I don't care about the sniping. I've done it plenty. My only issue is that the responder seems to think the owner doesn't have the right to message and complain about it in a way that wasn't even rude. Like I said... you don't have to agree and can just keep sniping, but responding with your own condescension isn't what the OP pretended it was. If you're a sniper, you're a sniper... nothing wrong with that. But that doesn't mean the person getting sniped doesn't get to message you and suggest that you not do so. You may think it's petty, but responding back with an equally unnecessary and condescending message is even more petty in my opinion than just ignoring it and playing your game the way you want to. And then to come here and post the example interaction as if you're some kind of altruistic sniper teaching people that they should be grateful when that's not how they want to play THEIR game... is pretty additionally petty in my opinion. Fortunately, these are only my opinions and you can feel free to ignore them as well.
It doesn’t matter what you may think is petty, condescending, grateful, altruistic or whatever ... The matter of who helps who, and who benefits from the endeavor, is settled when one player adds points to another player’s building ... And your opinion doesn’t mean squat to that.
No one suggested anyone had the right to do one thing or another, although Player 1 did try to suggest that Player 2 should do something Player 1 desired, that would not necessarily benefit both players, after Player 2 had already benefited Player 1.
If Player 1 was simply interested in playing THIER game, then that would in no way indicate the necessity to contact Player 2.
In the interaction posted, the only Player attempting to instruct another Player on how things are, or should be, was Player 1. Player 2 just offered an alternative response should Player 1 feel the need to contact them again.
.