LordDarknessOfLight Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Wu Tang Clan' timestamp='1328586212' post='2915881'] Rampage left Ragnarok. [/quote] Oh ok.. Eh, I don't blame the guy. If kait and Hoo are leaving, might as well drop everything and let MK have their fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurion Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1328581832' post='2915837'] This post implies they actually tried to get her back. As of my speaking with 1337 earlier today, neither Adel nor anyone else in RoK has yet to actually approach him directly yet. Every attempt to come to a reasonable conclusion thus far has been initiated by 1337guy. Even this most recent apparent declaration of Kaitlink as a ghost has been made with total silence with regards to the Kingdom. Despite our obvious involvement with the situation, RoK is clearly making no effort to keep us apprised of the situation or resolve it any other way. [/quote] Surely you aren't suggesting that Ragnarok was acting as though the problem would go away if they pretended it isn't there, or anything like that~ Edited February 7, 2012 by Aurion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crowdog07 Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328586201' post='2915880'] As Hal said: But given that (to my current knowledge) neither Kait nor Hoo intend to exist as soon as possible, it is, as I said, not really all that surprising that RoK took the easy road. Given their nordic volksgeist, it's not really that odd that they'd take her slots as opposed to letting MK have them. It's not that big of a leap, Blacky. We're talking about people that put their dead on boats and then set the boats on fire. [/quote] Hoo can delete whenever he wants. Literally nothing is stopping him. I don't see how they both want out asap when he has an open door. It's not as if he's a knight in shining armor for quitting a week or two before Kait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Crowdog' timestamp='1328588960' post='2915911'] Hoo can delete whenever he wants. Literally nothing is stopping him. I don't see how they both want out asap when he has an open door. It's not as if he's a knight in shining armor for quitting a week or two before Kait. [/quote] ....cry more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seerow Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328589700' post='2915916'] ....cry more? [/quote] How is it crying to point out that the intent to delete seems questionable at best when one of them could already be deleted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1328589895' post='2915917'] How is it crying to point out that the intent to delete seems questionable at best when one of them could already be deleted? [/quote] They would both already be gone if Admin hadn't reset their activity. Whether they 25 or hit the button, they're gone. There's "ASAP" explained, now let's argue the next word in my post. Are you guys 5 or 6 years old? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seerow Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328590041' post='2915920'] They would both already be gone if Admin hadn't reset their activity. Whether they 25 or hit the button, they're gone. There's "ASAP" explained, now let's argue the next word in my post. Are you guys 5 or 6 years old? [/quote] Well if the intent is to delete, one would assume they'd do it as quickly as possible. Delaying the action of deleting indicates that decision hasn't yet been made, or it would already be done. Until the nation actually deletes, I think it's fair to say they may not be deleting. And yes, they would both be gone already if admin hadn't collected for them. That was during a period where one would expect them to not be active. How much trouble may have been avoided had admin simply let them delete, I have to wonder... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1328590353' post='2915923'] And yes, they would both be gone already if admin hadn't collected for them. That was during a period where one would expect them to not be active. How much trouble may have been avoided had admin simply let them delete, I have to wonder... [/quote] I highly doubt that you would not have made up all kinds of wild lies about Hoo had his nation already ceased to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrwuss Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328590532' post='2915927'] I highly doubt that you would not have made up all kinds of wild lies about Hoo had his nation already ceased to be. [/quote] The best thing is you don't have to make up anything about these two. The comedy writes it's self. Also I'm not sure why anyone argues with Schatt. If MK was on the opposite side of this Schatt would be as well. He swings as wildly as any other attention seeking spotlight whore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voytek Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328590532' post='2915927'] I highly doubt that you would not have made up all kinds of wild lies about Hoo had his nation already ceased to be. [/quote] what how uhh ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayatollah Bromeini Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1328590974' post='2915930'] what how uhh ... [/quote] Sort of damaging to the ego to have to face the fact that the side of an argument you've been investing so much energy in just completely caved in, I'd assume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Ayatollah Bromeini' timestamp='1328594200' post='2915964'] Sort of damaging to the ego to have to face the fact that the side of an argument you've been investing so much energy in just completely caved in, I'd assume. [/quote] I'm having trouble writing a reply to this because it's sort of difficult to address such willful ignorance or to talk to someone who's putting words in my mouth. But let me try: Whatever RoK wants to do politically about the war situation is RoK's deal. Without hearing anything from RoLK about their logic, I've already made my postulation about it: Every slot of Kait's that RoK takes is a slot that MK can't have. All that has no bearing on my genuine disdain for the actions of MK's members during this saga. It's that simple. And not one person--friend, foe, or meh--that has PMed or queried me about this over the past week has any problem making that distinction either; the only variation is to what degree it matters to them. That line matters a lot to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328595409' post='2915985'] I'm having trouble writing a reply to this because it's sort of difficult to address such willful ignorance or to talk to someone who's putting words in my mouth. But let me try: Whatever RoK wants to do politically about the war situation is RoK's deal. Without hearing anything from RoLK about their logic, I've already made my postulation about it: Every slot of Kait's that RoK takes is a slot that MK can't have. All that has no bearing on my genuine disdain for the actions of MK's members during this saga. It's that simple. And not one person--friend, foe, or meh--that has PMed or queried me about this over the past week has any problem making that distinction either; the only variation is to what degree it matters to them. That line matters a lot to me. [/quote] Nice dodge! I would love me some herring! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 (edited) [quote name='USMC123' timestamp='1328595694' post='2915991'] Nice dodge! I would love me some herring! [/quote] What did I dodge? The dumbass comment about my ego? A construct of my detractors; I'm quite aware that I'm the leader of a micro allied to -no one- of consequence whose positions on just about everything stopped being popular decades ago. That ego? Or what else, that RoK caved in? I have argued that the coup is right, but why: Because of Bob and Joe's OOC attacks. It all goes back to the position I have just reiterated but which you cannot see due to your Schattenmania. What RoK does and what MK is doing are interconnected, but I don't need RoK to even exist to dislike MK's actions. Banksy, I see that you're typing, I assume you're replying to me, but FYI I am gone until tomorrow. Wiedersehen. Edited February 7, 2012 by Schattenmann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity111 Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328596123' post='2915995'] What did I dodge? The dumbass comment about my ego? A construct of my detractors; I'm quite aware that I'm the leader of a micro allied to -no one- of consequence whose positions on just about everything stopped being popular decades ago. That ego? Or what else, that RoK caved in? I have argued that the coup is right, but why: Because of Bob and Joe's OOC attacks. It all goes back to the position I have just reiterated but which you cannot see due to your Schattenmania. [/quote] Following the quote chain, probably the bit about wild lies about Hoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voytek Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328595409' post='2915985'] I'm having trouble writing a reply to this because it's sort of difficult to address such willful ignorance or to talk to someone who's putting words in my mouth. But let me try: Whatever RoK wants to do politically about the war situation is RoK's deal. Without hearing anything from RoLK about their logic, I've already made my postulation about it: Every slot of Kait's that RoK takes is a slot that MK can't have. All that has no bearing on my genuine disdain for the actions of MK's members during this saga. It's that simple. And not one person--friend, foe, or meh--that has PMed or queried me about this over the past week has any problem making that distinction either; the only variation is to what degree it matters to them. That line matters a lot to me. [/quote] you should post lots more posts. eventually you will post enough posts that you will achieve moral victory. post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328590532' post='2915927'] I highly doubt that you would not have made up all kinds of wild lies about Hoo had his nation already ceased to be. [/quote] To be fair, they didn't make up wild lies. Someone else did and they were quick to believe them. Also: I am content letting my nation die on it's own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacky Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328595409' post='2915985'] I'm having trouble writing a reply to this because it's sort of difficult to address such willful ignorance or to talk to someone who's putting words in my mouth. But let me try: Whatever RoK wants to do politically about the war situation is RoK's deal. Without hearing anything from RoLK about their logic, I've already made my postulation about it: Every slot of Kait's that RoK takes is a slot that MK can't have. All that has no bearing on my genuine disdain for the actions of MK's members during this saga. It's that simple. And not one person--friend, foe, or meh--that has PMed or queried me about this over the past week has any problem making that distinction either; the only variation is to what degree it matters to them. That line matters a lot to me. [/quote] Essentially what you're saying is you don't care what Rok does or has done but you wish to lay all blame on every event in history solely on MK. Alright, makes sense I suppose. This big boogey man that you've created in your head in regards to the immoral MK is just that. You've imagined it. You even admit that you're siding with Rok, without even hearing Rok's logic or their reasoning for attacking the member they've stalwartly defended as a member and former empres. Whereas starkly in contrast you've adamantly refused to even consider MK's position in this debacle. In case you've had a change of heart though: MK has always disliked KaitlinK. Our motivations for our attack on KaitlinK (OOC: are IC). MK has had strained relations and a history with Kait, and as such have those motivations to attack her nation. Rok has constantly made bad decision after bad decision in this affair and have become utterly indefensible to any sane and reasonable person. If I were you I'd take whatever moral or political capital I had left and save it. Because it really is wasting away in this monstrosity. Edited February 7, 2012 by Blacky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Chele Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Blacky' timestamp='1328597508' post='2916007'] Essentially what you're saying is you don't care what Rok does or has done but you wish to lay all blame on every event in history solely on MK. Alright, makes sense I suppose. This big boogey man that you've created in your head in regards to the immoral MK is just that. You've imagined it. You even admit that you're siding with Rok, without even hearing Rok's logic or their reasoning for attacking the member they've stalwartly defended as a member and former empres. Whereas starkly in contrast you've adamantly refused to even consider MK's position in this debacle. In case you've had a change of heart though: MK has always disliked KaitlinK. Our motivations for our attack on KaitlinK (OOC: are IC). MK has had strained relations and a history with Kait, and as such have those motivations to attack her nation. Personally, I have my own reasons (I think you might be familiar with them as you were witness to it. In KaitlinK offering moral/political support to Xiphosis.) Rok has constantly made bad decision after bad decision in this affair and have become utterly indefensible to any sane and reasonable person. If I were you I'd take whatever moral or political capital I had left and save it. Because it really is wasting away in this monstrosity. [/quote] I can promise you that Schatt really doesn't care about RoK or MK in the abstract, and that this is a totally situational issue. Maybe if you had named your pretextual AA "AntiKaitlinK" instead of what you did name it, you might have a leg to stand on. Make whatever arguments you feel are necessary to justify the constant baaing of your allies, though, because I'm sure this "monstrosity" can go on for another fifty pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voytek Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Don Chele' timestamp='1328599163' post='2916020']I can promise you that Schatt really doesn't care about RoK or MK in the abstract, and that this is a totally situational issue.[/quote] post of the year candidates putting in a strong showing already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayatollah Bromeini Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328596123' post='2915995'] What did I dodge? The dumbass comment about my ego? A construct of my detractors; I'm quite aware that I'm the leader of a micro allied to -no one- of consequence whose positions on just about everything stopped being popular decades ago. That ego? Or what else, that RoK caved in? I have argued that the coup is right, but why: [b]Because of Bob and Joe's OOC attacks[/b]. It all goes back to the position I have just reiterated but which you cannot see due to your Schattenmania. What RoK does and what MK is doing are interconnected, but I don't need RoK to even exist to dislike MK's actions. Banksy, I see that you're typing, I assume you're replying to me, but FYI I am gone until tomorrow. Wiedersehen. [/quote] You see the act of allowing MK to attack Kait as an "OOC attack"? I'm not trying to make a strawman here, just genuinely curios if that is what you're saying here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Chele Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1328599373' post='2916022'] post of the year candidates putting in a strong showing already [/quote] Glad I didn't disappoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bones Malone Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1328597312' post='2916005'] Also: I am content letting my nation die on it's own. [/quote] Even considering everything going on in this situation and my own opinions about said goings on, I would hope you keep your nation around. Planet Bob's population isn't particularly robust and losing nations won't help it any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrwuss Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328595409' post='2915985'] I'm having trouble writing a reply to this because it's sort of difficult to address such willful ignorance or to talk to someone who's putting words in my mouth. But let me try: Whatever RoK wants to do politically about the war situation is RoK's deal. Without hearing anything from RoLK about their logic, I've already made my postulation about it: Every slot of Kait's that RoK takes is a slot that MK can't have. All that has no bearing on my genuine disdain for the actions of MK's members during this saga. It's that simple. And not one person--friend, foe, or meh--that has PMed or queried me about this over the past week has any problem making that distinction either; the only variation is to what degree it matters to them. That line matters a lot to me. [/quote] With every post you make you get closer to exploding. Why is anyone coming to you, aside from the same people who tugs your nuts about everything you say and do, about an issue that doesn't revolve around or involve you in even the smallest possible manner? You, like many others, are a sidelined in this entire fiasco. You have no more insight to the situation, no more facts, nothing. You are just a windbag repeating the exact same dribble you do for every single polar issue that has ever existed. You pick the side that will het you the most attention. The position you field doesn't really matter as long as a larger group of people don't agree with it. Being a minority in thought does not make you a morally correct person. In fact the majority of your false convictions are disgusting. You are a showman who desires to get any attention. When that attentions wanes you find a 'fresh' direction to reinvent that lost attention to only quickly swap back when you set the hook. I blame the entire community for your existance, you are truly the saddest, lonliest piece of souless !@#$ on this planet. You honestly offer nothing to the community. Your are just a shell of a leader who is closely followed by a band of raving morons who worship the words that spill from your twisted, self-centric mind. You lead a true cult, it just has a stupid name. I suppose a disclaimer is needed everytime someone posts with a negative scope. I am not looking for a response from Schatt, merely pointing out his long inconsistencies on subject matter and how that is simply sad. Also the post is littered with spelling and grammar issues, but I can't be bothered to try and fix them from within a touchscreen environment. Edited February 7, 2012 by mrwuss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banksy Posted February 7, 2012 Report Share Posted February 7, 2012 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1328596123' post='2915995'] Banksy, I see that you're typing, I assume you're replying to me [/quote] schattenmann = so owned right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts