Jump to content

Dark Fist's reponse to NSO


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 900
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If they had a spine and really believed even half the crap they posted in the original discussion they would have declared.

Since they didn't and we all know they won't...

Pretty sure it was NSO who went to DF with demands and NSO who said DF's topic was considered a declaration of war..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in the other topic, I will be happy to provide evidence just as soon as DF provides evidence of the accusations it made towards NSO.

Since I am certain DF's allies all required evidence to validate their support of DF over this issue I am certain they understand completely, right?

Nope i'm pretty sure NSO itself is all the reason their allies need.

Really not much convincing to do :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to take this opportunity to demand 500 tech in reparations and demand that you apologize for posting your fake apology, without providing concrete evidence of it. You have until update.

:awesome:

Extortion eh? You're right, you guys are better than the NSO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to take this opportunity to demand 500 tech in reparations and demand that you apologize for posting your fake apology, without providing concrete evidence of it. You have until update.

:awesome:

Two minutes till go time then. Hope you guys will have time to quad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope i'm pretty sure NSO itself is all the reason their allies need.

Really not much convincing to do :)

So...you would have allowed an irrational hatred of the NSO to cloud your judgment? Doesn't seem like the best way to do politics, but I suppose that's your prerogative.

Edited by Shodemofi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to take this opportunity to demand 500 tech in reparations and demand that you apologize for posting your fake apology, without providing concrete evidence of it. You have until update.

:awesome:

Good.

Thank you for verifying that your initial claims are baseless, unfounded and false.

Please, declare on NSO.

Hell, I tell you what, you declare on NSO and let NSO and DF fight one on one, no allies, no treaties, let's make it easy. One round, no nukes, white peace at the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see you admitting that NSO was indeed trying to extort DF yesterday. always like you Pyro im glad you came around

I was not online. Anything that was conducted yesterday as far as a request for tech would have been overturned upon my return. Aside from that, it was withdrawn yesterday shortly after the initial comment on it was made. So I fail to see your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing someone to NSO is a quick way to get an ultimatum sent to you.

You have until update (~1 minute) to retract that statement or else.

Ultimatum first, attack later. At least read the manual.

Good to see you admitting that NSO was indeed trying to extort DF yesterday. always like you Pyro im glad you came around

I didn't admit anything. I simply pointed out that DF was trying to extort them, and then ironically claimed they were better than the NSO, implying, of course, that they are indeed the classless scum they want to destroy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh, I'm sure you all ought to be aware of the offensive connotations of Indian Giver.

Choose a different phrase maybe?

1. indian giver

buy indian giver mugs, tshirts and magnets

Indian Giver

There are two popular etymologies for this term for a person who gives a gift only to later demand its return. The first is that it is based on an unfair stereotype of Native Americans, that they don't keep their word. In the other popular explanation, the term doesn't cast aspersions on Native Americans, instead it echoes the broken promises the whites made to the Indians. Neither is accurate, although the first is closer to the truth.

Try again.

Edited by youwish959
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good.

Thank you for verifying that your initial claims are baseless, unfounded and false.

Please, declare on NSO.

Hell, I tell you what, you declare on NSO and let NSO and DF fight one on one, no allies, no treaties, let's make it easy. One round, no nukes, white peace at the end.

You two.

admin takes you out back and deletes both your alliances.

No white peace, no damage, no problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good.

Thank you for verifying that your initial claims are baseless, unfounded and false.

Please, declare on NSO.

Hell, I tell you what, you declare on NSO and let NSO and DF fight one on one, no allies, no treaties, let's make it easy. One round, no nukes, white peace at the end.

You're not helping your case here Ivvie,

NSO cared to threaten CSN with war and then backed away from war...you know - when they remembered that they only fight wars where they outnumber the opposition by a lot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's weak about denying an apology that was never made, Farns?

I call it setting the record straight.

The tl;dr is that NSO's announcement is a complete and utter joke, and they're trying (poorly) to play off of DF's announcement.

You're definitely right, Aurion; denying a nonexistent apology is setting the record straight.

While I failed to state it specifically, I did imply that I believe (lol assume) the apology was given.

It's entirely possible that an apology was not given, in which case SCM is right to respond with his refutation.

At this point I am doubting that NSO has falsified their claims of DF's (official or unofficial?) apology, though, as previously stated, I could totally be wrong and it should be provable. Also, it's quite possible NSO is simply making a point here: DF has accusations without evidence. NSO has an apology without evidence. If you believe one you should believe the other.

Current opinion: Withholding judgment. Yes, it's a copout, but really more information is necessary.

edit: Might I add, I still stand by my statement that denying the existence of an (actual) apology is weak.

Edited by Farnsworth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So...you would have allowed an irrational hatred of the NSO to cloud your judgment? Doesn't seem like the best way to do politics, but I suppose that's your prerogative.

Lat time I checked I wasn't allied to DF.. Best way to do politics is check the treaty web before acting or talking :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good.

Thank you for verifying that your initial claims are baseless, unfounded and false.

Okey, maybe just a personal apology from you?

Please, declare on NSO.

Hell, I tell you what, you declare on NSO and let NSO and DF fight one on one, no allies, no treaties, let's make it easy. One round, no nukes, white peace at the end.

Sorry, I don't think we have the guts to go through with our threat :(

And I'm glad you see it was a threat.

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...