[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

You were still planning on doing another thread? Why?

I didn't do this one. As for why, find my first post here if you want to know.

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

There you go Zha, your next home. Enjoy.

Very much considering it, if Legion would have me. I know these words would have caused massive mental trauma to any who read them but a year and a half ago but Legion is my favorite alliance in CN right now.

As for the expected drama thread, it has been called off on account of Blackbirds. Might as well have fun here, there won't be any more.

[Imperial Decree from the New Pacific Order]

Don't. You were very much a part of the shove into that ditch, and were even more a part of the horrible reputation the NPO has. You don't get to pretend that you had nothing to do with it now that you aren't a part of it anymore. Moo is an absolute pleasure to deal with compared to you. You are a Cyberverse terrorist. You should be laying in the ditch with a nuclear missile down your throat.

Was I now? That would falsely imply I had anything to do with a decision making process I was systematically excluded from. As for reputation, of that I have no doubt. Considering you never dealt with me, that is an awfully bold statement. However, I do admit I may have to defer to your judgment on driving alliances into ditches, you certainly have more experience than I in that regard.

I see at the end you just completely lost it. Terrorist? Death wishes? You should go back on your meds, clearly you aren't presentable without them.

[Imperial Decree from the New Pacific Order]

Change at last.

After everything that has happened, everything that was done to me, Cortath is still someone I have faith and trust in. He is someone I respect. I hope that he can make all the changes Pacifica needs that I failed to.

Best of luck and greatest speed, Cortath, in pulling the Order out of the ditch the previous owner left it in. If there is anyone left in the NPO who can, it is you.

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

Look, I don't intend to continue this thread any further, but two points. First, I do not accept Griswalds was a spy. He wasn't happy with the way Polar was going and worked with Moo to change it. He was not an active leak of information or answering to NPO bosses on how to handle Polar. That was simply never the case. Or, if I am wrong, it was over my head.

As for Ursarkar, my understanding is he has enhanced access, by Polar's choice, to their forums due to his artistic contributions. He has used that access to report back certain posts of the Polar leadership bragging about the NPO being destroyed, how it was deserved harsh terms, and so forth. To me, that is not a spy, that is just a leak. A spy would imply he either entered your alliance to gain information or changed alliance loyalty without telling you. You continuing to post anti-NPO crap in front of an NPO member is on you, not on the NPO for spying on you.

Also:

[23:15] <Zhadum> Eh, doesn't seem to be much hate. Some annoyance you didn't fight with us but I'd rate it pretty minimal

[23:15] <Venizelos> haha

[23:15] <Venizelos> NPO expected GATO to help them?

[23:15] <Venizelos> that is ridiculous

[23:15] <Zhadum> More hopeful than expectant

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

Oh, you dance so well Zha.

The BR are constantly told that NPO is a Meritocracy or atleast they were. Is that practice of internal propaganda ended?

Of course not? How do you make people work if they know they are not moving up?

I never said IO's were trying to stop middle people from doing work. It is the work done by the middle people that makes NPO successful. The IO's just don't want the middle people to gain the ultimate reward that one can gain in NPO for doing all that work. That is because if one of those workers gains that reward then that means a current IO lost that reward. If one IO loses that reward then that means all IO's can lose that reward and none of the IO's want that thus despite their petty cliques they all work together to protect their positions.

Not quite though not as far off the mark as I initially thought. Depending on the person and the department, a lot of the middle people just end up in orbital cliques, their relative power determined by the power of the IO they orbit. If an FA IO is in power, the FA middle people have a lot of strength, should they get moved to the margins, they can expect to have no say whatsoever. The influence of the mid level is almost entirely at the whims of politics at the top levels.

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

Right....then why don't you explain the reasoning behind why inactive IO's remain in power and thus due to it being a Meritocracy they continue to be responsible for major portions of the Order even though they cannot possibly be responsible for such while they are not around for long periods of time?

Explain how that is in line with what a Meritocracy really is. I mean, since you were booted you can certainly speak freely on such. Or....does this strike a little too close to home for you to touch?

I never said it was a meritocracy, it isn't any more than High School politics are. However, the idea that there was an active effort by the IOs to stop middle people from doing work just so they wouldn't be outshone is silly beyond words.

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

You consider him more of a traitor then yourself despite all of the sensitive info you are divulging about NPO because your girl didn't get the position Brehon got?

No, I consider him more of a traitor because once a group kicks you out you have no obligation to keep their secrets.

Does that little face you made in response to my other statement mean you have nothing to refute against that? What other explanation could you possibly come up with for why long time inactive IO's remain IO's while IA's and other hard workers in the ranks will never get the chance to rise up in the alliance they love?

No, the face means what you said was wrong on pretty much every level and I have neither the time nor the inclination to go point by point and refute everything wrong with it. The face was an expression of disbelief someone could post what you just posted, and, what's more believe what you just posted.

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

And as for Ivan "couping" Moo. If I recall correctly none of you seemed to really care, and even welcomed it, until word came around that Ivan was going to be clearing house and firing several of your clique. Again, one of my few regrets is sitting idly during that fray instead of openly supporting Ivan, although I will admit that my private musings to Umbrae, expressing my concerns about Moo's leadership ability, did come back to haunt me.

Not true, a number of people posted the usual "hails" and garbage when Ivan turned up, however, the only person actually sincere in them was Mussolandia. For everyone else, the complaining started on day one and the attempts to retake the NPO within a couple more days. Ivan likes to claim it was only when he threatened the IO status quo that we turned on him but the fact is he was pretty much an unwelcome interloper the moment he walked in the door. We just kept it quiet long enough to do something about it.

Oh, you're washed up. Whether or not you realize it is another story. Everyone in the Cyberverse hates you, and the only people who had the stomach to tolerate you have now turned their backs on you. You're done. Finished. History. And not a moment too soon.

Its like he couldn't even read what he was replying to.

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

You cannot call anyone a traitor from here on out due to all that you said, sorry.

Except you are wrong. A traitor is one who acts or attempts to act to betray an entity to which they owe allegiance. Fact is, I really so far have barely acted, and none of what I did I did when I actually owed the NPO any loyalty or confidentiality. Fact of the matter is, once they kick you out you are no longer actually capable of betraying them.

Those IO's have been there forever. They wouldn't know what to do without the power. Just look at what Zhadum has now done ever since losing that power.

That is why they dont let anyone do interim work. They are afraid the interim will actually do better work at a much quicker pace. They are protecting their places of power within the "Meritocracy".

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

You calling anyone a "washed up crony" is a little ironic considering the circumstances, is it not?

Enjoy the attention you receive from this before finally falling into obscurity forever, traitor.

Not really, if I were a crony I wouldn't be washed up, traitor.

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

A little bit of both. Most traitors are like that, but both sides only see as much of it as they want to see, and it tends to give them a very distorted impression of what's being said.

Look at LoD, I've seen people complain he's still too pro-NPO to be in MK, and also seen people say he goes out of his way to troll them at every chance.

Don't try to figure it out, no matter what you say it'll get spun to suit somebody else's agenda. You should know that by now just from having been one of the spinners for so long. Or was it really so subconcious you didn't realize what you were doing all that time?

Of course I'm aware, that was my designated role in the NPO. A verbal hitman called in to crush a post, where possible through logic or logs to the contrary, when not through any means necessary. One of the reasons I am hated so much is because I did my job often and well.

None the less, the point I am making is there seem to be two independent arguments. One that I am selling NPO lies, the other I am the new Doitzel come to destroy them where Karma failed to do so. I guess what I am really asking is could you, the people, settle on a label for me quickly so I can start wearing it properly?

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

I've always counted you as a follower, yet this is extreme. Clearly you should change your entire perspective on a player based on... Zhadum. I can't think of a more suitable source of unbiased accurate information regarding Sponge!

The quote he is referencing is one of those things the NPO paraded around trying to drum up anti-Polar sentiment. It's a private query between Sponge and someone in the NPO. They pissed him off and he remarked that he had just killed all the NPO's allies. Because we had. The NPO decided this means we made a concerted effort to destroy the NPO's powerbase. Which is not true. It hasn't ever been true. It's just another one of those lies that the NPO tells. Please tell me you are better than this.

Also good luck taking revenge on a nation that doesn't exist. Tell me how that works out for you.

Wait, am I here to paint the NPO as evil, villainous maniacs or tow their party line as their staunch defender? I'm confused.

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.

I may take offense to this, considering the only two NSO posters in this thread so far seem to have been Ivan and myself. But don't let me keep you from a good rant.

I never said anything about NSO. You also missed Corrinan and Heft and some other guy.

[Zhadum reveals NPO information: organized logs]

Dear God, 11 pages and I haven't even posted yet. Rather amusing watching the old haters, really, calling them anything else would give them too much credit. In particularly Ivan, the once and would be future king, prowling around the thread taking cheap shots where he get them; backed by his minuscule flock of washed up cronies. Hard to decide if it is pitiable of laughable. Of course, no small amount of Polar hate in here too. Not one post here and I've already ripped the title of most hated player in CN from Bilrow.

Yes, I will be creating my own thread, most of you, I expect will be disappointed. I'm aware a lot of you are expecting me to go full on ripping into the NPO, tell you how terrible and corrupt and evil they were. I'm not, that's not why I'm here, it isn't why I will be posting. Believe me or not, I will be posting exactly how I saw things and how the NPO saw things, in general terms. I cannot, nor do I presume to speak for the Imperial Staff as individuals, however, I can point to the distinct trends in what they said behind closed doors.

Further, I also am not going to do the expected 180, suddenly deciding everyone who ever worked against the Order was right and the NPO was horrible and wrong. We all know doing so would be BS. Sometimes, fact was, NPO was right. Sometimes they got the short straw. Sometimes they deserved the short straw. Just an alliance like any other, trying to do what is best for themselves. Sometimes I may not be right, my knowledge is fallible like anyone else's, sometimes I will tell you something that clashes with your own experience. For example, TOP and IRON members mentioning my notes about Polar causing relations breakdown. Maybe it is true, maybe it isn't, but that is what is and has been flying around in the top levels of the NPO.

So, that said, don't let this get in the way of the sniping/defending/repeating how interesting it is/saying you already knew it. Wouldn't want to derail the thread.

[A New Day Approaches]

I have not once stated that NPO signing this does us any harm, and that is because I don't believe it does.

Then what is the "objective" reason to deny us?

And I don't know where you get this notion that we NEED NPO to THE BIG EVIL. Our alliances weren't founded on the principle of having NPO lose a war. To say we need to somehow manufacture ways to keep people thinking NPO is THE BIG EVIL just isn't true. If NPO wasn't around, it's not like the world would be all love, peace, and harmony. None of us need you around to justify our continued existence.

Your current power in the world is based on the NPO having lost the war and no longer being a major power and being someone you can point to as a universal enemy. Your alliance may not have started that way but that is where you are now. I will note you made my point for me, if the NPO weren't around there would be a good deal more in the way of power struggles, which Karma wants to avoid for as long as possible.

I have nothing to say about Sparta, TOP, and VE. I don't know intimate details about their actions.

Nor Rok I presume. No, I suppose in cases like this it is better to not look too closely at what your allies have done in the past, or at least not admit knowledge of it.

As for someone not surviving the next conflict, please don't tell me you're already throwing around the threat of disbandment.

No... I was merely pointing out that the next great power struggle could destroy you as the last one destroyed us. I make no comment on disbandment.

We decided against allowing you guys to sign treaties at the time you asked us about Invicta and the Red Unity Treaty because you had either not sent any reps yet, or had just started; I don't recall if you had started by the time you asked, and it doesn't matter either way. It was talked over, and we decided we'd like to see some time of cooperation and adhering to the terms before granting you permission under the terms to sign treaties. I believe you're still within the first month of terms, which means you haven't even come up to the time which you must be in compliance with military terms. Have a little patience, comply with the terms for a little bit, and you'll be granted permission to sign these treaties.

How does the length of cooperation change anything? What is at risk? What could be lost from the treaty? How is it a reward for us to be able to sign it? None of that explanation makes any sense. I mean, yes, if there were something that could go wrong and cause damage were we irresponsible or ebil, then I could see needing to see some responsibility before allowing us to sign. However, for something completely harmless such as those, and for something that is of some importance to the future of all the other alliances on Red, being obstructionist in this nature cannot be explained away by just saying "we need to see a little more first".

But yes, we're doing all in our power to keep NPO looking like THE BIG EVIL, because without NPO in that role, well, none of us have any reason for existence.

Another one from Captain Strawman. I never said you wouldn't have a reason for existence, I said it would prove a political liability by increasing the degree of power struggle in the world when you lose the capacity to keep the world united against a common enemy, that presently being us.

[Punishment of the individual vs Punishment of the alliance]

One important point completely overlooked in the OP is that rarely (read: almost never) does anyone jump straight from act of random individual to punishment on an alliance scale. Generally the cause for punishment on an alliance scale is a refusal to do anything about it, or at least, a sufficient amount about it.

Say, for example, a senator from alliance Cat gets bored and sanctions a member of alliance Dog. Dog goes to Cat and demands something be done about it. Usually, if the response from Cat is considered reasonable, Dog will not go after the whole of alliance Cat. More often, what happens is Cat tells Dog that if they don't like it they can do something about, or that they will remove the guy from senate but not expel him, or that they will do nothing to make up for the damages done by the individual acting as their representative who they gave the power to do harm in the first place, etc.

What this poll sorely neglects is that very often it is the response of the alliance being "punished" that dictates whether the outcome is against an individual or an alliance as a whole. The problem then, is what if the government refuses to punish the nation that committed the act? Do you then attack the individual who committed the act and the government who refused to do anything about it? So now we have gone from an individual who engaged in the act and a government who supported it after the fact, or at least wasn't willing to do enough about it to satisfy the aggrieved party. If they are all attacked, what do you expect the members of that alliance, who, almost certainly pledged to defend their alliance mates and to follow the orders of their military command, who, in all probability were the people who were just hit as conspiring government members, to do?

Holding an individual responsible for an act only works if the government of that alliance allows it to work. Otherwise, inevitably either war follows or nobody is punished.

[A New Day Approaches]

There was nothing to duck. It's not against, or in our interests, for NPO to be or not to be THE BIG EVIL. If NPO is THE BIG EVIL, so be it. If NPO is not, we'll all survive and find other conflict.

You hope. Someone won't survive the next conflict, don't pretend to be so self-assured as to think there is no way it could be you.

Who told NPO they couldn't sign the treaty? Try the alliances on your front. There is nothing wholistically Karma about our organization. Karma was broken down into fronts, with each front handling their own affairs. As such, beyond the first day or so, there was no such thing as a true Karma decision. And most assuredly, not now, being that most other fronts had already wound down a while earlier.

Yes, the alliances on our front, otherwise known as Karma.

If UED is being hostile to you guys, which I'm unaware of, and frankly don't care much about, then it has nothing to do with any desire or directive of us, the NPO front.

Funny, they seem to have a lot of contact with the alliances on the NPO front, namely Rok, for you to know nothing about them. I can only assume that means you are not paying attention, much like the rest of this post.

Working with others on an open sphere makes you look better? It really only makes you look normal, like you get it, but that's not something you've done in the past, so I guess it does make you look relatively better, compared to your history.

Yes, and if we look relatively normal, we are no longer the great evil, which is an unfortunate political situation for you.

The post was a huge story of how we're still out to get you guys, how we need NPO to still be THE BIG EVIL, how we're trying to inspire a red civil war, a red hostile to NPO, etc. All of this, because we said you couldn't sign this treaty right now.

You are still out to get us and protect yourself. You do need us to be the big evil. Us being the big evil gives your position stability as it keeps people looking at us and not you. The fact of the matter is under the direction of other alliances within Karma, UED has attempted to create strife within Red, this is a simple fact. Though, you do have the cart before the horse, there has been a good deal more demonstrating your intent towards Red than just the treaty, that is merely the latest example of it. Of course, all of this was explained in the post you ducked.

So what do you have to say about us declining your signature on a treaty with Invicta? Are we now trying to make you look like THE BIG EVIL to the whole CN world, that NPO doesn't want to cooperate with anybody at all? Are we trying to inspire the whole world to hate NPO because you don't have any treaties while under terms that require you to ask permission before signing new treaties? I'm sorry, but his post was nothing more than a joke.

I have to say that any news that looks like the NPO is regaining some normality or displaying anything resembling friendliness, cooperation, support is bad news for Karma. As long as everyone is still convinced, that is they do not need to be convinced contrary to your post, that NPO is evil incarnate and everything done to the NPO is because we deserve it, they won't see you for the hypocrites you are. You need us to be bad so you can justify everything you are doing in the public eye as "justice" or similar nonsense, that if true, would have you crashing down the gates of Sparta, TOP, VE, etc. If ever your abuses are unveiled as simple abuse, what you claim to stand against, you might have to answer for it. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to you to continue playing the hero and every hero needs a villain, us.

You will be allowed to sign this treaty before your terms are up and reps finished, if all continues going as it has gone. What will you say then?

I won't have to say anything. You will allow us to sign a treaty that does nothing more than help stabilize and codify a mechanism for structuring the Red team in a non purely chaotic fashion as soon as it is too great a political liability to continue to deny us to do so.

Again I note not once have you established an actual harm that would come of us signing it, or an actual good that comes from denying it to us. Clearly then, any harm or good done in your actions originates from your end, not ours.

[A New Day Approaches]

No, that's not it either.

I read your whole post, including the tl;dr. They contradict each other, at least, aspects of them.

Your post doesn't even really merit a true rebuttal, because, quite frankly, there is nothing to do except chuckle at it.

I'm sorry, the too cool for school defense lost effectiveness with me somewhere around the sixth grade. Would you like to play again?

There is no Karma any longer. So first off, Karma isn't doing anything.

If there is no Karma, who told us we couldn't sign the treaty? Owait...

Secondly, a red civil war? Between who? No offense to those alliances on red, but a civil war between them doesn't really damage the sphere, considering the low percentage of the sphere they make up.

Between a UED directed effort and the NPO, as I said.

And how does us rejecting your signature on the document, make you the bad guys? What?

Because we look better if we are demonstrably playing well with others, in particular others on Red given our history with the color. It is for the sake of appearances.

Also, please don't tell me you don't believe politics would still be interesting without NPO being THE EVIL, as you seem to intimate with " then you no longer have us as the "hated other" to point to"?

I never said anything about how interesting it would be, I merely noted that is very much against your political interests for us not to be.

99% of your post is a joke, and the real explanation you touch upon for our rejection of your signature is only half the reason.

Again, too cool for school does not work on me. You are of course welcome to try again instead of this half hearted attempt at ducking.

[A New Day Approaches]

No, it does not remain nonsensical, because we did not reject your signing of it due to any clauses in the treaty.

No, you rejected it because you require the NPO to remain the universal bad guy so people don't look at Karma and their behavior. If there exists the perception that the NPO is playing nice with other alliances, that the NPO liberalized Red and is working with the fellow inhabitants of our sphere, that maybe we are fully capable of change, then you no longer have us as the "hated other" to point to.

Then, if the NPO weren't the hated other, they might recognize that for example, a full half of the hated viceroys in history who are still around are on the Karma side. They might recognize that a full half of Karma either was directly supporting the NPO domination of the world through most of our existence or were allied to people who were. They might recognize the alliance of Karma already brutally penalized a barely involved alliance in the Hegemony with massive reps and demands that a certain member leave their government simply because they did not like them. If people stop hating the NPO for a moment, just one moment, they might recognize the Karma and the people therein have a track record of doing everything they now pretend to be against.

Besides that aspect of it, the need to keep attention focused on us to avoid losing your new found and very much tentative grasp on power, the other reason is Karma is busy trying to cause a Red civil war of sorts and so Red Unity would hose them. So far we have seen red alliances pushed out of talks by Karma, they being UED and SWF. UED, under Karma direction was attempting to merge into a mega alliance specifically to fight NPO on red, or even their initial attempt to make Red Dawn a military bloc just so the NPO couldn't sign it. UED, for all intents a Ragnarok puppet state, has been promoting red instability ever since the original Moldavi Doctrine was removed. I hardly think this a coincidence. Ergo, keeping NPO from being part of the color treaty, on paper, plays into their general behavior of turning Red hostile to us.

Having spoken to half the people you named as knowing the true reason we didn't join, one didn't know anything about it at all, the other said the reason was because "you didn't want us signing anything right away". How is that an objective reason? How is that any reason at all? Well, simply, because objectively this plays into your political game of the moment of making the Red team a battlefield , the other nations on red that get caught in the middle of this be damned, and it makes people less likely to look at you.

So, the too long, didn't read version, the reason we can't sign is more than just maliciousness, it is a calculated effort to continue the war they signed peace in and make sure people are paying attention to anything but themselves.

[A New Day Approaches]

It's a completely different matter - and the reason for this is trivial. You can target individual nations of an alliance, yet you cannot target the ruler of a nation in your attacks against that nation.

First, that is highly debatable as when you hit a certain member of the alliance, the whole alliance tends to hit back. Second, that is open to tremendous abuse as a certain member could then engage in gross acts of misconduct against the enemies of an alliance, for the expressed benefit of the alliance, then throw themselves on a sword (OOC: or reroll) to avoid all responsibility. Third, that is largely irrelevant because the innocent victims are no less innocent.

That's a highly idealistic and not necessary correct way of looking at things.

If you take the average nation in and average alliance, they do not deserve to be attacked because someone else in that alliance did something wrong. This is a very simple concept.

That is your opinion, and while it is a very simple concept, it also does not capture the reality of things. The reality is alliances are almost always collective defense pledges, by joining you become the soldiers the leaders send to war should war arise. Alliances are an exercise of collective reward when things go well and collective responsibility when things go poorly, by signing up you assume all the risks that go with it in case your faith was misplaced. At best you make a case for individual surrender terms, but even then I'd say it is a weak argument.

[A New Day Approaches]

How can it be the same? In one case you are attacking a single nation, and in the other case you are attacking many nations.

Assuming that you know who the perpetrators are and not making it up;

In one case, you are punishing the perpetrators, and in the other case you are also attacking innocent nations.

How can you or anyone else possibly think this is the same thing?

Is it honestly your position that every man, woman, and child in a nation that commits an act of war against another is responsible for that act of war? If not, then you agree that should the aggrieved nation retaliate against their aggressors they are willfully attacking individuals who had nothing to do with the original grievance? If it is then wrong, in all circumstances, to war in such a way that innocents are harmed, you agree that all war in this land is wrong.

Simply put, an alliance is a collective agreement. I give my government my strengths; my armies, my ideas, my works, my defense, my loyalty. In exchange, they take my strengths and the strengths of everyone in my alliance with the trust that they will use them to advance my position or my beliefs in the world. If at any time I do not believe the government is doing this, I am free to leave the alliance. As long as I continue to lend my strength to an alliance, I am complicit in what they do because I am part of what is supporting their capacity to do it and they are doing it in my name. I may not always be aware what they are doing, but having given them my trust and my consent to act as my leader in joining the alliance, what they do reflects on, and ultimately, what they do I can be held responsible for.

[This Week in Pacifica]

You murdered my cat.

OOC: Oh, threatened, did I? Surely any threat I could bring to bear against you I would have expended by now -- Lord knows you've fired all your cannons. The whites of your eyes are turning brown.

Ugh, I grow weary of this.

Should have thought of that before it became the latest thing you hid behind to escape responsibility for your failings.

OOC: You did. She turned you down, you retaliated by spreading around logs and doing other things, just as you said you would. Hardly my fault that was the best you could do.

[This Week in Pacifica]

How nice, a thread in my honor. Haven't had one of these since before GWIII. Always nice to be so hated, to have your very existence cause spasms of uncontrollable frothing in your enemies, were I to be generous enough with my words to raise what Vox is to the status of an actual enemy. An unending stream of hatred and personal attacks, all funneled into me. Very little makes one feel more important than being the object of obsession for so many.

Still, it is not enough. I want more. More attention. More hatred. More outrage. As such, allow me to set a few things straight. First, I wrote most of the piece MoB has been credited with. Second, I ordered it posted. Therefore, by transitive property, I insist all the hilariously phony outrage levied against her instead be channeled to me. Yes, yes, I know, you are all absolutely shocked, SHOCKED, that a piece was created explaining Sileath was removed from our Diplomatic department over sexist remarks and subsequently left the Order and that it was noted he had had trouble in other departments. Still though, that shock would be better enjoyed over here so I ask you all to pay it forward.

Still more, I know Vox likes to harp on some logs between Doitzel and I. OOC: I note they keep forgetting when discussing the events surrounding that that Doitzel was attempting to blackmail my RL girlfriend into letting him into a channel by threatening me, but I suppose that is to be expected. IC: They always love to clamor to the moral high ground, then try to change the topic when they are demonstrated have engaged in the same conduct for which they attacked others.

Still, their hypocrisy is hardly news. Why so many dove off the Vox bandwagon as quickly as they climbed on in the beginning, they became worse than everything they claimed to stand against. What is amusing is their entire article amounts to one tech scammer, one guy who got banned from a semi-public channel for three minutes, and an article about said individual leaving the alliance after sexist remarks. What happened to the good old "the end is nigh" stuff you had going before? "Oh lawd, the NPO bank is collapsing. Oh lawd, the tech trade is breaking down". You guys used to have some really good tinfoil grade tabloid reporting. Now what are you reduced to? A three week old temper tantrum and the 10,000th aid scammer in CN?

I hope next week's is better; if your tabloid falls through I may have to devote manpower to create one in Media.

[Greenacres is a rambling man.]

It was before. Also I like that nice distracting misnomer with such negative connotations. "Blackmail".

And why was I "removed" from an OOC channel, Z'ha'dum? Surely not over my entirely IC actions and because I walked out in protest to the person you're defending, the channel administrator, sitting there and allowing you to repeatedly sling insults in a towering rage? In fact I was removed by none other than yourself, the only one in the channel who had a problem with me, because any time I was around you couldn't seem to control yourself. And yet you have the gall to sit there and accuse me of misconduct for getting angry -- against my better judgment, I confess -- that someone I thought of as a friend outside this game would actually blame me for your stone-casting.

The difference between you and I, Z'ha'dum, is that I know when I cross the line and make mistakes. You'll have to forgive me for daring to let my temper get the best of me when someone tells me to "take the high road" even as you threaten to stalk me.

Because I no longer considered you a friend and that channel is a channel for friends. And yes, it was blackmail. Or extortion. Or the use of threats to produce capitulation in one you want something out of. Whatever you want to call it, you did it. I prefer blackmail, despite any semantics games you are trying to play with this. You threatened her that if she did not let you back into the channel, you were going to release logs to make me look bad. I told her to tell you to go ahead and release them.

See, the difference between you and me is I haven't threatened to hurt uninvolved parties just because they happen to be close to you. I haven't violated the trust of uninvolved parties because it suited my political agenda. I haven't sent you queries insulting you, insulting your friends, insulting your significant others because I was angry with you. The difference is, I got angry with you and took it out on you. You got angry with me and took it out on my girlfriend. That is far more "low" and "juvenile" than anything I said.

Further, for all your claims to the contrary, the only one of us who has engaged in cyberstalking is you. You walk into channels I have founders in, I tear you a new one, hey, it may not be pleasant or friendly, however, it is not stalking. You following around my girlfriend, (and, oh by the way Sponge, considering she will be moving in with me in the next 3 weeks, I would hardly call it an "IRC girlfriend"; though I do appreciate the level of character you demonstrate in equating a colloquialism with stalking and harassing someone's girlfriend because they have a problem), sending her queries harassing me, insulting her, stealing logs and abusing the founder password even after she asked you to leave her channel, that is all the act of a cyberstalker. Smacking you up when you walk into my channel isn't.