Author Topic: Wheres Nationals? (Read 34978 times)

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #25 on:** January 03, 2010, 03:17:31 PM »

Well since MN and CA are the same state, there is precedence that Boston and Arden Hills are the same city

And we could have nats in 3 states at once

Lampy 2.0 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 04, 2010, 07:43:18 PM »

Atlanta! Or Hayesville, since the game is 15 years old this year.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #27 on:** January 04, 2010, 09:16:26 PM »

Quote

Clearly this is a Jedi mind trick trying to get us to believe that Minneapolis and Boston are actually the same city, and that having Nats in MN would effectively allow Nats to be in the Midwest and East Coast at the same time.

Actually, we gave Minneapolis to Boston as a Christmas gift and to cement our recent political alliance. So Minneapolis is technically "West Boston" these days, which would effectively make them the same city, allowing Nationals to be held in the Midwest and on the East Coast at the same time.

bmc25 · « **Reply #28 on:** January 07, 2010, 11:49:43 PM »

^ this was awesome.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #29 on:** January 08, 2010, 02:57:29 AM »

California and its Commonwealth Territories FTW!

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #30 on:** January 09, 2010, 09:15:54 PM »

I find it funny, that Minnesotans came up with the whole "West Minnesota" idea, and then the Western ones decide to call us "East California" um... nice try guys, but by doing that, your copying Minnesota. I suppose it's because we're just that awesome.

yeah, Midwest is probably going to get it this year. OH, MN or IA. GA wouldn't be bad, but I wouldn't be going...

sk · « **Reply #31 on:** January 10, 2010, 12:53:27 AM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on January 09, 2010, 09:15:54 PM

I find it funny, that Minnesotans came up with the whole "West Minnesota" idea, and then the Western ones decide to call us "East California" um... nice try guys, but by doing that, your copying Minnesota. I suppose it's because we're just that awesome.

But, we're the same state... we can't copy ourselves. It was simply necessary to explain to some who actually owned who.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #32 on:** January 10, 2010, 10:48:53 AM »

Quote from: sk on January 10, 2010, 12:53:27 AM

Quote from: Ring Wraith on January 09, 2010, 09:15:54 PM
I find it funny, that Minnesotans came up with the whole "West Minnesota" idea, and then the Western ones decide to call us "East California" um... nice try guys, but by doing that, your copying Minnesota. I suppose it's because we're just that awesome.

But, we're the same state... we can't copy ourselves. It was simply necessary to explain to some who actually owned who.

there is a definite division between Minnesota and West Minnesota. so you're copying us by trying to declare that you actually own us. funny that you only start saying that once we declared California's renaming to West Minnesota...

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #33 on:** January 10, 2010, 02:15:30 PM »

ORLANDO NATS 2010

sk · « **Reply #34 on:** January 10, 2010, 03:24:26 PM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on January 10, 2010, 10:48:53 AM

Quote from: sk on January 10, 2010, 12:53:27 AM
Quote from: Ring Wraith on January 09, 2010, 09:15:54 PM
I find it funny, that Minnesotans came up with the whole "West Minnesota" idea, and then the Western ones decide to call us "East California" um... nice try guys, but by doing that, your copying Minnesota. I suppose it's because we're just that awesome.
But, we're the same state... we can't copy ourselves. It was simply necessary to explain to some who actually owned who.
there is a definite division between Minnesota and West Minnesota. so you're copying us by trying to declare that you actually own us. funny that you only start saying that once we declared California's renaming to West Minnesota...

We've had a street named after East California since well before 1923. Texas has one, too. It's not a new idea, we've recognized East California for years.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #35 on:** January 10, 2010, 04:06:35 PM »

except for the fact that you're calling Minnesota East California, not the street.

on a side note, Hope and Harmony are in MN

sk · « **Reply #36 on:** January 10, 2010, 04:29:56 PM »

The street is named after the state of East California.

And Cactus is in CA.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #37 on:** January 10, 2010, 04:53:17 PM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on January 09, 2010, 09:15:54 PM

I find it funny, that Minnesotans came up with the whole "West Minnesota" idea, and then the Western ones decide to call us "East California" um... nice try guys, but by doing that, your copying Minnesota. I suppose it's because we're just that awesome.

It's okay to be bitter and jaded. We stole your joke and made it wittier. That would make me cranky, too. Speaking of wit, we happen to have a monopoly on that as well: Whittier is in CA.

sk · « **Reply #38 on:** January 10, 2010, 06:36:33 PM »

Quote from: Tsavong Lah on January 10, 2010, 04:53:17 PM

It's okay to be bitter and jaded. We stole your joke and made it wittier. That would make me cranky, too. Speaking of wit, we happen to have a monopoly on that as well: Whittier is in CA.

In fact, we've got an entire mountain of wit.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #39 on:** January 10, 2010, 07:48:20 PM »

Dang, we're on a roll. Poor East Californians...

Soundman2 · « **Reply #40 on:** January 10, 2010, 11:23:43 PM »

Hay if we do nats at disney world can we do the same time as botcon? plez http://www.botcon.com/BotCon10/

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #41 on:** January 11, 2010, 09:28:26 AM »

Quote from: Tsavong Lah on January 10, 2010, 04:53:17 PM

Quote from: Ring Wraith on January 09, 2010, 09:15:54 PM
I find it funny, that Minnesotans came up with the whole "West Minnesota" idea, and then the Western ones decide to call us "East California" um... nice try guys, but by doing that, your copying Minnesota. I suppose it's because we're just that awesome.
It's okay to be bitter and jaded. We stole your joke and made it wittier. That would make me cranky, too. Speaking of wit, we happen to have a monopoly on that as well: Whittier is in CA.

made it wittier by replacing one place with the same place? I don't think so. that's like the whole "Knock knock" joke with saying Banana a million times, but you would have it changed to Apple. which really wouldn't be that funny, since everybody knows that the Banana joke is the proper one. Orange you glad that I didn't say Banana again?
love that joke... apple would make it lame though.

ACe · « **Reply #42 on:** January 11, 2010, 10:10:21 AM »

I think Nats should be in Missouri again. its Central for most people. If not Missouri some where close, a neighbor state or something.

Red · « **Reply #43 on:** January 11, 2010, 10:21:45 AM »

no MO would be horralbe for me as would be orlando altough that would get us permotion but GA NATS 2010!!!!!!!

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #44 on:** January 11, 2010, 11:25:19 AM »

I know that this thread has nothing to do with where Nationals is ultimately placed, but it would be helpful if people limit their preferences to states that held a State-level tournament last year.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #45 on:** January 11, 2010, 04:37:54 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on January 11, 2010, 11:25:19 AM

I know that this thread has nothing to do with where Nationals is ultimately placed, but it would be helpful if people limit their preferences to states that held a State-level tournament last year.

That's not a fair stipulation. I don't know if there was a FL States last year, but I certainly intend to make sure there is one this year, even if not in Orlando. Having hosted the CT state tournament in the past, I would like to think that I am qualified. Plus, Roy has already agreed to come down to FL to help out if I get a BIG tournament.

Roy alone makes any state a favorite.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #46 on:** January 11, 2010, 07:03:14 PM »

The predominate issue IMO is not the quality of the host it is the size and motivation of the native player base that had me make that suggestion.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #47 on:** January 11, 2010, 07:54:04 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on January 11, 2010, 07:03:14 PM

The predominate issue IMO is not the quality of the host it is the size and motivation of the native player base that had me make that suggestion.

Still not a fair stipulation, since there may be large cells of players in hiding, waiting to be peacefully discovered.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #48 on:** January 12, 2010, 05:41:23 PM »

As opposed to... violently discovered?

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #49 on:** January 12, 2010, 07:42:08 PM »

Quote from: Tsavong Lah on January 12, 2010, 05:41:23 PM

As opposed to... violently discovered?

Yes. Being "discovered" by Cortez, for example, didn't work out so good for hidden civilizations.

News:

Author Topic: Wheres Nationals? (Read 34978 times)

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk