lonewolfe2015

This thread is a joke... the OP made no attempt to argue logically so others tried to clean up for him and expected Sparta to be interested in a serious discussion under a laughable pretense. Furthermore, one side goes "No, you aren't answering me." then the other goes "No, you didn't read what I said nor answer it." then we get "Well hey, why don't you read the first thing rather than spin it back on me." and the circle continues. At some point someone needs to step above that dribble and I've yet to see anyone in here arguing be in better light than someone else. You can claim Sparta isn't debating fair, but I don't see the opposition holding themselves in high light either. Perhaps someone here should open up a fair discussion on the matter rather than do this in a thread with nothing but insults at one party containing no discussion content in the OP.

[quote name='Bush_84' date='01 March 2010 - 12:50 AM' timestamp='1267422825' post='2209555'] I hear there's a Spartay going on? [/quote] Yeah, I stole Tulak's shield and went sledding with it. Accidentally crashed into Hyp's shed though and broke a hole into it.

[quote name='Believland' date='28 February 2010 - 08:50 PM' timestamp='1267408455' post='2209190'] Lonewolf, it's mutual. You've always been my second favorite MHAer right after Thai. So let me clear some things up. CG and I along with some others, viewed this as worthwhile. This wasn't our lolcoup on UN(Which was very fun, would do again) this was actually something that meant something to us. Marcus and Eddy were simply not following through and along with their ego and just the way they acted it concerned us. They even wanted to use treaty partners as tools which is why(Marcus has claimed) they canceled the treaty with LE. Now, I'm no fan of LE but, damn they're good. And I was actually in RE for the past two rounds. Being very quiet. surprised? Yeah even I was. Oh, I was also MI for 3 rounds. And I'm sorry if I was annoying you, I didn't take that into consideration when I was effecting MI and not MHA. Please, I'd rather be called English Empire than Marcus. [/quote] Well, I've never been a fan of Marcus' rants either, he just doesn't think about what he says. And since he joined MHA (I didn't even know...) I'll try to refrain from comment on him out of respect to Thai, Hisk and Rob. I do recall you were in RE, but I didn't know two rounds straight, so my apologies there. It just seems like everytime you start posting (this MI thing was fine before drama mind you) something happens that just blows it all up. Good luck making a better round out of things, but please no more RE either, I'd like to see you in an alliance that doesn't have a natural affinity against me

[quote name='astronaut jones' date='28 February 2010 - 09:02 PM' timestamp='1267409172' post='2209211'] What you get is the new GGA, saying how they don't need to have WRC's because their buddies over in ... I dunno.. Athens, have a bunch of them. It's stupid. Being bad at fighting isn't the worst thing in the world, obviously sparta's where they are now because they're good at something, and that something is playing the politics game.. but they shouldn't stand there and say they can fight when, by all accounts, they haven't been able to fight much at all since before the ujw. So, either fix the problem, or shut up about it, because no matter how much they scream and yell and say how good they did, that doesn't make it true. They've got other !@#$ they can be proud of. Their military? not so much. [/quote] Well first, they have many capable nations who are getting short changed, but they are overshadowed by some they need to fix too (like a lot of alliances do) and the changes they have made since Karma have been significant, so I feel it's only a matter of time until they deserve a little more respect, but that will be seen I guess. I trust their military, they've always been willing to help Asgaard if something happened we couldn't handle when we were smaller. They held their own from my perspective during the war as well, but that's my perspective. As for the stop talking about it, how? People bring it up at every turn, it's like telling members of GPA to stop saying they are neutral.

[quote name='astronaut jones' date='28 February 2010 - 08:50 PM' timestamp='1267408426' post='2209189'] Again, just because your ALLIES were superior, does not mean that YOU were. I fought sparta during the ujw, and we were told afterwards to say what great fighters you all were, when in private we were laughing about how piss poor you fought, and how utterly and completely unprepared you were. That was two years ago, and you know what's changed since then? From what I've been seeing, and from what I've been hearing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! All I said was, if you haven't fixed your problems in two years, then you guys shouldn't be calling people out like that. As it stands right now, I would take ANY top 30 alliance over Sparta in a 1 on 1 fight, because, again, your allies being superior does not mean that you are a superior fighting force. What it does mean, is that you guys know how to pick a winner. Y'all should go bet on horses, is what you should do. Leave the fighting to people who don't just pretend to know what they're doing. [/quote] But what good is an alliance who doesn't surround themself with good people who would be willing to fight alongside them? NpO had managed to effectively either isolate themselves or be isolated and look at the damage done there. Sparta doesn't have to be the best fighters, I'd take someone who is an awesome friend and ally first, their ability to fight can be worked on but their ability to be good people will never change.

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='28 February 2010 - 05:39 PM' timestamp='1267396979' post='2208920'] Attacking 2 mil NS when you're more then 5x their size isn't that big of a deal, so I'm not sure the point you're trying to make there. You didn't say most initiative towards improving, you said they'd taken the most initiative towards cleansing. That is why I brought up TPF/NPO/IRON. Wars like they have been in cleanse poor members usually. Essentially, you've said "I don't know" a lot in regards to a lot of different alliances in how they compare militarily and how they've changed. "Compare Sparta to other allies (including yourselves), not sure what you're getting at here, we're not allies. Everyone is going to have allies they think are great, and allies they don't. It's when your allies are put in awkward situations see: what we've done to all our allies this war and what many of our allies did to us during Karma that the true test of the relationship comes to pass. Respect is earned, not given. Many smaller alliances fail miserably at running their alliance, at engaging in politics, and generally just don't do much to progress the game. This is why I'm generally an avid fan of micro-alliance wars and people not making new alliances. Very few things are "unique" in idea or form and you're not offering anything that hasn't been before (you being microalliances not you personally LW). Every now and then a diamond comes up amongst the rubble, Argent comes to mind. They are smallish, highly active, a very good military alliance that have played an important role in many politics (in this war they tied TOP to TOOL/white). As far as the merge of nations coming into Sparta, no that is not what I'm talking about what so ever. I'm talking about the top tier in Sparta (whom are still there) that were derelict in orders during the war against NPO. Sparta told everyone that they'd be expelling/ZIing said members post-war. They never were. [/quote] I clearly said "At least acknowledge that of the major alliances they have taken some of the most initiative to cleanse their ranks and improve, because you're throwing them under a bus when they deserve none of that." This is because they [i]have[/i] been among the most active to improve their ranks. Legion cries fowl to them doing the most damage, but Sparta's ranks were focused on IRON/TOOL because their allies hit Legion harder to free their slots up some. When I told Sparta that we'd need a bit of 2nd wave support on Legion since most of our guys were in nuclear anarchy they said they'd allocate slots there because they weren't really before. Legion didn't even hit the most active ones... they hit regular joes a lot who everyone knows in a big alliance won't be the best fighter. No, we've never been allies, but I can compare my allies to friends who you've been allied to. That comparison is how I find in favor of Sparta. It doesn't matter if things are unique or not in small alliances, big alliances have a set community already with set leaders, to become important you have to spend a lot of effort and activity, sometimes which you don't want to do. So a smaller alliance allows you to mean more to it and to have a different experience to the game. If we all joined established alliances we'd be playing a Bob of 80 alliances all self-sufficient sentient communities. Is that what you wish to see? There are more diamonds in the rough than you think, many of these "micros" are made up of very good people who if given support would be the best allies you've ever had. Last thing, can you clarify your first sentence? Attacking 2mil is in reference to the strength of the combined nations they expelled from Sparta. [quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' date='28 February 2010 - 05:49 PM' timestamp='1267397562' post='2208928'] Sparta will get closer to SF in coming months. SF will take advantage of this and just use them as meat shields in the next great war. That's my prediction. [/quote] Wouldn't they have already of done this with the length of time they've been direct allies to SF and/or CnG? Something tells me while they like the specific alliances they are allied to, they aren't interested in being directly in either bloc.

[quote name='Believland' date='28 February 2010 - 04:55 PM' timestamp='1267394310' post='2208851'] If you're saying that TOP abuse the weak then you're just plain silly. I loved TOP when I was under their wing. Helped a lot. Anything they could do to help us. Which they've done with other allies. IRON, FOK, FACE and a couple others. Also, if they're at a high ns and still don't know how to fight then that's just plain silly. [/quote] Perhaps to you, but I've seen them shutout others (no names) who were allies. And I've seen them act high and mighty simply because of their alliance's position versus others. Point is, no one is perfect but I don't see how LM/TOP can claim the high road over Sparta in terms of whose the better ally without either exposing their flaws. LM, you are speaking with TOP in the back of your mind I'd assume, right? Either way, far too many large alliances treat smaller alliances as their means towards tech and a future merger unless it's their own protectorate. Even though sometimes those small alliances do grow up and they wonder why some have a chip on their shoulders...

BEazy, I can respect you if you were doing something worthwhile... but when was the last time you stayed someone for two rounds straight? Pick a plan and stick to it man... make it work. Otherwise simply become a part of somewhere else and leave us all be. These posts are Marcus-esque and just make you look worse.

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='28 February 2010 - 04:39 PM' timestamp='1267393382' post='2208830'] The fact is that all mass-recruiting alliances are going to have trouble becoming a military powerhouse outside of meatshield capability due to inactivity. That being said, Polar has done a fine job at showing what a mass recruiting alliance can do, MK (while I wouldn't consider them "mass recruiting" they do recruit (may be wrong but pretty sure they do), Sparta, who has been on the winning side of plenty of wars as of late (due in part to dropping their allies on one side or another, Karma war is a huge example of this), that they should of had the time, the money, and the ability to build a better war machine. This is what I think most people are getting at. Yes the pole is biased. Biased doesn't make things untrue though. And of the major alliances they have not taken the most initiative to cleanse their ranks and improve. Karma they said they were going to expel/ZI those that refused to fight (they didn't for their top tier). I'd say IRON/NPO/TPF have taken the biggest steps towards cleansing their membership by being on the bad end of a beatdown/war. Nothing clears out the crap members like that. Another reason why I believe in more wars, and in white pecae which in turn which causes more wars due to the higher speed of the war/peace cycle. It is good though that they've been good allies to you. Obligatory "until they drop you." That being said, Sparta is by no means NPO, and was by no means the worst parts of Q. It may indeed have been all a sneaky plan to get the world to think them irrelevant and allow them to be opportunistic. Sadly, if that is the case I wish they would of done more with the time they bought and a. become a true military powerhouse a la TOP, dropped down to 300 members and maintain that number no matter what, c. Made Trinite a court Jester. [/quote] Sparta does not wish to be the #1 alliance in the game, which they've stated repeatedly. And what did they do when they reached that height post-war? They attacked I'd say 2mil's worth of NS in nations who refused to participate. The "none" nations were extremely rampant with black sphere people post-cleansing. They then did this a second time (2mil in total between both I'd estimate) and so far it has shown well. BUT, if you time things properly my estimates is it takes 6-9 months to completely rebuild an alliance's military image or start from scratch, so perhaps with 2-3 more months things could be completely different. And I said "some of the most initiative" meaning they've done among the top 3 or so in most improvements. TPF shouldn't be counted among that because they aren't a big alliance anymore. NPO I am not sure of yet, they have a lot to still do if anyone wants to consider them more than just a number's game (nation count vs actual military might) NpO is perhaps the only alliance that was not already very strong in terms of military I'd consider made the biggest changes. IRON definitely cleaned ranks, but their military might I am not sure of since they've only been on the side of beatdowns and nothing which can show if given a relatively normal war if they'd win or take large damages still. Yes, they've been great allies. And when I compare Sparta to other allies (including yourselves) I'd say they've been among the best Asgaard could have hoped for. We aren't fodder to them, we're equals despite our differences in strength. They actually treat you like a normal person... I've seen far too many people simply try to manipulate smaller alliances. With the poll, I'd like to see simply a plain "never" not a never with a catch to it. E: The upper tier is pretty relative, they had a high average NS protectorate merge into them after Karma who were never part of a war yet, so if those are among the "problem" nations you're trying to point out, then they've yet to experience problems to correct until now.

[quote name='The Big Bad' date='28 February 2010 - 11:01 AM' timestamp='1267373095' post='2208354'] Sparta is not an alliance that leads they just follow. The have a complete lack of loyalty to anyone except themselves. So far this has allowed them to slip from side to side. In the grand scheme of things people think of them as irrelevant so they don't get much attention. They have however bean collecting a large group of enemies. Their allies are also aware that they have little value as a military ally and are not well liked or trusted. So I can see Sparta burning within the year if they don't collapse from inactivity and poor leadership first. [/quote] If this is the opinion of their enemies then I'll gladly burn with them. Sparta are great people, have an active and friendly community. Their leaders are awesome people when you get to know them and their military is getting much better. I'd like to see you turn their number of nations into the unbelievable fighting force you (and others) try to impose on them. It takes time, time they've used to improve their military for awhile now. As an ally, I can tell you that I see the exact opposite you seem to see. At least acknowledge that of the major alliances they have taken some of the most initiative to cleanse their ranks and improve, because you're throwing them under a bus when they deserve none of that. E: Also, the bias in this poll is ridiculous.

Honestly... it was only a matter of time someone took a serious attempt to hack this game.

[quote name='rabonnobar' date='28 February 2010 - 12:00 AM' timestamp='1267333434' post='2207589'] Pathetic. To Sparta and the others who asked for exorbitant reps: people are taking notice. The post-war world, politically, could be chaotic. Remember that some of us will define our foreign affairs by actions such as these. Good luck TOOL. [/quote] This is the one post I wanted to choose out of them all... why... heaven knows. I'd say Sparta if any combatant in this event was more inclined reps perhaps followed by Nemesis since they took a heavy hit it would appear for their size. Fact is, they (Sparta) were defending their ally when you jumped in. I know you were defending your ally too, and the chaining, blah blah, but to the victors go the spoils? If you've been involved in any backchannels, you'd consider this light compared to what some people were saying. And I highly doubt Sparta will make it difficult on you to pay. The issue, in my honest opinion here, is that we've got one side versus another basically saying "Hey, you thief, stop taking reps from this war!" and then going "Of course we'd never have done this to you if the shoe was on the other foot!" But the problem is... we never really would know. It's quite possible in 3 months things get reversed and if alliance such as yourself (no disrespect intended) lay out the same or harsher terms it'll be dubbed fair, right? Meh... I'm tired of this war. Intelligence goes out the window in it and literally every war front is different from another. So my commenting here has to try and remain objective since I really don't know what went on overall.

[quote name='Hymenbreach' date='26 February 2010 - 07:18 PM' timestamp='1267230098' post='2205549'] I'd rather not fight Asgaard again. [/quote] Much obliged to have earned your respect, likewise Hymen, Quantum fought well for their friends.

Welcome to Bob guys, looking forward to a bright future. With Randalla watching over you, nothing could ever go wrong.

Interesting, haven't seen you guys in a long while. Good luck this round.

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='24 February 2010 - 06:33 PM' timestamp='1267054595' post='2202180'] You mean you didn't know something about your own forums?! [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif[/img] Anyway, since this is about forum problems... what formatting there was in my notes was destroyed in the transition--oh, everything's still in order, but paragraphs are all wacky... [/quote] That's because all bbcode was converted to html during the transition from 2.3 to 3.0, some posts appear correct but if you try and edit them it's in all html for instance. This is an issue you can't change, and just have to manually fix where it arises.

Specto! How ya been man?

[quote name='JimKongIl' date='23 February 2010 - 10:45 AM' timestamp='1266940156' post='2199051'] Remove or shorten waiting periods for wonder purchases and remove or lessen the prerequisites for purchase. In a 60 day round there are many wonders that are not practical. The WRC is probably the best example. Since tech is so much lower in TE it is not really worth shooting for since it requires 3 wonder purchases each with a 10 day waiting period. If TE intends to mimic the life of a nation in 60 short days nations need to be allowed to purchase more wonders in that period. [/quote] Actually, I found the WRC + 400 tech + 2 nukes a day to be EXTREMELY useful for someone looking to do some smashing in the upper levels. Get a semi-respectable warchest and with the Pent already and the NRL's tech decrease you can do fairly well. However, I do think the wonder period would be best served at 6 day cycles, creating roughly 8-9 per round and you can effectively make a difference by going Military or Economy or hybrid.

[quote name='Locke' date='22 February 2010 - 10:56 PM' timestamp='1266897629' post='2198443'] I have no idea who you are. [/quote] Sums up this entire thread. We have a lot of other people to worry about that higher up on the totem pole.

[IMG]http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv229/lonewolfe2015/CN/Prop2.jpg[/IMG]

[quote name='Locke' date='23 February 2010 - 10:23 PM' timestamp='1266982020' post='2200423'] http://www.tinypic.com/ Fixes all your problems. [/quote] Quite awesome, two thumbs up. Thanks Locke.

I've been trying to find links to avatars which aren't long... but alas every link to anything I like has been too long to fit within the character limit and has tried to upload half made links. Most of them have been gif files which are too big to upload from my computer but would be fine if I could just use the direct link from the website... which is too long. For instance, my current Avatar fits just barely, but if I tried to upload via my computer it goes past the size limit. Is there anything we can do to increase the character limit for links to avatars or is there perhaps an outside source? I'd use tinyurl if it put the extension at the end... which it doesn't.

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='22 February 2010 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1266860714' post='2197502'] You like to use the word funny.... Sadly, it was your first time running an alliance. Sadly you tried your hand at extortion. Then I pointed this out to you, told you not to do it etc. Did you listen? Yes. Did you feel as though I forced you to do it? Probably. Yet another micro-alliance complaining of being forced to do something right instead of something idiotic (insert MOON's desire to ask for 600 mil in reps for a 2 day non-conventional war, I believe it was ACF also wanting to go in on NPO after 17 alliances were already there, plenty of other micro alliances thinking they deserved reps for declaring war but not having any actual wars). Fact remains, as you so aptly pointed out, I wasn't a member of your alliance, and you did not have to listen to me. Did you? Yes. Should you have done so at that point in time? Yes. As a leader of a wartime coalition, all anyone can do is offer up suggestions. Considering most people listened to me at that time and we won the war, I'd say it went over quite well. If you weren't thinking about a post-war situation, I can only lay that problem as your own. I truly do not believe I am entitled to anything, and I'd say a lot of Bob would agree to that. I present things as I see them, and avoid the diplotalk BS. I felt the need to bring up your history here as this I can only assume is your decision to ask for reps of Legion with yet again minimal engagement, is similar to your past actions. Since there is a correlation, and trend of asking for bogus reps here I enjoy bringing it up. I chalked the first one up to you being a new alliance leader (another reason why people should stop making micro-alliances and learn how to actually run an alliance right before taking one on) and not having the experience to deal with a post-war situation. This situation here shows that it is just the nature of your self, that you are vindictive and are no better then those you fought during Karma at your allies behest. If people dislike me, they are as always welcome to bring their issues to me and I will be glad to discuss any issues they have and at the very least, agree to disagree. I like to think I've garnered a reputation as being well-liked though of course I've stepped on the toes of people here and there. And even if I'm not well-liked I can stand to be respected. You sir, receive neither from me. I did offer to take it up privately, Thrawn didn't contact me, and I'm too lazy to bother contacting him. At times, privacy isn't the best way to go about things. Since my attempts here are to make you see that you're acting like a rookie alliance leader (again) and at least hoping you realize this, realize the mistake you've made and at least decide to waive reps at your own personal PR bonus. If not, then at the very least, people see you as an opportunist in two conflicts now one of which you are a self-admitted rookie alliance leader that had no clue what he was doing, and then later acts the exact same way in which case we'd hope you'd seen personal growth. Alas, it is from this podium that the future is decided. We saw it with NPO and Karma. I will of course not debase you so much to believe that you are capable of the past atrocities of NPO, but extortion was their strong suit.... As a side note, o/ MK (I have taken a lesson from you all and found that sometimes this is a lot of fun). [/quote] Publicly, I'll make it perfectly clear that ACF at the time wanted to enter the war, but did not want to enter onto an already toppled front on NPO, it wasn't our fight. But we were ready and willing to go to war for an ally at the drop of a hat, which we did at the time. YES, I was a rookie at the time, but that does not give you the right to previously treat me like one, you'll find smaller alliances (we weren't micro) the best kind of friends in the game if you simply don't try and act like you're the viceroy of them. You spoke as if you spoke for us in the peace negotiations, shrugged off our speech and were a general prick all around. I recall our DoE when you came to us and were opportunist asking for tech deals and then when I said no because we're internal you proceeded to ask if I didn't like you. This is far from a "rookie mistake" and you have utterly no clue what has gone on here. Many of the people posting are unaware of the full story. Interestingly I know a good bit, but only my part so I can only speak on that. I've made it aware I made a mistake with the whole beginning thing when I tried to patch a white peace agreement after I had lost power the previous night and did not realize that white peace was damaged goods and Legion was not accepting it. It followed into a massive miscommunication fest where I thought we had been given the go ahead by Legion and myself and my allies proceeded to post it. We retracted it after some hours of not so pleasant talk because Legion vetoed or retracted or who cares. If you noticed, they made the same mistake with SoL on our front. You make claims we weren't involved, but we jumped head first to defend our ally, we had over 1.5 wars per nation in Asgaard and we fought the best of Legion at every turn and never backed down. We offered white peace after the most destructive portion of these wars because we felt it was fair. But never EVER tell me how to run my alliance, we'll handle our business and that is why I have an issue with you. Once I get time to visit we'll be speaking in private because this pathetic showdown on here is ridiculous. There will always be people in favor and against the actions of people.

[quote name='Haflinger' date='22 February 2010 - 11:25 AM' timestamp='1266855935' post='2197366'] I'd love to see a reply by Sparta government to this line. However my guess is they're off trying to do calculations to see if this will put them past MHA for #1 score. [/quote] Haf, I don't see why this is called for. Sparta is one of the only big AA's I've seen doing mass ghost-busting of their AA. They've done these purges twice actually, both times dropped them either out of first or even further out of the overall #1 alliance race (not to say that size = political weight) If you can prove me wrong with others, so be it. But they have been anything but ambitious to take #1 over with the recent vacancy of TOP.

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='22 February 2010 - 08:56 AM' timestamp='1266846976' post='2197201'] You know, I thoroughly enjoyed reading all of this thread. Congrats on peace Sparta, much love to you all. When negotiating peace, it is a reasonable assumption that those negotiating for peace, are actually, you know, interested in peace. Several days ago peace talks occurred between Sparta and Legion. It has been confirmed, that the talks began with reps figures being thrown about. Sparta asking for $800 million. Legion countering with $400 million. As I understand it, after some negotiation, they kinda tacitly agreed on $600 million. Im not sure exactly what transpired after that agreement, but it is a fact. that at some point after the agreement of $600 million, Sparta went on ahead and offered White Peace. Then the infamous conversation occurred that led Sparta to believe they had an agreement. So Sparta posted the white peace agreement. Legion then has someone come in and say, not only did they not agree to peace, they didn't even want peace. At this point, in my opinion, Legion forfeit any right they had to expect a white peace. While it is well within their rights to continue defending their allies, it is well within Sparta's rights to believe that Legion was negotiating peace in good faith. Legion got the best terms possible...THE BEST TERMS POSSIBLE...in negotiations that THEY VOLUNTARILY engaged in...AFTER OFFERING and tacitly agreeing to substantial cash reps. For THESE reasons, and for the reason that, you know, Legion agreed to THESE terms, I completely find these terms acceptable. You cannot negotiate in BAD faith, get the BEST POSSIBLE exit for yourself, then say "we didn't really want peace anyways," then expect to get rewarded for that behavior later. o/ Sparta! [/quote] This is semi-correct. However Legion did not agree to pay 600 million initially, they were discussing it and while discussing if they would agree or not Sparta decided on their own to decline reps if Legion decided to agree to leave the conflict. Let it be known that no one was expecting reps at that time until things blew up on that one day and severely declined afterwords. Had several events not occurred which compiled together in a very bizarre way, we likely would be sitting on no reps right here. I would also like it to be known, after some thinking on this; People are complaining reps were given after 5 days from the initially white peace offering, but can you tell me, What good did remaining in the conflict a whole five extra days do for anyone? I'm curious, it didn't help a single alliance in my opinion. Their allies still got damaged, Legion took more damage and had to pay reps for the damage incurred after their decision to remain in the war, no one benefited. But yet their allies asked them to remain in the war and suffer further damages when there was a divided opinion on whether to leave or not amongst Legion. I'm not faulting them for remaining, I'd have done the same if I were in their shoes possibly (can't promise it, depends on a lot of things) but I am criticizing everyone's opinion that 5 days does not matter, because it means A LOT in a war. In 5 days time you can lose more than it takes to rebuild in a month. So if you will discuss this with some tact with me, I open anyone to answer this question I am posing.