| 26 Aug 17 UTC |
Spring, 2009: California supports Quebec Soloing |
| 01 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: Howdy |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: Why does California let BC win? Multiple accounting? |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: Unlikely. |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: But possible |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: No I just gave up on this game I'm letting Quebec win |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: You let California win, not Quebec. |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: ...This accusation is just weird BC isn't going to win Quebec is going to win. |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: You let British-Columbia (yellow) win I mean.
He took San Francisco and Oregon. |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: Yes but Quebec is beating him I said I support Quebec soloing |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: BC conquered Colorado, Arizona, San Francisco and Oregon without any resistance.
This is cheating or backstairs politics |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: FINE I'll start fight back sheesh
I still support Quebec soloing |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: If you want to support Quebec, please attack the undefended yellow scs. |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: Thanks.
Quebec is a nice player. |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: I still don't see how giving BC all my SC will make him win he has basically. O Home SC left so it's not like he can build stuff |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: Peru just stop
This accusation is just a bonkers and your just trying to stir stuff up |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: He has no right to get any points, because he joined late and had no resistance winning some scs. |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: BC (yellow) possesses Vancouver, Vancouver is one of his start scs. So he CAN build units. |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: I will kill Mexico though |
| 02 Sep 17 UTC |
Spring, 2010: We dont care for little Mexico. |
- Spring, 2019, Finished