Proko
-
Posts
883 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Proko
-
-
[quote name='wilhelm the demented' date='21 February 2010 - 11:25 PM' timestamp='1266812716' post='2196170']
If we were asking them from one or two nations without a war chest, maybe.
This is a 300+ man alliance - and, believe it or not, some of them have war chests.
[/quote]
I don't think the quantity is the issue. If you asked them for 4000 tech instead of 40,000 I would still think this is wrong. -
[quote name='Matthew Conrad' date='21 February 2010 - 11:14 PM' timestamp='1266812047' post='2196109']
We did not take 40k tech. We took half of that. Honestly, I very much doubt you would be so vocal had you not have a personal connection to one of the alliances attached to this announcement. That's fine, most people still hold a fondness for their former alliance. Perhaps you would be so outraged had it been an alliance completely unrelated to you. Either way, I'd appreciate you get your facts right next time.
To address some others in here, I personally don't mind taking absorbing hard feelings from you if it's for our allies but I do find it amusing that we are usually the only target, no matter the situation, when our name is in an announcement (sort of like if no one else was involved).
[/quote]
I don't have a personal connection to the alliances attached to this announcement, and I still think this announcement and decision are stupid. -
In this thread, Schattenman antagonizes Polaris by repeating old posts and creating no original content.
In this war, Schattenman antagonizes Polaris by repeating the same arguments and creating little original content. -
[quote name='NoFish' date='02 February 2010 - 12:59 AM' timestamp='1265090347' post='2152399']
Somehow I think this wasn't what FOK, PC and \m/ had in mind when they let you surrender, AlmightySponge. Enjoy your "Short Victorious War".
[/quote]
The terms we issued to \m/ and their cronies included sections that are relevant to this declaration. -
To Ruin.
Hail Polaris. -
I am glad people are setting this precedent for this war. I'd like to see alliances have more agency than to simply intervene where their allies are directly concerned.
I know how much you hate us, Xiphosis, but good luck, nonetheless. Our Sith are resilient, if nothing else.
-
You get all butthurt when your leadership is insulted and then turn around and do this?
I see where you're coming from - I think you are wrong but I get it. Nuances are important to this. Grub was coming to have a chat with a tech raid we didn't like and was abused for minutes while \m/ leadership ignored the situation. I made a jest because \m/ leadership has refused to admit wrong-doing outside of an insincere apology about the racism in the abuse of Grub (as opposed to the abuse of Grub) and then reprimanded its members days later. You guys were wrong to steal FoA's tech. They bought it, you took it. You guys were wrong to ignore the abuse your members were inflicting on my Emperor while it was going on, while your leadership was active in the channel and witnessing it.
No offense, but after the minutes of berating Grub tolerated in the name of diplomacy, and your refusal to admit almost any wrong-doing in this situation, I've come to the conclusion your leadership is kind of stubborn.
I like Godwin's post a lot. I wish you, Merrie Melodies, had the same opinion as Godwin, instead of hard-lining against us. Godwin is willing to overlook differences to come to a reconciliation, and an important part of that is admitting error. You guys are stubborn, but Godwin evidently is not. He seems progressive, he wants to work through this, and he is willing to compromise. He may not be more "intelligent" than \m/ leadership, but he is certainly more inspired and liberal. I wish you were like that.
-
Don't forget Papa Ivan
Ignored, perhaps, but never forgotten. The Sith know they have my respect, my gratitude, and my trust.
-
What is intelligent about destroying each other over a recognized mistake? I don't get why people are hailing that post.
It's insightful. It recognizes that \m/ made a mistake. It acknowledges a desire to change \m/'s manner of conducting business. There is one condition for peace, and that's for \m/ to stop attacking vulnerable alliances for their own profit. This post acknowledges that possibility.
That's all we're in this for.
-
This crap has gone on long enough... From both sides.
If we can all agree on SOMETHING here, it's that there is a huge error in the interpretability of the section of our charter dealing with wars. If we concede that point, apologize for it, and fix it, and NpO concedes that they will no further badger us about that, then can we end all of this drama? The actual war is great, but all the crap on the forums spanning more than TWENTY THREADS across all sorts of places and from all sorts of completely uninvolved people is getting to the point where I'm embarrassed to even be a part of this community as a whole, never mind any individual group.
My point is, we $%&@ed up, you $%&@ed up, a bunch of people who should have been neutral $%&@ed up. Is there really any more to it than that? Can't we just call it a mistake of epic proportions, all stop whining about it, and go back to smashing in each-other's faces without the drama?
You're far too intelligent and inspired to be \m/ leadership. Please tell me you're \m/ leadership.
-
Blunity, as it was meant to be. Welcome, brothers.
-
Once again, and as it always will be, Polaris and STA stand together.
Za Sabir!
-
Welcome to the fight, guys. AZTEC proved in Karma that it is a powerful military organization, and I am eager to see you distribute to FOK the same beatdown you gave MCXA.
-
Seems to me if the original issue was about that raid on FoA Grub would have been talking with PC at the same time they were speaking with \m/, the fact that didn't happen clearly points out Grub was after \m/ specifically.
Actually, that proves Grub was after GOONS specifically.
Expect our DoW.
-
Preventing their allies from being destroyed when it became clear Grub was going to be unreasonable.
Those scum in FOK.
\m/ have been offered extremely lenient and reasonable terms. There is one condition. It is a condition my alliance meets. It is a condition your alliance meets. It is a condition that \m/, on paper, should meet. They do not. We are asking them to stop hurting people.
-
Then why does Grub keep throwing that offer around, seems some minor tweaking and something could be worked out.
Kevin is not a sanctioned representative of the New Polar Order. While he may feel this situation has become to complex to be solved with the original peace proposition, the terms that Grub proposed are still on the table.
-
Funny is your moral high horse when you keep a treaty with one of the raiding alliances, don't even talk to the other raiding alliance at all, zip, zero nadda, not one word and then set out to crucify the third, and you wonder why we gave you the bird.
Errrr...
Alright, I am sure you have heard our side of events over fifty times by now, so I'll stick to the pieces of information that I think are most important to you.
1) GOONS was approached first because of our treaty
2) We intended to talk to PC after we spoke to \m/. We never got that far
3) Grub went into your channel to talk to you. There was not simply [OOC] racism occurring[OOC], but abuse directed at him specifically by \m/ members while \m/ leadership was present and active in the channel.
Sorry, we don't deal with that. One bad apology later, here we are.
-
Again, I fail to see how \m/ is at all relevant to this DoW.
I am trying to empathize with your side here, but this statement is beyond me. I guess you could say FOK is attacking someone because PC is attacking someone. \m/ is relevant because they, with Polaris, are the core of this war. Without \m/, there is no war.
Are you still failing to see how \m/ is at all relevant to this DoW? I feel like I didn't tell you anything you didn't know.
-
It's because we're attacking with FOK, not in defense of FOK, according to iFOK's treaty with them and Stickmen's policy of generally rolling together. Polaris decided its willing to further escalate the conflict and the Stickmen accepted the invitation with gratitude. Kapish?
Er...we did not escalate the war. We started the war. PC escalated the war. FOK escalated the war. NSO escalated the war. All we did was start a war.
No NpO escalated this war by starting it. Guess what people follow their treaties and wont bail on their friends because polar asks them to
I don't think that's what 'escalate' means. There was no war, and if we escalated that, wouldn't we be escalating nothing? I don't get it.
Poison Clan was never asked not to follow their treaty. FOK was never asked not to follow their treaty. All we did was attack \m/. We expected there would be more war, but we didn't do anything besides initiate. We escalated nothing, as there was nothing to escalate.
-
you know stumpy's stumped the polars with logic when they can't muster any spirited rebuttals.
any polars care to step up to the challenge? you've been so vocal throughout this Proko, that was a disappointing response
o ya NEW isn't MADP'd to NpO, not sure if anyone has said that yet............
Oh, I was just praising this work as a work. It's humorous, thoughtfully outlined, and creative. I think it's awesome that someone spent time on something like this and made a product of real quality. It reminds me of CN Radio, another project that I thought symbolized how excellent I think this community can be.
I can work up a response to the content and the particular accusations, but I don't want this thread to turn into bickering (although it probably will anyway.) There are fifteen other threads for us to argue in. Let's appreciate this as an example of Cybernations Art, and remember that this community is capable of exceptional things sometimes.
-
IC: Some rubbish about this being slander. I don't really know.
OOC: This is really fantastic. Keep up this kind of work, even if it slanders me and mine. Pieces like this, whether in a series or otherwise, are examples of the Cybernations community at its very best.
-
The "old grudge" thing is getting really old. While I might not be the biggest fan of Polar myself, the membership and the gov in general don't have an "old grudge" feeling, there is even friendship at some places with Hawky[NpO]as an example. The war we fought against you during WOTC was mainly to support our allies in TOP and Gremlins, we have moved on since then. You really think we attack a much larger alliance than us who is reasonably well connected over some kind of old grudge? We are simply here to help our friends in Poison clan out, who were fighting a much larger force, we are here to even things up.
The idea that you attacked us out of an old grudge, as Penguin observed, is an argumentative construct. It's not a real claim, and I would sound insane if I earnestly believed it. I simply have the exact same amount of reason to believe that you are attacking us for an old grudge, as you have that we are attacking \m/ for an old grudge.
Both claims are false. No one has any reason to believe either, unless they know something I don't.
-
He has just as much evidence in his claim as yours of "FOK declaring for an old grudge".
Ha! Good point. And similarly, as much proof that we attacked \m/ because of an old grudge. So let us say, there is equal proof of the following:
The New Polar Order attacked \m/ for an old grudge
The New Polar Order attacked \m/ but really wanted to attack PC too
FOK attacked the New Polar Order for an old grudge.
Sum Total of Proof:
I will reiterate my opinions:
The New Polar Order did not attack \m/ for an old grudge. There is no proof of this, or at least no proof that has been presented.
The New Polar Order did not attack \m/ in order to attack PC, too. There is no proof of this, or at least no proof that has been presented.
FOK attacked the New Polar Order for an old grudge. There is as much proof for this as for the previous two sttatements.
-
considering the size of the NpO on the one hand and PC and \m/ on the other hand i can safely state that yes they are "being attacked". Are they being attacked by a seperate alliance as well? No but the NpO has more than enough warslots to attack two alliances at once.
PC has entered a war on the defensive side in honor of their treaty, and is now being attacked by the agressive side. That the NpO did not need to bring in any allies to fight the war is immaterial.
We did not issue a declaration of war against the Poison Clan. We did not issue a declaration of war against FOK. We did not issue a declaration of war on Stickmen.
We issued a declaration of war on \m/. Any wars between alliances that are not \m/ and New Poalr Order are out of our hands. We did not attack Poison Clan. Offensive wars were only made against Poison Clan after dozens of offensive wars were made against the New Polar Order by the Poison Clan.
In contrast, no defensive war slot of the Poison Clan was filled by the New Polar Order because we declared war on \m/ until first defensive slots ofthe New Polar Order were filled by members of the Poison Clan.
You are reaching.
Unimportant Announcement
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
[quote name='Matthew Conrad' date='21 February 2010 - 11:28 PM' timestamp='1266812880' post='2196178']
I don't even know if you were trying to argue against my post or just trying to be witty. I'm not sure why you quoted me like I said you had to be connected to an alliance to have strong opinions about something related to it.
[/quote]
I don't think Pezstar is posting as she is because of her former ties, and it seems she and I are in agreement about the reparations terms. It was no play for wit, just a comparison of Pezstar's opinion to my own, in lieu of our different backgrounds concerning the Legion (she is a former member, whereas I don't think I've ever really spoken to someone in the alliance).