AirMe's Blog

I blame you for making NFL Generic make that save which then gave the rebound right to me allowing me to score a goal that no one gives me credit for.

Wait....

I see what you did thar...

>_>

Mr. Janova comes from a background where we were oppressed. We were taken advantage of and the only difference between your former home, MK, and Gremlins was that we didn't get into an actual war, we politically manuevered ourselves to getting what we wished for, secretly, WHILE helping your former home with the little Nowedge fiasco. Lets not forget Bilrow and his wonderful dummies in suppressing green, lets not forget Janova and his buddies attacking NPO in GWIII and maneuvering themselves so they were offered white peace. Gre did what MK did, only better.

I will say that you guys did it differently. You also had a chance to make good friends who were able to help out. All we had was UJP and once that was gone we were on our own for a while. As for the noWedge incident, I do personally appreciate the help you guys gave but many people I considered friends turn their back on us in that situation which has left me a little bit bitter still because it never should have happened.

I blame AirMe for making TSO attack our allies with no CB.

AirMe can not be blamed for making TSO attack, as he didn't. However, Ronin can be blamed for having their allies attacked, since it was Ronin's choice to ally with the alliances in question.

So yes, I suppose you could indirectly blame AirMe for it.

AirMe can not be blamed for making TSO attack, as he didn't. However, Ronin can be blamed for having their allies attacked, since it was Ronin's choice to ally with the alliances in question.

So yes, I suppose you could indirectly blame AirMe for it.

I also heard I was the cause of type 2 Diabetes.

...Ronin can be blamed for having their allies attacked, since it was Ronin's choice to ally with the alliances in question.

So yes, I suppose you could indirectly blame AirMe for it.

I thought I had seen a lot of stupid arguments around these parts and there certainly has been no want of false semantic arguments around these parts, but that quite simply takes the cake. You sir, cannot imagine my joy to learn that it was Ronin's choice of Allying with MK and =LOST= which lead to the latter being attacked.

They don't want to pay checkmate reps, and said so in the dow's, and you're offended by it? Meh, much to do about nothing in my opinion.

I also heard I was the cause of type 2 Diabetes.

You're just being plain ridiculous now... You aren't -the- cause, though you may be -a- cause. Indirect cause of course, your posts could lead people to stuff themselves into obesity in their lament for the future of our civilization. This is certainly one of the many routes by which you may be a cause of type 2 diabetes.

As for you, Nolissar, you only proved my argument. I'm glad you're happy that Ronin allied MK and =LOST=, that's your prerogative. However, saying that TSO "dragged in" Ronin is an absolute fallacy.

Oh and I more or less agree with kerschbs.

As for you, Nolissar, you only proved my argument. I'm glad you're happy that Ronin allied MK and =LOST=, that's your prerogative. However, saying that TSO "dragged in" Ronin is an absolute fallacy.

Oh and I more or less agree with kerschbs.

TSO DID DRAG US IN DIP!@#$. They hit our !@#$@#$ allies. stfu and go away

You're just being plain ridiculous now... You aren't -the- cause, though you may be -a- cause. Indirect cause of course, your posts could lead people to stuff themselves into obesity in their lament for the future of our civilization. This is certainly one of the many routes by which you may be a cause of type 2 diabetes.

As for you, Nolissar, you only proved my argument. I'm glad you're happy that Ronin allied MK and =LOST=, that's your prerogative. However, saying that TSO "dragged in" Ronin is an absolute fallacy.

Oh and I more or less agree with kerschbs.

I'm terribly sorry, but I do believe I have done no such thing. I think you need to reread both your comment which I quoted, and my own, then pick up a good text on discursive logic and another on causality, and come back to me when you are able to explain how Ronin being allied to MK and =LOST= lead to the latter being attacked, which was the point you made initially. TSO dragged Ronin in, is as much as Ronin had contracted, to attack whomsoever attacked MK and =LOST= and this was known to, or readily discoverable by TSO and the others who attacked CnG. Ronin's obligation, while possibly voluntary, was essentially mandatory as they had, by virtue of their treaty ceded some of their freedom of action to MK and =LOST= and if I use the sort of convoluted relational extensions of which you seem so fond, to those who chose to attack them. Where they 'dragged in'? No, but was their involvement all but inevitable owing to past choices? Yes. I don't think anybody disagrees with that. Your initial statement however "that you could blame AirMe for their allies being attacked", required that the attack upon MK and =LOST= was caused by the fact that they were to Ronin, which like much else that you have written of late, is simply absurd. The novus actus interveniens of a third party breaks the chain of causation quite nicely.

I'm terribly sorry, but I do believe I have done no such thing. I think you need to reread both your comment which I quoted, and my own, then pick up a good text on discursive logic and another on causality, and come back to me when you are able to explain how Ronin being allied to MK and =LOST= lead to the latter being attacked, which was the point you made initially. TSO dragged Ronin in, is as much as Ronin had contracted, to attack whomsoever attacked MK and =LOST= and this was known to, or readily discoverable by TSO and the others who attacked CnG. Ronin's obligation, while possibly voluntary, was essentially mandatory as they had, by virtue of their treaty ceded some of their freedom of action to MK and =LOST= and if I use the sort of convoluted relational extensions of which you seem so fond, to those who chose to attack them. Where they 'dragged in'? No, but was their involvement all but inevitable owing to past choices? Yes. I don't think anybody disagrees with that. Your initial statement however "that you could blame AirMe for their allies being attacked", required that the attack upon MK and =LOST= was caused by the fact that they were to Ronin, which like much else that you have written of late, is simply absurd. The novus actus interveniens of a third party breaks the chain of causation quite nicely.

You misread my argument. I argue that Ronin was forced to declare war not because TSO attacked MK and =LOST= but because Ronin was allied to MK and =LOST=. Perhaps while I pick up those texts I can get you one on English comprehension and perhaps composition. Nowhere have I said that Ronin being allied to MK or =LOST= was the cause of the declaration upon CnG. Instead, I have only said that it is not TSO's fault that Ronin chose these allies. The only way TSO could have attacked allies of Ronin is for Ronin to sign a treaty with said "allies", is it not? There is absolutely no way that TSO could have attacked Ronin's allies if Ronin had no allies.

So yes, I asserted that you could blame Ronin for their allies being attacked, for with no allies there is no possibility that their allies could be attacked and thus they would not be required by treaty to defend their ally, since they would have none such.

We agree, though, that AirMe's assertion that Ronin was "dragged" into this war is completely false. This is the only point I was making and is my original point. (Ok, that's a lie. My original point is that AirMe whines a lot.)

Ok. Here's the deal.

TSO enacted it's treaty with TOP. Face it AirMe, Ronin/Genesis/OSA or whatever weren't declared on. You declared, sent a total of 8 attackers on us at the beginning, and then demanded 21K tech? That's not respect. That's extortion. For what? You attacked US. We never really even countered you until you came up with these asshat reps for doing the least you could do for your allies thinking we're a quick an easy war. I don't see any declarations on any of the other numerous alliances that attacked your allies. If you look at the war screens under Genesis and Ronin, A damn good portion has you guys as the attackers.

The war isn't over and you can pile on more reps if you want. You haven't figured it out yet? We DON'T care!

We're not going to pay 21K and we're not going to pay more than that to you because we decided to counter attack your actual first attacks on us. Lordie lord blame us for actually fighting.

GATO has taken 100x more damage than you guys. Their initial offer was 10K reps and in the end, they dropped even that. Then in you come saying "We want 21K even though we didn't do anything." You realize thats more than HALF of what all of CnG was asking from us for doing a fraction of the fighting.

Ok. Here's the deal.

TSO enacted it's treaty with TOP. Face it AirMe, Ronin/Genesis/OSA or whatever weren't declared on. You declared, sent a total of 8 attackers on us at the beginning, and then demanded 21K tech? That's not respect. That's extortion. For what? You attacked US. We never really even countered you until you came up with these asshat reps for doing the least you could do for your allies thinking we're a quick an easy war. I don't see any declarations on any of the other numerous alliances that attacked your allies. If you look at the war screens under Genesis and Ronin, A damn good portion has you guys as the attackers.

The war isn't over and you can pile on more reps if you want. You haven't figured it out yet? We DON'T care!

We're not going to pay 21K and we're not going to pay more than that to you because we decided to counter attack your actual first attacks on us. Lordie lord blame us for actually fighting.

GATO has taken 100x more damage than you guys. Their initial offer was 10K reps and in the end, they dropped even that. Then in you come saying "We want 21K even though we didn't do anything." You realize thats more than HALF of what all of CnG was asking from us for doing a fraction of the fighting.

For the record, nimrod, we started out at 5k a piece in Checkmate. Then you guys claimed you had to disband because it was against your charter to pay reps directly. So we came to a compromise of 7k tech a piece in checkmate. So instead of looking at JUST RONIN, all of checkmate has made up the bulk of the counter attack on you. It's not our fault you back yourselves into a corner by putting a clause in your charter that makes it so you aren't allowed to legally pay reps.

I am not blaming you for anything other than declaring on MK and =LOST= making it so we had to enter a conflict. We can continue to fight as long as you needed. What I have an issue with your is in your face disrespect which is kind of funny because this war started because TOP saw MK as disrespectful.

So to FIX your numbers. Original reps were 5k tech for Ronin which is a drop in the bucket. Then you guys said you had to disband to pay directly and the offer was upped to 7k indirect. And we have had more than 8 wars on TSO. And it isn't our fault you guys didn't launch a counter on us. You should get some better war planners. For an alliance of 31 nations we have had at least 70 wars. So your facts again are skewed.

Bottom line, you declare on ANY of my allies and we will defend them.

Another thing, you didn't HAVE to activate your treaty with TOP to offensively enter a war. So claiming you were forced to enter is bull. You entered optionally. We entered because it was MANDATORY. But then again you guys have seem to forget how a damn treaty works. "Hey its ok for TOP to vote on honoring mandatory treaties but as soon as someone else does it IT'S DISHONORABLE." Run back to peace mode.

Another thing, you didn't HAVE to activate your treaty with TOP to offensively enter a war. So claiming you were forced to enter is bull. You entered optionally. We entered because it was MANDATORY. But then again you guys have seem to forget how a damn treaty works. "Hey its ok for TOP to vote on honoring mandatory treaties but as soon as someone else does it IT'S DISHONORABLE." Run back to peace mode.

I don't believe he, nor anyone else, has said that TSO was mandated to enter.

As for "Bottom line, you declare on ANY of my allies and we will defend them.", that's a very honorable choice.

Another thing, you didn't HAVE to activate your treaty with TOP to offensively enter a war. So claiming you were forced to enter is bull. You entered optionally. We entered because it was MANDATORY. But then again you guys have seem to forget how a damn treaty works. "Hey its ok for TOP to vote on honoring mandatory treaties but as soon as someone else does it IT'S DISHONORABLE." Run back to peace mode.

WTF are you on about AirMe? In our one and only conversation some 30 days ago I never mentioned TSO disbanding. If anyone has disrespected anyone here it's the collective governments of checkmate not having the courtesy to talk to me at all since CnG's opening offer. Our members take offense at your alliances trying to sparta their way up to the rep trough and voted such. Get over it and fight the war. Earn the reps you are trying to exact from us.

For the record, nimrod, we started out at 5k a piece in Checkmate. Then you guys claimed you had to disband because it was against your charter to pay reps directly. So we came to a compromise of 7k tech a piece in checkmate. So instead of looking at JUST RONIN, all of checkmate has made up the bulk of the counter attack on you. It's not our fault you back yourselves into a corner by putting a clause in your charter that makes it so you aren't allowed to legally pay reps.

I am not blaming you for anything other than declaring on MK and =LOST= making it so we had to enter a conflict. We can continue to fight as long as you needed. What I have an issue with your is in your face disrespect which is kind of funny because this war started because TOP saw MK as disrespectful.

So to FIX your numbers. Original reps were 5k tech for Ronin which is a drop in the bucket. Then you guys said you had to disband to pay directly and the offer was upped to 7k indirect. And we have had more than 8 wars on TSO. And it isn't our fault you guys didn't launch a counter on us. You should get some better war planners. For an alliance of 31 nations we have had at least 70 wars. So your facts again are skewed.

Bottom line, you declare on ANY of my allies and we will defend them.

Another thing, you didn't HAVE to activate your treaty with TOP to offensively enter a war. So claiming you were forced to enter is bull. You entered optionally. We entered because it was MANDATORY. But then again you guys have seem to forget how a damn treaty works. "Hey its ok for TOP to vote on honoring mandatory treaties but as soon as someone else does it IT'S DISHONORABLE." Run back to peace mode.

Wow. Name calling? Nimrod? There's civility for you.

We didn't have to do a lot of things but we chose to be there for TOP. So because of that you chastise us. If we said "Nope, not going to fight." you would have probably been the first one slamming that decision too. And where did I even state that we were FORCED to? Read much? Signing Mandatory anything just gets you into trouble apparently. You could have just declared that your deal was satisfied after the first round a peaced out like a lot of others but you decided to press it thinking you could profit from it. You chose to attack US. CHOSE to mind you, because of your MANDATORY agreement and figured you wouldn't have to fight much because of the dogpile. The reason for lack of a counter attack was because most of our slots were already full and you can't declare from anarchy.

Our charter states we will not pay reps to those who attacked us. Which is what Checkmate did.

Well, you have your counter attack now.

[1:54pm] Voytek: airme be honest, you made that blog out of boredom at nothing else juicy going on didn't you

[1:55pm] AirMe[Ronin]: pretty much

[1:55pm] AirMe[Ronin]: its a distraction from arguing health care

I am curious to know the reasons why Checkmate alliances feel entitled to the ammount of 21k tech. Or even 50 tech for that matter.

WTF are you on about AirMe? In our one and only conversation some 30 days ago I never mentioned TSO disbanding. If anyone has disrespected anyone here it's the collective governments of checkmate not having the courtesy to talk to me at all since CnG's opening offer. Our members take offense at your alliances trying to sparta their way up to the rep trough and voted such. Get over it and fight the war. Earn the reps you are trying to exact from us.

As for the negotiations they are being handled the way they are now in private to make sure each negotiation doesn't turn into a cluster**** like the first set did. I believe it was your side that complained about that. If you wanted to deal directly with us, nothing is stopping you from making that request. Which I have no issue with and understand your concerns. No one is "Spartaing" their way up the reps ladder. Good term by the way I chuckled Without giving away sensitive materials, there are some people who wanted a lot more than was originally asked. The reason it was upped from 15k, to 21k was because of the change from direct to indirect. Cash really is no issue for all our nations lets just be quite honest about that so paying us in tech indirectly really doesn't effect you that much.

As far as the disbandment claim, I based that off the inquiry about individual terms that was immediately followed by the question asking if they could go anywhere they wanted once they were out of the fight. So if I misinterpreted the request I do apologize but it was the opinion of the people in the room at the time that you guys intended to all surrender individually and then reform as a way to escape.

We have been fighting this war. And will continue to fight this war but I am a hippie at heart and always desire peace. You only got attacked by us because you attacked our allies. You can't kick a wolf and not expect the rest of the pack to come to his aid. If you didn't want to pay reps you shouldn't have started the war.

As I have stated, this isn't about continuing the war, we will fight as long as is needed. Personally I am more upset by the disrespect of the war declaration instead of you coming to us or C&G in private and telling us the offer was denied.

Wow. Name calling? Nimrod? There's civility for you.

We didn't have to do a lot of things but we chose to be there for TOP. So because of that you chastise us. If we said "Nope, not going to fight." you would have probably been the first one slamming that decision too. And where did I even state that we were FORCED to? Read much? Signing Mandatory anything just gets you into trouble apparently. You could have just declared that your deal was satisfied after the first round a peaced out like a lot of others but you decided to press it thinking you could profit from it. You chose to attack US. CHOSE to mind you, because of your MANDATORY agreement and figured you wouldn't have to fight much because of the dogpile. The reason for lack of a counter attack was because most of our slots were already full and you can't declare from anarchy.

Our charter states we will not pay reps to those who attacked us. Which is what Checkmate did.

Well, you have your counter attack now.

This isn't a counter attack really. It is an insurgent attack that can be easily repaired when all is said and done.

Actually I wouldn't have ridiculed you for not following TOP because you have an MDoAP. Really the only ridicule you would have seen from me is if you had an MADP with TOP and not honored. The little o's are just that, optional. Though giving your past history and the controversy surrounding your formation, if you didn't support TOP there would be no doubt that people would come after you pretty quickly. So I don't really blame you for going with them.

We don't peace out after 1 round while our friends are getting attacked. It's not how we roll. We commit all the way. And if you think we are profiting at all from this, you clearly have no idea how much damage gets taken. I only had 1 war due to my family and travel obligations and I lost over 500 tech. Extrapolate that over the length of this war and 5 or 7k tech doesn't come anywhere close to being a profit. If we wanted to profit we definitely would have gone about this a different way.

I am curious to know the reasons why Checkmate alliances feel entitled to the ammount of 21k tech. Or even 50 tech for that matter.

I am curious to know why you think they should get off with paying nothing?

It's honestly the truth

I am curious to know why you think they should get off with paying nothing?

I think they should pay reparations to Complaints & Grievances Alliances who they attacked. I am asking why they should pay anything to Checkmate.

AirMe can not be blamed for making TSO attack, as he didn't. However, Ronin can be blamed for having their allies attacked, since it was Ronin's choice to ally with the alliances in question.

So yes, I suppose you could indirectly blame AirMe for it.

I think my comprehension is just fine. You have said that the above is to be interpreted as follows: "Ronin signed treaties with an alliance. That Alliance is now an ally with Ronin, and if that ally is attacked then an ally of ronin has been attacked because of Ronin signing with them and making them an ally (even though this wasn't the actual cause of the war)." Which, while a pointless and stupid comment to make, is nonetheless at least semantically acceptable, although it fails a number of tests for basic causality and relationship if used as the philosophical underpinning of an actual argument over anything but preferential construction of the meaning of a pointless clause. Your use, however (please not that "however" is correctly used in the postpositive position when it is a conjunctive adverb, but with your incredible rhetorical knowledge, you know this already) of the words, "However, Ronin can be blamed for having their allies attacked, since it was Ronin's choice to ally with the alliances in question" does not mean what you wanted it to mean. Had you worded it differently, I might well have been content to agree with you on that point. Something along the lines of "Ronin only had an ally who was attacked, because they chose to have an ally who was a target for attack" might have been a superior choice of phraseology.

Ronin had mad their choice long before this war, that if ever MK or =LOST= were to come under fire, they would come to there defence. This was of course public knowledge. While the option was in theory open to them to disregard their commitment, the reality of Ronin's manner of operation and the sensibilities of their membership meant that any action other than declaring war on an alliance attacking their treaty partner was only ever going to be responded to with force. For words to mean something they must be backed up with action and that is what Ronin provided. Ronin were only "dragged" in to this conflict in as much as they were not looking for a war, and thought that the conflict which precipitated the present conflict, was one which quite happily did not involve them or their allies directly.

I think Ronin in total have fought something on the order of 65-75 wars with TSO the vast majority offensive declarations, OSA have done around 45-46 (only 3 of which were defensive) and I think Genesis has now more or less caught up. Like Ronin, the involvement of all members of Checkmate. was inevitable once CnG was attacked. Genesis hold and MDP with MK, OSA have an ODP with FoB, Checkmate. itself can and has been read as a chaining MDoAP, and more specifically, our own FA policy well known to those who know us, has always required that unless we find the reason for one of our allies going to war to be morally repugnant (for example what NpO did to \m/ or they were planning a massive tech raid on a political un connected or isolated alliance) we will join them, so as to do our best to ease their burden and secure them a quick, honorable and easy exit from the war we consider this the proper duty of a true friend and ally.

Our initial reparation offer was 15K for all 3 Checkmate. alliances, which TSO could quite easily have paid in less than 40 days while using 50% or less of their slots, and we were quite prepared, on the day of the first offer to have gone down to less had TSO come back and said "look, we think that really is too much to pay, and CnG have asked for ex, could we deal?" but that didn't happen. They only response I saw, from TSO was a question about "individual surrenders" for their members, which most people viewing the logs of the talks took to mean that TSO was considering disbanding instead of paying reps. Checkmate. has always been open to reasonable counter offers or productive discussion with TSO, but it is up to them to make the offer, not us we've already done our part.

"Since my side of the war has been attempting to get people to the table to negotiate every night for the last 10 days that the blog posts about how evil we are have stopped."

Correct me if I'm wrong but officials from my alliance were online and ready to negotiate last night but were told at the scheduled meeting time that your "side" would need atleast an extra day or so to talk about their next offer. So I believe your statement about being on "every night" is wrong.