Jump to content

Extra, Extra, Monsters Inc News!


Lord Hitchcock

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lord Hitchcock said:

 

Surely it's in enhanced, logs of him saying to hit DK, while they were tied.

 

If you are referring to

  1. <DemonSpawn[RnR]> why don't you guys just go and attack Doom Kingdom if you want action that bad?

then your interpretation is both ridiculous and false.

 

Quote

And it's one thing for it to be a one-time thing, it's not. It's an every time thing, there is no heroic gesture to have an ally you do not care for... Or an ally you'd like to see rolled.

 

with friends like that, I wouldn't want enemies

Disagreeing with your allies FA policies means you don't care for them or want to see them rolled? Personally I thought it meant that some in R&R disagreed with their FA policies :|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Finnish Commie said:

If you are referring to

  1. <DemonSpawn[RnR]> why don't you guys just go and attack Doom Kingdom if you want action that bad?

then your interpretation is both ridiculous and false.

 

ex-DK gov was thrilled to read that, regardless of how you interpret it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speculation and twisting something to your own thoughts does not give the full context of the scenario .. personally i would listen to the posts that are telling you that two leaders and allies owe it to each other to be up front update possiblities of things that may or may not occur ... Judgements from one conversation does not dictate events that may or may not have happened 6 months to a year before.  WIth that in mind speculation is okay as long as you dont state it as fact without knowing the whole facts invovled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, brucemania said:

Speculation and twisting something to your own thoughts does not give the full context of the scenario .. personally i would listen to the posts that are telling you that two leaders and allies owe it to each other to be up front update possiblities of things that may or may not occur ... Judgements from one conversation does not dictate events that may or may not have happened 6 months to a year before.  WIth that in mind speculation is okay as long as you dont state it as fact without knowing the whole facts invovled.

 

When interviewing demon spawn, I asked him how the talks were, specifically with non grata and NPO, post leakage and he said they were 'akward'.

 

so a completely transparent picture you're attempting to paint never occurred.

 

and judging by this thread, the 'hails' are simply people hoping to pull away an oculus connection like a pack of hungry dogs.

Edited by Lord Hitchcock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Lord Hitchcock said:

 

When interviewing demon spawn, I asked him how the talks were, specifically with non grata and NPO, post leakage and he said they were 'akward'.

 

so a completely transparent picture you're attempting to paint never occurred.

 

and judging by this thread, the 'hails' are simply people hoping to pull away an oculus connection like a pack of hungry dogs.

 

 

No one is painting anything ... ALL leaders i am sure have had the same kinda chats all the time ...even then they are a continiuous thing and if taken out of the full context can be twisted and constructed to a different interpretation ...  just like your show .. you are giving your own speculation of  what it means .. does not mean your right or wrong but only the people that have been talking know the truth behind what we do not hear.  

Edited by brucemania
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its nice to see someone creating a podcast about the going ons of the world. Been awhile since I've seen one so keep it up.(Edit: Maybe add a more knowledgeable co-host to get better content/analysis0

 

However I disagree with your conclusion along with some errors that were presented(namely calling me just a member,I'm DMoFA put some respekt on my name :D ). Also I'd like to echo what Bruce said above that this is par for the course for most if not all AAs.

Edited by Edward Reed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/12/2016 at 9:13 AM, Lord Hitchcock said:

 

ex-DK gov was thrilled to read that, regardless of how you interpret it

Please note YOU brought this up in your post and I am just responding.  Considering that one of the mistakes I think I made previous is not stopping rumors right away I'm going to take the time to do this now.  

 

It's somewhat amusing from a historical standpoint.  However, as I said in other OWF discussions,  Doom Kingdom is disbanded and I have absolutely NO interest taking anything from the time DK was an alliance and moving it to the present.  The point to disbanding is that the alliance is gone.  Bringing up DK is like bringing up the dead.  I really don't care what RnR thought back then about a now dead alliance at this point.  I hope they feel the same about any future interactions with me.  It's history.

 

On 6/12/2016 at 9:20 AM, brucemania said:

Speculation and twisting something to your own thoughts does not give the full context of the scenario .. personally i would listen to the posts that are telling you that two leaders and allies owe it to each other to be up front update possiblities of things that may or may not occur ... Judgements from one conversation does not dictate events that may or may not have happened 6 months to a year before.  WIth that in mind speculation is okay as long as you dont state it as fact without knowing the whole facts invovled.

Very true.  I actually feel for RnR leadership right now.  In my particular experience (the Margrave stuff), it wasn't even something *I* or Lord Hershey said but a government person from an allied alliance to a government person of an alliance DK had no relationship with - and when they are talking as friends.  Yet THAT situation was used by some to suggest possible truth. At least in this case,  it is two relevant people talking to each other.  The problem I see with this one, however - is it's old.  I don't feel the need to speculate because I don't see how it is relevant to today.  If DK still existed, there might be an argument.   

On 6/12/2016 at 10:33 AM, Finnish Commie said:

In that case they would be idiots, as that is obviously sarcasm.

We're not.

Edited by White Chocolate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...