my experiences, which ayu will explain to you, makes my review valid.

Blablaish can be subjective, but numbers dont lie

[teOx]

ayu please explain it to him we argue so much that he is too stubborn to ever admit im right

[Général_Argos]

Your dead wrong on this.??

I do not care that what you wrote is based on experience or that what the other guy wrote is based on a lie (or he is crazy and really believes it)

I'm talking you about numbers and scores

please re-read post #26