Guild Wars 2

Adlanaa.6172:

I need to tune in here more often, I forget how fun it is to see all the QQ about XOXO.

Keep crying boys, your whining sustains us.

hi lana

Dio.2394:

Furiousbeard.7602:

I’M CANADIAN!

The REAL English of the world. UK English is a travesty of the spoken language, and American (U.S.) English is an abomination to both written and verbal forms!

If Buffy would have said any of the following, I would have been fine with it.

“Fort Aspenwood players/guilds/zergs/underlevels are…”

“Fort Aspenwood(ians/ites/ers/etc) are…”

Fort Aspenwood is not plural since it’s a place, and not considered a collection of people. It has a geographical location and cannot be pluralized. It would be like saying “Canada are cold all the time.”

Nope. You are wrong. In this case, Fort Aspenwood is a collection of individuals, not a single unified entity.

Think of it this way:

The Edmonton Oilers are playing on Sat.
The MN Vikings are playing on Sun.
The Crimson Tide ARE playing on Sat.

The plurality of the moniker doesn’t matter, the noun is representing a collection of individuals and thus the plural verb form is used.

Edit: BTW, it isn’t a place. You don’t play against a physical location, you play against a set of people placed into a group named after a non-existent physical location.

Sorry, but you are the mistaken one.

Fort Aspenwood is a place. The people that reside there are individuals or groups of people.

If you use the Oilers as an example and compare it to Buffy’s response, it’s like him saying “Rexall Place (the arena the Oilers play in) are easy to beat.”

If you play against a group of people, you would refer to them by pluralizing an individual players title.

Singular player – Oiler
Plural – Oilers

For example, I am Canadian. If there were more than myself in a group we would be called Canadians. We reside in Canada (a place) and Canada is not pluralized.

You seem to be taking his phrase out of context.

Edit: I also want to point out that your examples are all properly pluralized, hence the s at the end of each team name, except for the tribe, which implies more than one person by definition. Buffy’s reference to Fort Aspenwood players was not properly pluralized.

Further to that, your examples all start with “The”, whereas Buffy’s starts with only Fort Aspenwood, which means that you have not followed his sentence structure to support your examples. Even if you change your example to “Oilers are playing on Saturday”, it becomes a sloppy sentence and somewhat vague since Oilers could refer to Oil works instead of “the Oilers” which is a specific reference.

Canada are grammar kittens.

Chaba.5410:

I dunno man. A server is a machine, not a collection of individuals.

A server is also someone who brings you food at a restaurant or delivers court documents to people.

Furiousbeard.7602:

Sorry, but you are the mistaken one.

Fort Aspenwood is a place. The people that reside there are individuals or groups of people.

If you use the Oilers as an example and compare it to Buffy’s response, it’s like him saying “Rexall Place (the arena the Oilers play in) are easy to beat.”

If you play against a group of people, you would refer to them by pluralizing an individual players title.

Singular player – Oiler
Plural – Oilers

For example, I am Canadian. If there were more than myself in a group we would be called Canadians. We reside in Canada (a place) and Canada is not pluralized.

You seem to be taking his phrase out of context.

Edit: I also want to point out that your examples are all properly pluralized, hence the s at the end of each team name, except for the tribe, which implies more than one person by definition. Buffy’s reference to Fort Aspenwood players was not properly pluralized.

Further to that, your examples all start with “The”, whereas Buffy’s starts with only Fort Aspenwood, which means that you have not followed his sentence structure to support your examples. Even if you change your example to “Oilers are playing on Saturday”, it becomes a sloppy sentence and somewhat vague since Oilers could refer to Oil works instead of “the Oilers” which is a specific reference.

Fort Aspenwood is a place. It is also the name of a server full of people. The reference was not made to the place, which is non-existent, but rather to the people. Do you believe that you were fighting against a mountain pass last week? Of course you don’t. You believe you were fighting against a group of individuals on a team named after a mountain pass.

Let’s put it this way. Say your character’s name was FuriousHammers instead of FuriousBeard.

FuriousHammers is unable to comprehend proper grammar.

FuriousHammers are unable to comprehend proper grammer.

Which would be correct? The first of course because it refers to a single person that is named after something that is plural.

The same thing for Fort Aspenwood in the original context. Whether the name is singular or plural is of no relevance because what is being named is plural and that is what counts.

As the to the Canada reference. Again, the plurality of the name makes no difference. Think of places named Twin Palms, Five Points, etc. One refers to each of them as singular despite the S at the end.

There is a famous water slide called Raging Waters in California. No one says “Raging Waters are a great place to go” instead of “Raging Waters is a great place to go.” (Well, maybe Canadian tourists do, who knows!?!) Places don’t have to have singular names because they are places and if they have plural names one still refers to them as singular because the place is singular, the name is not relevant.

Also, all my examples are not pluralized, that is exactly why I gave them. The Crimson Tide is singular, but you still use the plural verb because it is a collection of individuals.
Tide, not tribe. Alabama Crimson Tide. Nothing plural about it. Another example would be Stanford Cardinal. No s at the end, still a team name, still plural. People from Berkeley yell “Cardinal sucks” and not “Cardinal suck” at football games.

The inclusion of “the” doesn’t make a differences either.

The staff is in a meeting.

The staff are upset.

Both of those are correct. Both have “the” in them. By context though, one understand that in the first sentence staff is singular because it is referring to the collection itself and not the people in the collection, while in the second the reference is clearly to the people who make up the staff.

Buffy is talking about the people who make up Fort Aspenwood as not being fun to play against. Perhaps the mindless blobbing of FA has caused you to no longer think of yourselves as individuals, but we realize that you still are.

You need to stop changing the structure of Buffy’s sentence or you will never get this right. You constantly put “The” at the beginning of your sentences which changes the meaning.

Fort Aspenwood by itself at the beginning of a sentence refers to a place. With “The” at the beginning of Buffy’s sentence, it is closer to being correct, but still poor English.

Let’s look at your examples now.

“People from Berkeley yell “Cardinal sucks” and not “Cardinal suck” at football games."
Cardinal is the team name, and again is not a place, but a group of players. Fort Aspenwood is a place, just like Toronto is a place. Fort Aspenwood is not our team name since Fort Aspenwood doesn’t have a team name.

" The staff…" is not singular by definition. It means a group of people in an organization. You are again using pluralized words for examples. This is not helping your examples and you are wrong.

“Furioushammers are…”
You cannot put “are” after a person’s name since I am singular. “Are” applies to plurals.

Every single one of your examples is flawed and your English is just as bad as his.

Furiousbeard.7602:

You need to stop changing the structure of Buffy’s sentence or you will never get this right. You constantly put “The” at the beginning of your sentences which changes the meaning.

Fort Aspenwood by itself at the beginning of a sentence refers to a place. With “The” at the beginning of Buffy’s sentence, it is closer to being correct, but still poor English.

The doesn’t matter.

The deer is pretty.
The deer are pretty.

The subject can be both singular or plural, the VERB tells you which. The same thing is happening here. You don’t know what you are talking about.

People would never say The Fort Aspenwood but yet it is still the name of a collection of people. You also don’t have people saying “The players of Fort Aspenwood” they just say Fort Aspenwood. It can be used either way and a reasonable person can tell the difference.

Furiousbeard.7602:

" The staff…" is not singular by definition. It means a group of people in an organization. You are again using pluralized words for examples. This is not helping your examples and you are wrong.

The staff can be either singular or plural depending on whether or not you are talking about the entity of the people in it. That is the whole point.

Furiousbeard.7602:

“Furioushammers are…”
You cannot put “are” after a person’s name since I am singular. “Are” applies to plurals.

That is my point, glad you agree the just the fact that the word is plural doesn’t make what it represents plural. Same applies here. Fort Aspenwood can represent a place, a server or the people on the server. It is singular or plural depending upon which you are talking about.

Furiousbeard.7602:

Every single one of your examples is flawed and your English is just as bad as his.

And infinitely better than yours.

Dio.2394:

Furiousbeard.7602:

You need to stop changing the structure of Buffy’s sentence or you will never get this right. You constantly put “The” at the beginning of your sentences which changes the meaning.

Fort Aspenwood by itself at the beginning of a sentence refers to a place. With “The” at the beginning of Buffy’s sentence, it is closer to being correct, but still poor English.

The doesn’t matter.

The deer is pretty.
The deer are pretty.

The subject can be both singular or plural, the VERB tells you which. The same thing is happening here. You don’t know what you are talking about.

People would never say The Fort Aspenwood but yet it is still the name of a collection of people. You also don’t have people saying “The players of Fort Aspenwood” they just say Fort Aspenwood. It can be used either way and a reasonable person can tell the difference.

Furiousbeard.7602:

" The staff…" is not singular by definition. It means a group of people in an organization. You are again using pluralized words for examples. This is not helping your examples and you are wrong.

The staff can be either singular or plural depending on whether or not you are talking about the entity of the people in it. That is the whole point.

Furiousbeard.7602:

“Furioushammers are…”
You cannot put “are” after a person’s name since I am singular. “Are” applies to plurals.

That is my point, glad you agree the just the fact that the word is plural doesn’t make what it represents plural. Same applies here. Fort Aspenwood can represent a place, a server or the people on the server. It is singular or plural depending upon which you are talking about.

Furiousbeard.7602:

Every single one of your examples is flawed and your English is just as bad as his.

And infinitely better than yours.

Deer is can be both singular and plural. Bad example.

No reasonable person would call a player by the name of the place from which they reside. “London are really hard to play against”. Really? would you Dio? London is full of people, but the sentence is wrong.

If you refer to the people in London, you change the sentence to “Londoners, or Londonites”.

Look up the definition of staff.

Based on your confusion, I think we need to give Fort Aspenwood players a name like the Furiousbeards just to make it easy for you.

Furiousbeard.7602:

Dio.2394:

Furiousbeard.7602:

You need to stop changing the structure of Buffy’s sentence or you will never get this right. You constantly put “The” at the beginning of your sentences which changes the meaning.

Fort Aspenwood by itself at the beginning of a sentence refers to a place. With “The” at the beginning of Buffy’s sentence, it is closer to being correct, but still poor English.

The doesn’t matter.

The deer is pretty.
The deer are pretty.

The subject can be both singular or plural, the VERB tells you which. The same thing is happening here. You don’t know what you are talking about.

People would never say The Fort Aspenwood but yet it is still the name of a collection of people. You also don’t have people saying “The players of Fort Aspenwood” they just say Fort Aspenwood. It can be used either way and a reasonable person can tell the difference.

Furiousbeard.7602:

" The staff…" is not singular by definition. It means a group of people in an organization. You are again using pluralized words for examples. This is not helping your examples and you are wrong.

The staff can be either singular or plural depending on whether or not you are talking about the entity of the people in it. That is the whole point.

Furiousbeard.7602:

“Furioushammers are…”
You cannot put “are” after a person’s name since I am singular. “Are” applies to plurals.

That is my point, glad you agree the just the fact that the word is plural doesn’t make what it represents plural. Same applies here. Fort Aspenwood can represent a place, a server or the people on the server. It is singular or plural depending upon which you are talking about.

Furiousbeard.7602:

Every single one of your examples is flawed and your English is just as bad as his.

And infinitely better than yours.

Deer is can be both singular and plural. Bad example.

No reasonable person would person would call a player by the name of the place from which they reside. “London are really hard to play against”. Really? would you Dio? London is full of people, but the sentence is wrong.

If you refer to the people in London, you change the sentence to “Londoners, or Londonites”.

Look up the definition of staff.

Based on your confusion, I think we need to give Fort Aspenwood players a name like the Furiousbeards just to make it easy for you.

Nope, people refer to the people on other servers simply by the server name all the time because there is no formal team name for the wvw players, instead the name of the server is used. But it is still a team name.

Let me give you another example since you are so hung up on The.

There is a rock band called U2. They are not called The U2.

If you liked the band’s music you would say “U2 sounds great.” You are using singular because you are referring to the band as an entity.

If the members of the band were coming to your house to teach you grammar you would way “U2 are coming to my house to teach me grammar.” In this case you use the plural because the members of the band individually are being referred to using their collective name.

Fort Aspenwood is the collective name of the players who wvw for Fort Aspenwood the server which is named after Fort Aspenwood the place. There is no Fort Aspenwood Zerg Monkeys™ to call them. Additionally, the people being referenced are not all the players of Fort Aspenwood, but rather those on the wvw “team” so no one callers them Fort Aspenwooders (ians, ies, etc.), they simply say Fort Aspenwood.

BTW, you don’t live in Fort Aspenwood. You don’t live on the server and you don’t play in the area called Fort Aspenwood. None of your characters has ever been to Fort Aspenwood. It is simply a team name.

Fort Aspenwood is a place or region on a map. It is not a team. The only way you are able to validate your answers is by assuming that Fort Aspenwood is the team name (which it is not).

U2 as an example is bad again because it refers to a group and not a place.

This is basically the sticking point of our conversation. Unless you accept that it is not a team name, and is in fact a location, we cannot continue the discussion. It is at an impasse.

On the internet, no one knows you is a dog.

Furiousbeard.7602:

Fort Aspenwood is a place or region on a map. It is not a team. The only way you are able to validate your answers is by assuming that Fort Aspenwood is the team name (which it is not).

U2 as an example is bad again because it refers to a group and not a place.

This is basically the sticking point of our conversation. Unless you accept that it is not a team name, and is in fact a location, we cannot continue the discussion. It is at an impasse.

Fort Aspenwood is not a place on a reset map. Fort Aspenwood Borderlands is. Borderlands, as in the area next to Fort Aspenwood. not Fort Aspenwood itself.

I am not going to accept that Fort Aspenwood is only a location because it clearly isn’t. No one on these boards refers to the players in Fort Aspenwood wvw as Aspentonian, Aspenwooders, Apsenwoodians, etc. Nor does anyone refer to them by some other team name than Fort Aspenwood.

It means multiple things:

1) Some location in Guild Wars 1
2) A logical grouping of players into a “server”. This is not a physical server, but rather a logical boundary that is used to scope processes and memory space and it has the side effect of separating which players can interact with each other while on the server.
3) It is the name of a team in WvW

If one is using it to mean the place or logical grouping, then one would use the singular. If it is used to refer to the team as an entity itself (Fort Aspenwood is leading), then the singular is used. If it is used to refer to the individuals on the team, then the plural is used.

For “Fort Aspenwood are not fun to fight at all” refers to the players. We aren’t fighting a place called Fort Aspenwood. We aren’t fighting a physical server called Fort Aspenwood. We are fighting the players from a WvW logical grouping called Fort Aspenwood. Its the name of a grouping, not an actual location in the context in which it is used.

You refuse to see context. Clearly it can mean more than a place because two places can’t fight each other.

Let me ask you a question Dio.

If you wanted to tell people on a forum that Fort Aspenwood players were not fun to play against, how would you word it?

Fort Aspenwood is a place, as well as the borderlands around it.

The people on these boards use proper grammar for the most part when referring to a rival server. Go read some more threads and you’ll see a trend.

As you said, Fort Aspenwood is a region in GW 1, meaning that it is a place.

The server is a physical object on the planet Earth. People have their digital characters on it. Again, it is a place that they reside.

The teams that enter WvW are usually in guilds that have names, otherwise they are individuals.

Like you say, “two places can’t fight each other.” You need people to do the fighting, so you would refer to the players and not the place they come from.

I am destroying every example you have and you still won’t accept it.

Even though every server is named after a region on a map, you still say “I am not going to accept that Fort Aspenwood is only a location…”. Your ignorance is quite impressive.

Borlis Pass are all your base belong to us.

<—— winner

Furiousbeard.7602:

Fort Aspenwood is a place, as well as the borderlands around it.

The people on these boards use proper grammar for the most part when referring to a rival server. Go read some more threads and you’ll see a trend.

As you said, Fort Aspenwood is a region in GW 1 meaning that it is a place.

The server is a physical object on the planet Earth. People have their digital characters on it. Again, it is a place that they reside.

The teams that enter WvW are usually in guilds that have names, otherwise they are individuals.

Like you say, “two places can’t fight each other.” You need people to do the fighting, so you would refer to the players and not the place they come from.

I am destroying every example you have and you still won’t accept it.

Even though every server is named after a region on a map, you still say “I am not going to accept that Fort Aspenwood is only a location…”. Your ignorance is quite impressive.

You aren’t destroying anything. When people are addressing each other here by the server name they aren’t referring to some location, they are referring to a collective of people.

If one says “Fort Aspenwood is bad”, the grammar is correct because the team as a unit is being referred to by the speaker. If one says “Fort Aspenwood are running away”, the grammar is correct because the individuals within the team are being referenced. In neither case is Fort Aspenwood being referred to as a location btw.

You are clueless. Perhaps you know how to speak Canadian, but you are poorly versed in actual English.

Furiousbeard.7602:

As you said, Fort Aspenwood is a region in GW 1 meaning that it is a place.

So you are saying that when people reference server names within context of the wvw forums they are talking about a place in another game rather than the people grouped together and named after the place in another game? Are you insane?

While you were so angrily trying to defend your bad grammar, you let your spelling and punctuation slip over the last two pages. Go clean that up and then come back and talk to me.

<—- still the winner

Your English is terrible. Go hang out with your friend Buffy.

Furiousbeard.7602:

Let me ask you a question Dio.

If you wanted to tell people on a forum that Fort Aspenwood players were not fun to play against, how would you word it?

You still didn’t answer this Dio

Dio.2394:

Furiousbeard.7602:

As you said, Fort Aspenwood is a region in GW 1 meaning that it is a place.

So you are saying that when people reference server names within context of the wvw forums they are talking about a place in another game rather than the people grouped together and named after the place in another game? Are you insane?

And you haven’t answered the above.

Look at everytime you have referenced Borlis Pass, Fort Aspenwood and/or Crystal Desert in this thread and tell me with a straight face you have been referencing some location in GW1.

You keep making excuses and changing the reason it is wrong. First it was because examples had “the” in them and Fort Aspenwood doesn’t. Then it was because it’s a location and a location only. But that little bit of weaseling doesn’t hold up in the face of how people, including yourself, actually use the name of the server to refer to the players on the server. Under your logic, people should be saying Fort Aspentonians, etc. But, they don’t, including yourself. Tell me why?

Furiousbeard.7602:

I know I am wrong, but am unable to admit it, so I will go off in another direction

Fixed it for you.

BTW, spend some listening to the BBC or English Premier League broadcasts. You might find you have an entire country to teach how to speak the language which bears the country’s name.

Poor Dio

You lost brother, and sometimes in life you need to accept things and move on.

Maybe after you’ve experienced more in life and learned your native language, you will understand what is happening here.

Furiousbeard.7602:

Poor Dio

You lost brother, and sometimes in life you need to accept things and move on.

Maybe after you’ve experienced more in life and learned your native language, you will understand what is happening here.

You are clueless. Perhaps the cold has limited your brain. I will show you one final example that fits all categories here, the World Cup. The teams are from countries and named only by the country name, which is about as similar to this set up as you can get.

Headline: “Spain deliver on promise at last”

http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro/season=2008/

Game, Set, Match.

That unfortunately doesn’t say “Spain are”… so, yeah… you have only further proven that you are incapable of keeping to the format of the first sentence and have not proven anything.

Game set match?

You never even got off the bench. When you learn to stay on topic and not resort to petty insults, you might be able to debate. Until then, you can continue to ramble on like a fool.

Good day Dio.

Furiousbeard.7602:

That unfortunately doesn’t say “Spain are”… so, yeah… you have only further proven that you are incapable of keeping to the format of the first sentence and have not proven anything.

Game set match?

You never even got off the bench. When you learn to stay on topic and not resort to petty insults, you might be able to debate. Until then, you can continue to ramble on like a fool.

Good day Dio.

It doesn’t matter if it says “are” or not. They are, they deliver, he is, he delivers. It’s the same thing. The rule of grammar governs subject verb agreement. The subject and the verb agree for the same reason under the same circumstances, it is just a different verb. You would realize that if you actually understood anything about language.

You have lost little troll and lost what little bit of credibility you had in the process.

Edit: But since your little mind is unable to comprehend an example that is not exactly like another, I bring you:

Headline: “How Spain Are Intent on Producing the Players to Replace World Cup Winners”

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1811055-how-spain-are-intent-on-producing-the-players-to-replace-world-cup-winners

BTW: I started all this off with a smile and saying it was an understandable mistake. You turned things nasty.

Let me break this down for you.

You are talking about the World Cup. An event that has teams representing their home country. Not so ironically, the teams have the name of their country.

The team name is Spain and they come from Spain.

Fort Aspenwood is a place or country if you are following along. The people that represent their home country of Fort Aspenwood have guild names or run solo. When you speak about the players from Fort Aspenwood, you would say “the players are tough to win against” or “Fort Aspenwood is leading Silver League”.

There is a difference between the home country and the teams or players that represent it, which you an incapable of grasping from the look of it.

In your desperate attempt to find a suitable argument, you have completely lost sight of the difference and end up providing examples that don’t reveal anything except for your lack of understanding.

I think you’ve had enough and should give it a rest.

Furiousbeard.7602:

Let me break this down for you.

You are talking about the World Cup. An event that has teams representing their home country. Not so ironically, the teams have the name of their country.

The team name is Spain and they come from Spain.

Fort Aspenwood is a place or country if you are following along. The people that represent their home country of Fort Aspenwood have guild names or run solo. When you speak about the players from Fort Aspenwood, you would say “the players are tough to win against” or “Fort Aspenwood is leading Silver League”.

There is a difference between the home country and the teams or players that represent it, which you an incapable of grasping from the look of it.

In your desperate attempt to find a suitable argument, you have completely lost sight of the difference and end up providing examples that don’t reveal anything except for your lack of understanding.

I think you’ve had enough and should give it a rest.

You simply can’t admit you were wrong. Your last defense was that an example using the verb to be was not used. Now you have gone back to the it’s not a team name defense.

But it is a team name and the World Cup shows a perfect example of analogous naming.

Scores are listed beside team names. What name is associated with Fort Aspenwood’s score each week? Hmmm? Oh, it’s Fort Aspenwood! Why? Because that is the team name.

It’s sad. I knew you were a troll, but I really didn’t think you were completely incapable of doing anything but trolling. It has been amusing watching your attempt to sound authoritative as you squirm from one non-grammar related rationalization to another. You are as sure of yourself as a Tea Party Republican and about as accurate.

So you’re saying a country or region is a team because the team is named after the country in the World Cup.

Soccer fans are smart!

You do realize that the publication is identifying the team right? Not the country? I just want to make sure you understand what’s written there.

England are full of smart people. London are home to many people. Spain are near the ocean. Earth are located in the Milky Way. North America are above South America. Fort Aspenwood are not fun to fight. Germany are at odds with other Euro nations. Whitehouse are where Obama works. Australia are a place you can find poisonous creatures. Canada are not fun to fight. France are not fun to fight. Belgium are not fun to fight.

Please continue to post more examples. I think you’re very close to convincing me.

wtf why r u all still posting in this thread about grammar

It’s over now, I won.

Dio gave up and stopped posting. I think he went to practice his grammar, punctuation and spelling.