Wordfeud League of Honour

i also note the term ´injustice´ was introduced in your response, not mine. my intention was simply to question how the outcome aligned with the stated rules.

that said, i understand and appreciate that you and the others involved are volunteers, and i recognise the time and effort that goes into maintaining these tournaments. however, the tone of your reply-particularly the reference to donations-came across as dismissive and somewhat inappropriate. it suggests that a player´s concerns may carry less weight if they haven´t contributed financially, which doesn´t feel like a fair or inclusive approach in a community where participation is otherwise open.

if the expectation is that only paying members are entitled to have their concerns seriously considered, it would be more transparent to make that a clear, mandatory requirement rather than framing contributions as optional, while informally tying them to how feedback is received. as it stands, that implication feels misleading.

in any case, i will leave it there.

You don´t even donate the tiny annual fee to help keep the site running, just playing for free and demanding stuff. Not sure I´m too interested in further analysis of your "injustice" to be honest. Have a great weekend.

PEAS AND CARROTS is a warm and generous human being who donates and helps WLoH pay the bills.

The winner gets promoted, the two last players will be relegated. If I were to guess, I would say that Saverne will top the table at the end of the season.