EVE Search - Kenny evaccing their last system

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

Kenny evaccing their last system

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 15:46:00 - [1] 3 kenny threads from the goons in 1 day on CAOD never stop bringing us the nail biting content ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 16:29:00 - [2] Originally by: Vladic Ka Originally by: Butter Dog 3 kenny threads from the goons in 1 day on CAOD never stop bringing us the nail biting content I personally think the death throws of a once powerful alliance is epic reporting. 'death throws' would imply something dramatic and entertaining ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 16:33:00 - [3] Originally by: Devilish Ledoux Originally by: Butter Dog 'death throws' would imply something dramatic and entertaining This is how the BoB ends: Not with a bang, but a whimper. except kenny isnt dead and removing sov from 49- won't kill them either then what are you going to do? post 50 threads a day into coad about how you killed one of them in lowsec and claim more dramatic 'death throws'? ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 16:37:00 - [4] Originally by: Anderson Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Vladic Ka Originally by: Butter Dog 3 kenny threads from the goons in 1 day on CAOD never stop bringing us the nail biting content I personally think the death throws of a once powerful alliance is epic reporting. 'death throws' would imply something dramatic and entertaining 'death throws' would imply nothing that makes sense, maybe the grim reaper playing frisbee? 'death throes' on the other hand, would make a whole hell of a lot more sense. look who I am quoting, and hence the ' or do I have to use [sic] to make it even more obvious?
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 16:40:00 - [5] Originally by: Devilish Ledoux Originally by: Butter Dog except kenny isnt dead and removing sov from 49- won't kill them either Wanna bet? so you're saying kenny will disband if they lose 49-? and the original members of bob won't stick together in some form, or just move elsewhere? Are you that delusional?
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 16:44:00 - [6] Originally by: thelung187 Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Devilish Ledoux Originally by: Butter Dog 'death throws' would imply something dramatic and entertaining This is how the BoB ends: Not with a bang, but a whimper. except kenny isnt dead and removing sov from 49- won't kill them either then what are you going to do? post 50 threads a day into coad about how you killed one of them in lowsec and claim more dramatic 'death throws'? "Even as a different named alliance, you won't defeat them!" "Even without their regions, you won't defeat them!" "Even without Delve and NOL, you won't defeat them!" "Even with only a single outpost, you won't defeat them!" "Even without holding any space whatsoever, you won't defeat them!" Now that they're about to be reduced to little more than a glorified collection of empire-hugging starter corps, I wonder what tune you'll sing next. Well, they need to define exactly what 'killing kenny' is, because we've been told they are dead so many times in the past I think we're all getting a little tired of hearing it. So, for the sake of clarity, can Goons/PL please describe exactly what the final outcome looks like? The point at which we won't have to endure 50 spam threads a day about shrike/bob/kenny/gbc etc - what exactly does that look like? we're all ears
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 16:51:00 - [7] Originally by: Vladic Ka They are dead when we say they are. right, so that would have been on about 60 different occasions including during the first invastion of delve just face facts, you'll never kill them in the only way that actually matters and can be considered 'final' - which is to tear them apart and to see the core corporations disband etc and not stick together they'll always be a part of eve whilst the server is running, and there isn't really anything you can do about that - they've made too large a mark on the game (look at your own alliance, you're just like BoB pre-max except with more blues)
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 16:54:00 - [8] Originally by: BurntCornMuffin Originally by: Butter Dog So, for the sake of clarity, can Goons/PL please describe exactly what the final outcome looks like? The point at which we won't have to endure 50 spam threads a day about shrike/bob/kenny/gbc etc - what exactly does that look like? we're all ears They'll most likely look a lot like your alliance does: wandering about empire trying to be relevant. They might even lose a territory war with the likes of CVA later on. look at this cluless meme artist firstly, we dont live in empire secondly, we're a 0.0-based PvP alliance and we're pretty good at shooting stuff too thirdly, U'K have more members than ever before, and we're the oldest active alliance in the game, so we're in a pretty good place - thanks for you concern all the same though
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 16:55:00 - [9] Originally by: Vladic Ka BoB is dead. Its time to finish off kenny. well lets hope they dont reform into another new alliance, or you really will be screwed :(
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:01:00 - [10] Originally by: Captian Duffy Edited by: Captian Duffy on 16/06/2009 16:58:23 Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Vladic Ka They are dead when we say they are. right, so that would have been on about 60 different occasions including during the first invastion of delve just face facts, you'll never kill them in the only way that actually matters and can be considered 'final' - which is to tear them apart and to see the core corporations disband etc and not stick together they'll always be a part of eve whilst the server is running, and there isn't really anything you can do about that - they've made too large a mark on the game (look at your own alliance, you're just like BoB pre-max except with more blues) its not about "killing" them, its about DEFEATING THEM. which NC and goons definetitely did: ✓ strip them off their own name ✓ take their space ✓ defend Querious and take Period Basis ✓ wave to them as they depart for Empire you know even many dead alliances still have people in them, but it doesnt mean that they are relevant nowadays. p.s. ill stop poasting when molle loses chow's titan you use the word 'defeating them' NC/PL/Goons most certainly did not of course if you want to change the yardstick now, then by all means do so if it suits the purposes of your post I take it this is an acknowledgement you can never actually 'kill them', which means unfortunately we are due for many hundreds more caod spam posts about shrike undocking, or yaay losing a battlecruiser, and equally thrilling tales i'm sure I speak for the whole eve community when I say: we cannot wait
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:09:00 - [11] Originally by: thelung187 Edited by: thelung187 on 16/06/2009 17:02:21 Originally by: Butter Dog (look at your own alliance, you're just like BoB pre-max except with more blues) Only without having lost Omist/Paragon Soul/Esoteria/Tenerifis due to militiaristic/logistical incompetence. Or without having 30% membership participation in PVP operations, and few capital pilots while not maintaining a capital replacement program. Or without massive amounts of veteran FCs letting their subs expire due to burnout. Also Pandemic Legion makes (much) more than BoB/Kenny/Beaver over the regions it holds via R64 income now (with their own holdings, and especially what's now been carved up in Delve/PB). Other than that, yeah, they're the same. Clearly there are going to be differences, they are two different entities after all. But there is also an important similarity - perceived power, and always picking the easy fights (a classic BoB trait). Pre-Max BoB were the richest alliance in-game. PL are extremely risk averse (as BoB were), and they fight only where they feel they have a significant tactical advantage (as BoB did). The difference with pre-MAX BoB is that PL are also happy to be part of the uberblob. In that way, you can say BoB were a little less risk averse, perhaps.
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:12:00 - [12] Originally by: Twoside Does your f5 key still have any print on it? ps: I feel your pain, reality hurts to much to face facts eh?! gah, annoying stalker
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:20:00 - [13] Originally by: Flinx Evenstar They may have lost Delve, all their R64's, and are evacuating their last outpost, but they will ALWAYS have Butter dog yapping from the sidelines with his Goon obsession. well, if you will side with an alliance most of the eve population hates, then you're going to have to deal with me pointing out how ******ed you are sorry!
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:27:00 - [14] Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Originally by: Butter Dog well, if you will side with an alliance most of the eve population hates, then you're going to have to deal with me pointing out how ******ed you are sorry! I would put isk on you being less popular than Goons by yourself. that just goes to show how detached PL are from reality in the PR stakes seriously... lol haven't you noticed how the only people defending goons in threads like this are PL and obvious PL alts? go read the MM forums or something
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:29:00 - [15] Originally by: Orree Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Vladic Ka They are dead when we say they are. <snip> they'll always be a part of eve whilst the server is running, and there isn't really anything you can do about that - they've made too large a mark on the game (look at your own alliance, you're just like BoB pre-max except with more blues) Remember the onset of MAX? Remember when Kenny (and friends) had approx 1,400 pilots in 49-? Me too. Hush now. what part of 'pre-MAX' are you not able to understand?
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:34:00 - [16] Originally by: Orree As I point and laugh at the guy who thinks he doesn't have reading comprehension issues. earth to orree 'Pre-MAX', meaning 'before max' you gave two examples - the max campaign, and 49- neither of which accurately describe pre-MAX BoB, so yeah, laugh it up ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:48:00 - [17] Originally by: Orree Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Orree As I point and laugh at the guy who thinks he doesn't have reading comprehension issues. earth to orree 'Pre-MAX', meaning 'before max' you gave two examples - the max campaign, and 49- neither of which accurately describe pre-MAX BoB, so yeah, laugh it up Both instances show that BoB/TAFKAB/Kenny have had as many "blues" and used them as often as anyone else. For some reason, you keep wanting to say others always have more. Carry on with your nonsense, troll. are you deliberately missing the point? I am drawing a comparison with pre-MAX BoB, not the BoB which marched up north with pets in tow, or the 49- blob I agree that BoB had more blues in 49-, I wasnt talking about that Here is the comparison again, for clarity because you seem unable to understand my point: BoB at one time, when it held delve/querious, had very few blues but it did always engage in quite risk-averse fighting... PL also engage in risk-averse fighting, however the key difference being that when bob was at the height of its power it still tended to act alone (unlike PL who seem happy to be a new honorary member of the NC) ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:51:00 - [18] Originally by: Twoside Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Originally by: Butter Dog well, if you will side with an alliance most of the eve population hates, then you're going to have to deal with me pointing out how ****ed you are sorry! I would put isk on you being less popular than Goons by yourself. that just goes to show how detached PL are from reality in the PR stakes seriously... lol haven't you noticed how the only people defending goons in threads like this are PL and obvious PL alts? go read the MM forums or something PL alt signing in! Also, how many keyboards do you use per week bitters? well, I've had the same one for many years :( i know I'm posting lots this evening, I am actually playing eve though, camping some people into a station and getting quite bored ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog'** Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:52:00 - [19] Originally by: Hikaru Shindou are you deliberately missing the point? I am drawing a comparison with pre-MAX BoB, not the BoB which marched up north with pets in tow, or the 49- blob I agree that BoB had more blues in 49-, I wasnt talking about that Here is the comparison again, for clarity because you seem unable to understand my point: BoB at one time, when it held delve/querious, had very few blues but it did always engage in quite risk-averse fighting... PL also engage in risk-averse fighting, however the key difference being that when bob was at the height of its power it still tended to act alone (unlike PL who seem happy to be a new honorary member of the NC) Anyone ever heared of Mercenary Coalition? Noone? sad gasp 1 blue! I am proven to be wrong ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 17:55:00 - [20] Originally by: Euriti http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/crii/20.06.109.jpg yase no blues at all (This is mid 07) lol, are you even trying to be serious with that? they were pretty much alone in the south, and MC were off north with some ex-LV, and thats it now lets compare it to your blue list shall we? ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 18:11:00 - [21] Originally by: Fred0 Edited by: Fred0 on 16/06/2009 18:09:26 Edited by: Fred0 on 16/06/2009 18:06:29 Bob's probably started the big blobbing trend. The NC when it was originally conceived was done as a counter to the BOB/ASCN announcement saying they had created the biggest power bloc in EVE. They made everyone sit up and notice when they subsequently invaded Pure Blind together with the Five, ASCN and a myriad of smaller alliances. Remember the 3 day EC camp to kill EVE's first MS which they missed which just two days. That's the start of multi alliance powerbloc's. 5-3 years ago they pretty much drove this escalation. We took up the mantle and together with the RSF at the time, now Goons we've pushed the envelope to beat them. We passed KEN (BOB then) over a year ago and we've come closer every time we've pushed while their ventures outside home has been smaller and smaller. Looks like we've finally done enough. KEN can go whereever they want and start anew to build a powerhouse but for now they've been beaten comprehensibly at a game they atleast partly invented. yeah, fair post, and I agree, pretty much however BoB didn't keep ASCN blue for long at all, so their powerbloc was extremely short-lived... the NC is something else entirely and you guys started the trend of more permanent 'super-coalitions'
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 19:17:00 - [22] Originally by: Korinn He also somehow missed the 2 dread fleets we lost in the last couple of months, they died because we were being risk averse Actually, they did indeed die because you are risk averse - well spotted. On both occasions you came in at extreme snipe range, and others hotdropped in at close range in support of you. Seems pretty safe, doesn't it? But both times you were effectively countered. Being effectively countered is not the same as 'not being risk averse'.
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 19:21:00 - [23] Originally by: IronGoldenEagle SIgh* I hate to respond to delusional dog and plz dont crucify me for posting alliance guys but this is a eve history issue and im bored at work (love history and was a part of this EVE history first hand, merely pointing out a fact). PL killed BRUCE when they were sitting on somewhere between 400-600 pilots tops and a small contribution by the Goon black ops groups who really just afk camped systems. Bruce was widely considered to be one of the more powerful rising alliances at the time and even with carebears had 3000 members and sov 3 and control of Fountain from January till March b4 the first PL dudes showed up. So the odds did not appear to be in PLs favor in at least that situation. If you're going to call other people delusional, you should at least check the factual accuracy of what you are posting. Calling BRUCE a powerful alliance is strange - numbers alone do not power make. BRUCE internally collapsed under the weight of their own ineptitude. And you're forgetting BoB's influence at the time. All in all, the word 'delusional' could more accurately be applied to your post, as opposed to mine.
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 19:29:00 - [24] Originally by: The Mittani you seem a little angry, as if all of your efforts of the past few months have gone for naught i wonder why that could be~ the hilarious thing is you think disliking goons is the same thing as loving kenny I've got some news for you: it's not
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 19:31:00 - [25] Originally by: Machine Delta Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: IronGoldenEagle SIgh* I hate to respond to delusional dog and plz dont crucify me for posting alliance guys but this is a eve history issue and im bored at work (love history and was a part of this EVE history first hand, merely pointing out a fact). PL killed BRUCE when they were sitting on somewhere between 400-600 pilots tops and a small contribution by the Goon black ops groups who really just afk camped systems. Bruce was widely considered to be one of the more powerful rising alliances at the time and even with carebears had 3000 members and sov 3 and control of Fountain from January till March b4 the first PL dudes showed up. So the odds did not appear to be in PLs favor in at least that situation. If you're going to call other people delusional, you should at least check the factual accuracy of what you are posting. Calling BRUCE a powerful alliance is strange - numbers alone do not power make. BRUCE internally collapsed under the weight of their own ineptitude. And you're forgetting BoB's influence at the time. All in all, the word 'delusional' could more accurately be applied to your post, as opposed to mine. Please list any powerful alliances you have been a member of. hehe, clueless meme artist i must say the quality of goon trolls is falling quite considerably... and I didn't think that was possible - you live and learn!
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 19:34:00 - [26] Originally by: Zastrow J i wonder what the count is on butter dog predictions that have gone completely against him I predict what whenever I post about wider, general issues in reasonably coherent posts, Goons/PL will post about me personally instead as a vague counter for lacking the intellectual rigour to debate my points and that, is 100% accurate
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 19:46:00 - [27] Originally by: Korinn Basically what I'm saying is you really don't know what happened in either of those fights (probably because you weren't there), so calling us risk averse is pretty laughable, especially given we're usually the ***gots roped in to run RR bs at 0 on jammer takedowns. There's a very big difference between calculated avoidance of risk at all costs (aka. not engaging), and engaging in a way that reduces your chances of dying I agree with you that 'not engaging' would be the ultimate risk aversion. No arguements there. But on the occasions mentioned re: the dreads, you chose your moments carefully, and with the XIX dreads going in close you didn't expect the AAA hotdrop (without that, you'd have probably got out alive). I think that trying to say that just because you take minimal risk, you're not 'risk adverse' isn't a very coherent position. You clearly are risk averse - look at your blue list, if that isn't playing it safe I don't know what is. The moment you started getting a lot of moons, you napped whoever you needed to ensure you could hold them (pretty much). That's a defensive position, but it's not a courageous one. RR BS on a jammer POS isn't exactly the best example, we all know that done properly RR BS won't be lost to a deathstar. Hell, even the providence holders have thrown themselves at some very nasty faction deathstars we've thrown up to annoy them, and they're not known for their courage (although they should be).
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 19:47:00 - [28] Originally by: Machine Delta Asking a direct question is a meme? Please. If you want to speak like you have an informed opinion, then please inform us of what powerful alliances you have been a part of first-hand? If you cannot produce such information, then why should we listen to your inane ramblings when you've proven yourself an armchair failure? So please, just answer the question. You can dismiss anything you don't wish to answer as a 'stupid goonie troll' a la Jade Constantine if you like, but I'm hoping you actually have more than a summary dismissal reflex going on in that brain of yours. You want to play serious-posts now, do you? Okay. Tell me exactly why your questions is related to anything we're discussing in this thread, and I'll answer it.
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 19:55:00 - [29] Originally by: Machine Delta Edited by: Machine Delta on 16/06/2009 19:52:23 Originally by: Butter Dog Calling BRUCE a powerful alliance is strange - numbers alone do not power make. Originally by: Butter Dog You want to play serious-posts now, do you? Okay. Tell me exactly why your questions is related to anything we're discussing in this thread, and I'll answer it. You call into question what makes a powerful alliance. I retort by asking you what powerful alliances you have been a part of. You deflect, repeatedly. If one is going to give an opinion on a subject, hopefully it is a subject they have first hand knowledge of, otherwise it's cheerleading from the sidelines, never getting into the big game. Okay, tell me exactly what Goonswarm has accomplished ALONE, and I will tell you exactly what alliances I have been a part of have accomplished alone (during the time I was with them). We can then directly compare solo achievements (after all, we wouldn't want to be riding off the coat-tails of others, for that would not be any kind of indication of our own alliances abilities)
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:03:00 - [30] Originally by: Machine Delta Deflection #3. Are you going to answer the question or just try to redefine what you consider a powerful alliance when you can't come up with a suitable answer? Do you want to extend this into a full blown ad hominem while you're at it? It's quite simple Mr Delta, I know that alliances I've been in have accomplished more alone than GS ever has. That's a simple fact, because I know your alliances history (as do most people). So, I'm asking you a loaded question. I know I'll be able to counter it, and that's why you're not answering me. Carry on ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:05:00 - [31] Originally by: VCBee 516 Originally by: Butter Dog Okay, tell me exactly what Goonswarm has accomplished ALONE, and I will tell you exactly what alliances I have been a part of have accomplished alone (during the time I was with them). Survived. That is most certainly not a solo accomplishment on your part. Try again. ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:06:00 - [32] Originally by: Machine Delta Are you actually going to answer the question or just redefine your position further? It was really a straightforward question. I'm asking you a very straighforward question too, an yet, we both lack an answer ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:11:00 - [33] Originally by: Dahlia Houghton So in your mind accomplishing something "solo" is better than with brosefs? More worthy right? More honourable too no doubt... I think you forget what Goons are and why they don't care for your honourable "good fights". not better, just different if you want to compare the ability of two alliances, you can only really look at solo achievements as a fair measurement ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:14:00 - [34] Originally by: ThorTheGreat That's unfair butterdog has helped plenty of alliances... into their graves lol unfortunately i only helped to kill one alliance (ISS) but they really did deserve it ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:22:00 - [35] Originally by: Commander Tigre Originally by: Butter Dog if you want to compare the ability of two alliances, you can only really look at solo achievements as a fair measurement This is not true. The ability to exert political prowess on its own and through its allies and even sabotage are great achievements that must be accounted for. I'm not saying they can't be accounted for, I am saying you can't directly compare two alliances in that way.
Butter Dog Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.17 10:37:00 - [36] this thread is abolutely terrible (thanks to me) ---------- AKA 'Bitter Dog' Failing at everything he does in EvE since '05

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.