Magnificent_Cow
Chieftain
Ok! I'm happy as long as the wheels are still turning.
DG6 RPG PBEM - "Let's Play"
- Thread starter truckingpete
- Start date
RegentMan
Deity
Actually, the manual's spelling is correct. It says "...regardless of whether they password protected their turns." That's correct. Your way doesn't make too much sense...truckingpete said:This password allows the admin (me) to drop players from the game, regardless of whether their password protected their turns.
That's all it says for that. Plus I found a spelling mistake in the book:
they password protected their turns.
SHOULD BE:
their password protected their turns.
truckingpete
On a Stark Trek
RegentMan said:
they password?? Umm..I don't think that doesn't make sense
I still think it should be their or whatever theres..THERES so many..
ANYWAY....
How long should we wait before kicking out a player??
1- 2 weeks. We can wait a month..I would like to get this moving, it would be fun!!
Pete's way could be correct given the right context. However, given the intended meaning of the paragragh...
"Password protected" is a term that can stand by itself, meaning that the item is currently protected by a password. Here is an example of the use of the phrase: "My laptop is password protected." Of course, if you really wanted to, you could hyphenate the phrase - "Password-protected" - which might make the meaning a little more clear. As such, I believe RegentMan is correct.
Pete's way implies that the protection of the password occurred in the past, and the sentence has a slightly awkward feel to it when put into this context. Also, and perhaps more importantly, it changes the meaning and implies that they DEFINITELY HAVE a password - "...regardless of whether their password protected their turn." This throws in a possessive (their) when referring to the password, and thus says that the person definitely has a password, and as we all remember, password protection is optional. Also, it gives the implication that their password (which they DEFINITELY HAVE
) can also NOT protect it.
Anyway, bringing it back to the context in which it was first used. Essentially it means that they admin can remove a player from the game, and whether they HAVE a password or not is irrelevent. This is as opposed to the way you put it Pete, in which case it would mean that an admin can remove a player, regardless of whether their password (which they DEFINITELY HAVE ) has protected their turns in the past.
I hope that cleared this mess up
Back on topic: let's give Drake one more day, then remove him if he doesn't show in any way.
"Password protected" is a term that can stand by itself, meaning that the item is currently protected by a password. Here is an example of the use of the phrase: "My laptop is password protected." Of course, if you really wanted to, you could hyphenate the phrase - "Password-protected" - which might make the meaning a little more clear. As such, I believe RegentMan is correct.
Pete's way implies that the protection of the password occurred in the past, and the sentence has a slightly awkward feel to it when put into this context. Also, and perhaps more importantly, it changes the meaning and implies that they DEFINITELY HAVE a password - "...regardless of whether their password protected their turn." This throws in a possessive (their) when referring to the password, and thus says that the person definitely has a password, and as we all remember, password protection is optional. Also, it gives the implication that their password (which they DEFINITELY HAVE
) can also NOT protect it.Anyway, bringing it back to the context in which it was first used. Essentially it means that they admin can remove a player from the game, and whether they HAVE a password or not is irrelevent. This is as opposed to the way you put it Pete, in which case it would mean that an admin can remove a player, regardless of whether their password (which they DEFINITELY HAVE
) has protected their turns in the past.I hope that cleared this mess up
Back on topic: let's give Drake one more day, then remove him if he doesn't show in any way.
Octavian X
is not a pipe.
I wouldn't remove him - that might throw the game off-balance should someone stumble upon his abandoned lands. Rather, I'd try to find a replacement...
truckingpete
On a Stark Trek
Octavian X said:
Don't need to
I just got an e - mail from Drake that he said that he sent it to UWS a couple of days ago. So UWS, you should have the email. If you don't, email Drake to see of he could send it back.
So game on!!
- TP
P.S - we should make a rule though of how long we should wait for an unscheldued absents. I am saying 1 - 2 weeks.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
truckingpete said:Don't need to
I just got an e - mail from Drake that he said that he sent it to UWS a couple of days ago. So UWS, you should have the email. If you don't, email Drake to see of he could send it back.
So game on!!
- TP
P.S - we should make a rule though of how long we should wait for an unscheldued absents. I am saying 1 - 2 weeks.
1-2 weeks is far to long, I'd say 3 days at the most. Possibly 1-2 weeks if they announce there going to be gone.
RegentMan
Deity
Thank you for clearing that up UWS. I look forward to your guys' updates!
Perhaps we should make it a requirement that you post in here once you have sent the email. As you may have deduced, the save didn't appear in my inbox, so I've sent Drake an email 
Also, I believe 1-2 weeks unexplained absence is a bit too long. Perhaps 1 week unexplained absence, but any longer and the game will just take way too long.
P.S. Glad I could help clearing things up
Also, I believe 1-2 weeks unexplained absence is a bit too long. Perhaps 1 week unexplained absence, but any longer and the game will just take way too long.
P.S. Glad I could help clearing things up
truckingpete
On a Stark Trek
Yea 2 weeks is a little long. How about 5 days. Its in between 3 and 7 days. Plus that would be nice to have a rule to post in here once or something like that.
- TP
- TP
Magnificent_Cow
Chieftain
5 days unexplained absence sounds like a sane limit to me. If we're going to try to get replacements in the event of a dropped player, though, I think we need to give our passwords to pete.
Mmmm, well I was under the impression that it was possible for the admin to skip a player's turn. Maybe I'm making things up Nonetheless, my vote is for 5 days unexplained absence.
I've received the save by the way, but I won't be able to play it until tomorrow
EDIT:// Played and sent
Nonetheless, my vote is for 5 days unexplained absence.I've received the save by the way, but I won't be able to play it until tomorrow
EDIT:// Played and sent
truckingpete
On a Stark Trek
Strider said:
Umm...I didn't get it.
Better send it again.
- TP
truckingpete
On a Stark Trek
Strider said:
Hmm..strange...nothing yet..Its not in my junk mail folder either.....
Better try 1 more time, if it doesn't work, put in this thread or send me a PM.
I wonder what the problem is.....
- TP
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
Not even going to bother re-sending it. I uploaded it to CFC, you can find it here:
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads9/DG6_PBEM.sav
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads9/DG6_PBEM.sav
truckingpete
On a Stark Trek
Strider said:
Ok..thanks! I'll figure out this email...watch this it comes 5 days later...
- TP
truckingpete
On a Stark Trek
Played the save and sent..
- TP
- TP
TimBentley
Deity
Save sent.
