Do platipi have balls?

[Skippy]

Nobody is forcing you to reply or even read this. If you don't like what is said, you can always just walk away. Thats the thing not too many people realize.

And instead of assuming the STA is absolutely wrong you should ask yourself how your alliance would react to myself and Uhtred going rogue and attacking Valhalla with STA members filling war slots followed by Pezstar running spy ops on Chefjoe while carrying the STA alliance affiliation. I have a fair idea how it would be construed. You really aren't putting a great deal of thought into this.

^^ Love it, this question should pretty much be asked to all of you who think we are whining

[Ragashingo]

And as for clarification of context, I was trying to think where this conversation took place. I looked through all my logs talking to Kronos and drew a blank. I looked in my logs talking to Crymson who spoke to me from TOP and got nothing. I eventually found it in a conversation with DrDan from TOP who was asking me for my point of view. What I said to him was never put forward as an offer to Kronos nor was it put forward to Crymson when we discussed a compromise.

Well there we go. I had a feeling the context of those four lines would be critical.

I will leave you however with this thought: maybe instead of continuing to insist that your accounting of events is the absolutely correct one, maybe you should be asking why people would want to go rogue on your alliance and address that issue with the new government at Kronos.

It is our fault that they went rogue on us? You're a funny guy sometimes ChairmanHal.

[Tygaland]

Come on having been here as long as you ought to try a something different, I mean do you keep these on a clipboard so you can paste them in?

Must be a hard burden, particularly allowing those who are vague and post nonsense to have so much control over you. I mean you have to right?

Usually it takes you 3-4 arrogant filled ( I mean you have to right? lol) put downs on others before you get to substance, least you got to some substance before the 3rd.

So to the substance, you assumed based on what top told you, even though your member here seems to imply you guys knew what kronos was up to? (you inferred I knew what he was talking about, wasnt that it?). Odd, if you knew what kronos was up to why would you deal with TOP anyway, maybe the title should be reworked "do platpi and tigers have balls?"

Surely you think highly enough of yourself to have resloved it with Kronos directly, I certainly did but now Im not so sure. Congrats to TOP I suppose B)

To be fair, you already conceded your post was nonsense so I wasn't sure what it was I was supposed to rebut.

As for your next erroneous assumption. TOP contacted me and told me they were discussing matters with Kronos. I had spoken to Kronos earlier and was awaiting them getting back to me when TOP stepped in. I never sought out TOP at all. Maybe your silly comments and snipes are better utilised asking TOP why they got involved.

I don't mind replying to genuine enquiries but it does get tiresome batting back enquiries based on ignorance but packaged as fact.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Tygaland

[Poyplemonkeys]

It's really easy to see where STA is coming from in all of this. So much so that I find it hard to believe anyone can possibly be denying that they have a legitimate grievance over the situation without holding an ulterior motive to do so.

[astronaut jones]

It's really easy to see where STA is coming from in all of this. So much so that I find it hard to believe anyone can possibly be denying that they have a legitimate grievance over the situation without holding an ulterior motive to do so.

I believe the question comes down to, whether or not an alliance can be held responsible for rogues that attack while under their affiliation. STA believes it is so, while traditionally the alliance was not held responsible, but rather the rogue itself was.

All of this violence and anger, however, is very hurtful and disrespectful to all. It would be much more beneficial if people would do as the members of TOP were doing, and discuss some amicable, and quite peaceful solution to all of this. Peace is what people should be striving for.

[Auctor]

It's really easy to see where STA is coming from in all of this. So much so that I find it hard to believe anyone can possibly be denying that they have a legitimate grievance over the situation without holding an ulterior motive to do so.

It would be a lot easier for me if I had not eaten a nuke for jerleat.

[Poyplemonkeys]

I believe the question comes down to, whether or not an alliance can be held responsible for rogues that attack while under their affiliation. STA believes it is so, while traditionally the alliance was not held responsible, but rather the rogue itself was.

I cut out the irrelevant crap at the end.

I think it's more the efforts of the people that are actual Kronos members that causes a problem. Particularly nations with hugely less technology and the lack of a weapons research complex firing nukes at the nation. It strikes me as an action solely aimed at reducing the damage the rogue takes. Spying away cruise missiles, which was done by Grämlins, is again something done solely to enable the rogue to hand out more damage to his intial target. I seriously question the intelligence of anyone that can't grasp why STA is aggrieved.

It would be a lot easier for me if I had not eaten a nuke for jerleat.

I do not see the relevance of that to the Kronos/STA situation?

Edited November 23, 2009 by Poyplemonkeys

[astronaut jones]

I cut out the irrelevant crap at the end.

I think it's more the efforts of the people that are actual Kronos members that causes a problem. Particularly nations with hugely less technology and the lack of a weapons research complex firing nukes at the nation. It strikes me as an action solely aimed at reducing the damage the rogue takes. Spying away cruise missiles, which was done by Grämlins, is again something done solely to enable the rogue to hand out more damage to his intial target. I seriously question the intelligence of anyone that can't grasp why STA is aggrieved.

I do not see the relevance of that to the Kronos/STA situation?

Please, sir, enough with the harsh words. Everyone is smart in their own right, and I'm confident that if people would take the time to talk out, perhaps with the help of TOP, who so graciously had offered to pay for what they thought would keep the peace, that all will be very happy with the peaceful end results.

[the rebel]

I believe the question comes down to, whether or not an alliance can be held responsible for rogues that attack while under their affiliation. STA believes it is so, while traditionally the alliance was not held responsible, but rather the rogue itself was.

When wasnt an alliance held accountable for its goverment choices

Even with them being ex-gov the alliance still worked with the rogue by filling up the defence slots and continued to assist the rogue by peacing out a day early and filling up the defence slots with more members.

So i dont understand where you are coming from the alliance assisted the rogue.

[Poyplemonkeys]

Please, sir, enough with the harsh words. Everyone is smart in their own right, and I'm confident that if people would take the time to talk out, perhaps with the help of TOP, who so graciously had offered to pay for what they thought would keep the peace, that all will be very happy with the peaceful end results.

Yeah I'm totally ok with you gracing the Cyberverse with your new peaceful persona, but if you're going to use it to evade answering issues I raise, then you're going to have to get used to the harsh words. If you don't wish to actually talk about the content of my writing, I must request you don't quote it.

[enderland]

You know damn well what he meant. Two leaders of Kronos quit and go rogue on the STA one after the other with their war slots filled. Plus another Kronos member runs a spy op on an STA member scouting them out for another rogue hit. A little too much to believe it to be a series of coincidences. Less so when they clearly worked with the first rogue to ensure the STA would not get any war slots to defend our member.

You should probably at the very least mention that the "rogue" spy chap got anarchied (by Kronos) before being able to declare war on STA, and is currently being nuked by Kronos people.

And that Whitey has his war slots "filled" by tech raiders, and was not government when he resigned from Kronos.

We really do seem to be a magnet of rogues from Kronos. If you guys have something to say about us, come and say it to us directly, rather than sending people who've just "decided to quit" after us. Whatever the case is, I've seen too many coincidences.

Well then I guess it's a good thing that in spite of all those coincidences that at least two of those people who've "decided to quit" chose not to attack STA.

[bzelger]

I believe the question comes down to, whether or not an alliance can be held responsible for rogues that attack while under their affiliation. STA believes it is so, while traditionally the alliance was not held responsible, but rather the rogue itself was.

It is not, and never has been our contention that an alliance is responsible for the actions of rogues. The argument has been that a large body of circumstance indicated to us that the rogues were aided in their roguery.

[WarriorConcept]

Well handled throughout the whole affair STA, cheers

[acrux]

It comes down to ones perception of the events to where you take this.

STA thinks Kronos was trying to do more help for the rogues.

Kronos was attacking said rogues because they were rogues.

Id like to believe if I went on my own adventure from umbrella they would attack me. They all love my land anyways, and no matter what they say they support me I'm just one to state things how I see them.

I'd still like to know what STA would have done if TOP didn't step in.

I see both sides, I really do. However, I think TOP gave you an early xmas gift of 300t.

[ChairmanHal]

OOC: why oh why did I check this thread again before popping into the shower and starting my day?

They still carried the Kronos AA and isn't that the basis of the argument here. Or do Kronos get ot have it both ways?

You've been around too long and know the definition of rogue too well to even ask this question. Seriously.

You ignore a number of factors mentioned earlier. Go read them again. As for whether TOP thought the compensation was required, they agree to the deal and to my knowledge the issue was dealt with.

I don't need to read anything further related to this. I have already privately expressed my condolences that STA was hit by rogues to your FA minister (who was gracious by the way) and publicly come out against the rogue's actions.

I have also said that TOP is doing what it thinks is right, whether true altruism is involved or they have some sort of ulterior motive in addition to their move to to send STA tech. Whatever the case, I have in no way condemned it.

And instead of assuming the STA is absolutely wrong you should ask yourself how your alliance would react to myself and Uhtred going rogue and attacking Valhalla with STA members filling war slots followed by Pezstar running spy ops on Chefjoe while carrying the STA alliance affiliation. I have a fair idea how it would be construed. You really aren't putting a great deal of thought into this.

Now you are more or less accusing an entire alliance of "war slot filling", [OOC: a "game rules violation"] and crime on Planet Bob. But let's put your scenario into play.

If STA was filling their slots, we would expect some effort out of you (STA). We already know you'd probably not hit them as well as we would, but then this is Valhalla, the alliance that hunts other people's rogues for sport. We'd also be patient, and we'd probably aid the hell out of whoever was fighting the rogues and a fair number of us would envy the casualty counts they were racking up. The rogues would of course know no peace, even if we had to sit at update and wait for a slot to open or for them to exit PM one night when they thought they could get away with it. Would we demand reps? Doubtful. Remember, this alliance hunts other people's rogues for sport. We also probably wouldn't hit anyone but you, Uhtred and Pezstar, unless someone came up with solid proof that there were other in STA involved. Oddly, the world demands more solid CBs these days, particularly coming from the likes of the last of the Q members.

Oh and...we may even get along with STA better once the three of you were gone. I've heard it said more than once by some of our members that they actually get along well with individual members of STA.

As for why they went rogue on the STA, because we disagreed over Valhalla's peace terms from the Karma War.

Those peace terms weren't your to dictate and your rather vocal objections to them made you enemies you would not otherwise have. Still, that's not excuse for going rogue on someone, if in fact that was a reason they did it. Attacking the leader of an alliance the size of STA does little more than inconvenience the alliance while they pump leader's nation with aid. It's a silly damn waste is what it really is.

[Wad of Lint]

I believe the question comes down to, whether or not an alliance can be held responsible for rogues that attack while under their affiliation. STA believes it is so, while traditionally the alliance was not held responsible, but rather the rogue itself was.

At some point multiple rogues cease becoming coincidence. It could indicate a larger feeling of anger, hatred and aggression towards a specific alliance (See FAN's "X Nuclear Rogue" policy). Whether or not that's the case here is currently being debated by both sides.

[Bob Sanders]

And instead of assuming the STA is absolutely wrong you should ask yourself how your alliance would react to myself and Uhtred going rogue and attacking Valhalla with STA members filling war slots followed by Pezstar running spy ops on Chefjoe while carrying the STA alliance affiliation. I have a fair idea how it would be construed. You really aren't putting a great deal of thought into this.

Oh God, please let this happen. I will never ask for anything else as long as I live. Can I please be one of the targets?

[Drostan]

As someone who recently enjoyed a WRC-enabled nuclear cupcake preventing another rogue from striking the STA, I take exception to some of the accusations in this thread. I have nuked and been nuked and while you may say "I could have done it better" that's hardly grounds for war or reparations. Sorry.

The only person who wore the Kronos AA when they committed a hostile act (gather intel op) on STA was Ptricky to my knowledge, and he is the one whom we anarchied prior to him attacking. We actively raid rogues in Kronos, and being that these rogues came from amidst our ranks, we were the first to know and thus got the drop on their slots. In one case, we so thoroughly got the drop on them, that the rogue wasn't even able to attack your AA.

While I can see your frustration that you cannot deal with this more on your own terms, you have certainly over-stated your case against Kronos in this matter. But if I were in your shoes, I'd have been mad too and probably would have made demands of STA which you almost certainly would have refused. And I certainly wouldn't expect grub to send any tech our way on your behalf. At which point the ball would have been in our court whether we wanted to go to war over some flimsy rogue antics. Of course, the situation was reversed, and so I personally would have been happy to leave the ball in your court and await a declaration if you felt that strongly about it. Of course, If you had declared I would have already been in nuclear anarchy from one of those rogues and it would have made defending my alliance a lot harder, but you are free to ignore that if you wish.

We can only speculate on the reasons why rogues attack who they attack unless they openly declare it. I know Hatter had beefs with you that dated back a long time, and believe me, I (along with most of Kronos) would have much preferred him to stay among us as a leader and friend. But that's not what happened. I have had no issue with the STA before this and thus I fail to see why I would wish them to come to more harm than is necessary. If I had the infra, I would buy a WRC, but I do not (especially not now). But you certainly can't say that we have done nothing as I am sure that Hatter sustained huge amounts of damage as has/will Ptricky (another person with whom I used to raid in happier days). Yes, these were our friends, but that did not stop us from fighting them when they left our AA.

I am left with this question: should I declare peace with Ptricky or allow him to recover so that he can declare war? It would appear that everyone thinks we are laying down anyway and it seems strange to be fighting a former friend to prevent him attacking a party that has nothing but harsh words for me. But my government makes those decisions and I follow them. This period has been difficult for the membership of Kronos as well. I appreciate those who have worked on the STA side to keep heads cool. The point of my message is not to goad or complain, but rather to give you some perspective. If I were in your shoes, I'd be upset too, but this is the sort of thing that either helps us gain an understanding of each other or entrenches our mutual dislike. Nothing more or less than that. It seems that this incident has been widely blown out of proportion and it is a shame that it was dragged into the public eye in such a crass manner. This didn't play out as it should have, but there it is. It is done.

*hugs Ragashingo*

Edited November 23, 2009 by Drostan

[Kzoppistan]

Well, that was pretty boring after all.

Also, that some ex-members that went rogue from Kronos and attacked STA was probably not a coincidence. It was indicative of some members that were more united in their dislike of STA than their love of Kronos.

Conspiracy closed.

[pezstar]

Oh and...we may even get along with STA better once the three of you were gone. I've heard it said more than once by some of our members that they actually get along well with individual members of STA.

Yes. Just as we would get along with Valhalla once a few of your leaders were gone. I've heard it said more than once by some of our members that they actually get along well with individual members of Valhalla.

[Eden Taylor]

Yes. Just as we would get along with Valhalla once a few of your leaders were gone. I've heard it said more than once by some of our members that they actually get along well with individual members of Valhalla.

Is Valhalla's or STA's membership really the topic of discussion here? I thought this was about TOP. At least keep the inane and idiotic posts about nothing whatsoever pointed at TOP, please.

edit: While this is in direct reply to pezstar it is just as much about the post he himself was replying to.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Eden Taylor

[shahenshah]

Has admin banned anyone for war slot filling so far?

[kevin32891]

Why not next when people from Kronos have rogues again (which they will) and attack STA members, let STA handle it by filling in the war slots so this stuff doesn't happen anymore. And if Kronos has a problem with that, then there is something deeper to all this.

Edited November 23, 2009 by kevin32891

[Eden Taylor]

Why not next when people from Kronos have rogues again (which they will) and attack STA members, let STA handle it by filling in the war slots so this stuff doesn't happen anymore. And if Kronos has a problem with that, then there is something deeper to all this.

NSO members aren't supposed to be pro-peace! I'm confused.

[kevin32891]

NSO members aren't supposed to be pro-peace! I'm confused.

Whats in there speaking of peace lol? "Peace is a Lie"

I'm just saying let STA handle the rogues that come from Kronos or any alliance for that matter.