Bergerland

You mean you didn't give your enemy advance warning of a potential attack? What a terrible alliance you are! For shame, VE! For shame.

[quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1295509128' post='2585873'] They never entered against you? They defended us because PC attacked us. BTW, a MDoAP is an MDoAP. Same thing. [/quote] Against us as in entering as part of the opposite coalition, not directly against us. That should have been obvious.

[quote name='lakerzz8' timestamp='1295508833' post='2585851'] Regardless of what you think of the relationship between Rok and NpO, there is clearly a reason their treaty hasn't been canceled. So there is clearly more to their relationship than you know or can understand. [/quote] Correct. I can't understand it. Hence the reaction.

[quote name='Aloop' timestamp='1295507610' post='2585806'] The way VE's talking in here, you'd think that Rok had declared on them personally. You can be disappointed all you want, but would you kindly lay off? You're not making yourselves look good by doing it, and you're (frankly) arguing idiotic points. Rok has a treaty with NpO, and they honoured it. I'm kinda disappointed in you tonight, VE. That said, this thread is supposed to be about Rok vs. PC, so I'll go ahead and congratulate Rok on their entry into this war. Have fun Rok! We'll get together once this mess all gets sorted out, and swap stories about how we crushed our foes beneath our feet. o/ Rok. [/quote] Given the fact that they entered against a MDoAP partner who was spied upon and has fought not only on their side but for them, I think we have the right to be a little miffed. Especially so when they entered for another MDoAP partner who has never fought for them and has directly engaged their treaty partners multiple times.

[quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1295504690' post='2585633'] You realized you legitimately spied on \m/(a RoK MDoAP partner) a few months ago and treated them like !@#$ whenever they tried to talk with you? Yes, I know we attacked \m/, but you already mentioned that. Doesn't excuse you [/quote] You realized that I have stated, and will again, that \m/ had a legitimate CB that they could have used, right? I told Bob Janova that it was stupid and I've held the position that how Impero dealt with Caliph was wrong. But thank you for speaking for me.

[quote name='lakerzz8' timestamp='1295504244' post='2585583'] You realize that's what VE did to start the war right? [/quote] You realize Polar did that multiple times last war, right?

So Polar declares on two of your direct allies in BiPolar and you do nothing, yet when your direct ally is spied upon you side against them. Excellent decision RoK. I'll be glad to see the back of you.

[IMG]http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c98/bergini113/PolarProp1.jpg[/IMG]

With 4 war blitz I'm curious about how many people were in their private IRC channel at update. No matter how many people it was, it's hilarious either way.

He could...if their war slots weren't full. And we hit when sane people where he live sleep, so tough luck for BobbyJ.

Look at which alliance is the one posting in the comments that they want you. P.S. Voted VE.

Damsky, you know what this means. I give up my title as an honorary member of BoS. Take that.

[quote name='Caliph' timestamp='1292754619' post='2544273'] The crime is the same: stealing members information that they are not privy to know. The actions performed to obtain the information was different, I'll grant you that, but the crime is the same.[/quote] The crime is the same, but again I'm talking degree. The degree of Bob's transgression are not the same as WasDrogan's. Accessing multiple nations worth of data is inherently worse than accessing a single nation's worth. [QUOTE]Do you know who else partook in the aforementioned raid? GOONS asked PC and \m/ to come along. Funny how you don't care that 2 of your MDoAP allies were also present at the raid. Either criticize them for their part as well or let it be known that you hate certain actions, but not your allies if they do it.[/QUOTE] We talked with GOONS for months before we even got to an ODP level with them, and since the incident they've tightened their raiding standards significantly. We also had talks with PC that put our concerns going forward to rest before Pandora's Box became a reality. So maybe we did criticize them for it but didn't broadcast it over the Open World Forum. [QUOTE]\m/ recognized that it should abide by its charter as a result of that war, and I say that we have no plans on doing anything similar ever again. Lesson learned. If you can forgive PC and GOONS for their part in it, perhaps you could also forgive our part as well?[/QUOTE] When did this conversation become about forgiveness? I thought this was about hypocrisy? Me forgiving you has nothing to do with actions being hypocritical or not. Bullying an alliance by direct combat and then baw-ing about being bullied by a spy attack is fairly hypocritical no matter if I forgive you or not. Which is, again, funny because you're such an apparent hater of hypocrisy. [QUOTE]The Carlos accords were not intended to offend.[/QUOTE] Glad to know you think Out of Character attacks aren't offensive. [QUOTE]Regarding VE working on correcting their problem ... what exactly are you doing? I received the apology from Impero, but I have not seen any actions by them. Instead I see VE members speaking out against us with hatred, with contempt, similar to the way NPO spoke down upon others in their reign of power. Now we see an NPO who has not acted in such a way in over a year, however we see a VE who acts such a way in this current day and age.[/QUOTE] When in doubt, compare the person I'm arguing with to NPO, amirite? Impero stated in his apology that he won't reverse his decision out of principle, but that he was going to make it up to you, somehow. It's hard to see action when you need an opportunity to make it up to somebody. I mean, we could do something small and insignificant at the moment, or we could do something when it actually matters, so you can either wait for that to happen or continue stomp your feet and yell. It's your choice. [QUOTE]If you want to be the bad guy, do it, be the bad guy. Just don't lie to yourself and believe you are the good guy. Nothing wrong with being bad, just be honest with yourself. You are here to have fun, aren't you?[/quote] Good guys do slip up on occasion, which is what happened here. Taking the wrong course of action does not make it so that we may not take correct action in the future. Perhaps that makes us hypocrites, but I'd rather be hypocritical than continually wrong.

[quote name='Caliph' timestamp='1292708109' post='2543055'] Spying is spying, whether its an "in game" spy attack or if other means were used to get the same information. VE telling \m/ to shove off is fine if that is your opinion regarding all spy attacks involving VE. That is not VE's opinion, it was VE's opinion that all spy attacks involving VE in the offensive manner are not worthy of paying reps if the defender is \m/, whereas if VE is spied upon then punishment must be performed. That is why VE are hypocrits in this endeavour.[/QUOTE] Equating accessing a database of information and spying a single nation is a stretch. It's the same at it's base, taking information, but if you can't see the difference between accessing an alliance's worth of information and a nation's worth of information there's nothing I can do for you. And I've already said, as you conveniently ignored, that I didn't like the way Impero treated you and I didn't like what Bob did. Do I have to bold it? Make it flashing? [QUOTE]Regarding the last war you blame us for starting, I garauntee you if Almighty Grub had gone to #VE and acted the way he did that VE would have told him to shove off as well. He was looking for a war, and the only way to stop it was to have surrendered before shots were fired. We don't do that, especially if you are looking to attack us over something that has already been resolved with all the involved parties. I have publicly stated, and will do so again, had I been consulted about the "attacktorate" situation I would not have gone along with it. I had come back after having these strangest dreams about this place called "real life" in which I was very busy. It was strange, but it did prevent me from being involved in my alliance that week and when I came back I saw we had done that. If it makes you feel any better that was not the right thing to do, and we have since moved on from doing those sort of things. Can you explain how \m/ is being hypocritical here? I have explained why I, and others, view VE's actions here as hypocritical, but this is the very first time I have heard \m/ being called hypocrits. Can you explain your reasoning here? Can you explain when \m/ was being hypocritical? It has consintantly been my position that hypocricy is bad and something that I do not partake in. Can you please explain how you are drawing the conclusion that we are being hypocritical here? I am very curious about that.[/quote] You're 100% right, but I wasn't referring to telling Grub to shove off. I was referring to the raid that started Grub taking a poke at you, which leads into why you're just as much as a "hypocrite" as VE. Apparently it's alright for you to bully other alliances but when VE does it it's terrible because it's being done to you. And that's not a defense for it being right, because, as I'll say again, it wasn't. As for the double level of hypocrisy that I mentioned, it's getting up in arms about VE being hypocrites while you yourself are also being hypocritical. I am however glad that you acknowledge the "attacktorate" as a bad idea, because while I really, really, really, didn't like GGA they should have died in peace, or have been left dead in peace. Also, to tie into what Merrie Melodies said: [quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1292707132' post='2543034'] I freely admit as the Vice President of \m/ that we have done some things that were flat out wrong, we acknowledge as much and we are actively working to correct it, I see no such behavior from VE.[/quote] Which looks eerily similar to what another alliance leader has said in this very topic... [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1292318179' post='2539387'] ...I have no issue about being man enough to admit it was a mistake, just as I did months ago...I also don't expect you to believe me or care, as I know I wouldn't if I was in your shoes, but while I cannot turn back time and as a general rule do not change decisions once I have made them, I do intend to one day make it up to you guys, somehow.[/quote] Two alliance leaders who state they are wrong and have said they are working to correct the problem. Apparently, \m/ can actively work to correct their problems but VE gets the Carlos Accords. How tasteful.

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1292704900' post='2542983'] I love how \m/ is supposed to be the bad guy when it was VE that committed an act of war! Yes, it is true, \m/ behaved like jerks several times during our first 8 months, I suppose that makes it ok for VE to be jerks now. [/quote] I didn't say Bob wasn't in the wrong. I personally don't like what he did, nor did I like the way I saw Impero treat Caliph. However, I also don't like when people come out and attack my alliance for being hypocritical when the very act of doing so makes them just as hypocritical.(Errr...I think I might be doing this wrong. I mean, do something about it ) You also neglected to address what I was getting at. Apparently it's alright for \m/ to be hypocrites but for VE it's some scathing insult. I'd like to know how you logically get to such a place.

I love how VE attacking WasDrogan on accessing multiple nation's information and then sharing said information is somehow hypocritical when Bob spies [i]in-game[/i] on \m/'s top nation, yet \m/ calling VE bullies is not considering how the last major war was started and their more recent "attacktorate". Is being a hypocrite while calling somebody a hypocrite another level of hypocrisy?

Ninjas are sweet. I can get behind this.

[quote name='Yankees Empire' timestamp='1290930643' post='2525202'] If you have Umbrella's sword, you have ODN's as well. YOU WILL PAY VIRIDIAN SCUM! [/quote] I call this guys warslots. You will eat my nukes, sir.

You can roll GVC if you want. I won't mind.

I should totally make more posts so I can get noticed and put into a Schatt blog!

[quote name='Audran' timestamp='1287601933' post='2488873'] Ugh, now I don't like you.. [/quote] You know you liked coordinating with me. Don't lie to yourself. And good luck to you guys in the future GATO, you're still cool peeps.

Glad to see two buddies stop fighting. And good show OMFG for protecting these guys.

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1286949654' post='2483332'] Why dont you tell all the dozens of fringe alliances around your 3 blocs to get lost and when the numbers are no longer 3 to 1 in your favour you might have the potential of an opposition forming.[/quote] Why don't [b]you[/b] try and sway those alliances towards yourself or "side" rather than saying, "Nah, I want you to help bring yourself down without any work done on my part"?

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1286944356' post='2483249'] I was responding to someone claiming that it wasn't a mark of a good treaty, or something like that. [/quote] Whoops. My bad then.

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1286936342' post='2483112'] Now where did I find that? Hmm... You could perhaps argue (however weakly) that the parties involved didn't [i]need[/i] to have that clause, but apparently someone felt strong enough about it to put it in writing. [/quote] "Valhalla and Boards Alliance of Protectorate States (Hereafter knows as BAPS) agree to abstain from aggressive military action and all forms of espionage against each other" Guess you guys need to be told not to attack your treaty partners too. It's a common treaty clause. I seriously don't know where you're going with this.