Gamemaster1

[quote name='SynthFG' date='19 June 2010 - 12:23 PM' timestamp='1276964578' post='2342941'] IRON because they are who Gre were fighting when Ram went off the deep end the rest of your questions are irrelevant to anything [/quote] True, they are irrelevant. Not because of inherent irrelevancy, but merely because the true reason behind this unconditional surrender attempt is Ram's ego. Everything PK has been saying in here has always been fluff.

So...just to list the questions Matthew_PK has yet to answer. Maybe if they are all in one post he might see them easier. Or just ignore them easier, as he seems to have done earlier. Why specifically IRON and DAWN? Why are Gremlins justified in trying to force IRON and DAWN to do anything? Why is a pre-emptive strike actually so terrible? And more perhaps more importantly, why has Matthew_PK refused to back up his words with action? He has also failed to prove that the terms behind his unconditional surrender are reasonable, instead resorting to harping about his codex and rhetorical insults.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='18 June 2010 - 06:24 PM' timestamp='1276899825' post='2342270'] Are you really making the statement that nobody has claimed our terms [b]are[/b] unreasonable? [/quote] Are you really even attempting to respond to my posts anymore? Our very argument against unconditional surrender is that [u][b]we don't know what the terms are.[/b][/u] They could be unreasonable. They might not be. But we don't trust you. You, rather, claim that they [i][u][b]are[/b][/u][/i] reasonable. Prove it.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='18 June 2010 - 12:27 AM' timestamp='1276835212' post='2341540'] There is nothing unreasonable about our terms. I implore you to prove otherwise. [/quote] He who asserts, must prove. The burden of proof is on [i]you[/i], not us. We are claiming they [i]might be[/i] unreasonable, but you are [i]telling[/i] us they are not. See how that works?

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='17 June 2010 - 09:38 PM' timestamp='1276825063' post='2341313'] Yeah? Maybe DAWN should ask Matt Miller (or anybody in OG who we fought) how to fight a war with class. [/quote] Maybe Von Droz should take a lesson from Matt_Miller too.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='17 June 2010 - 12:17 AM' timestamp='1276748237' post='2340297'] That's too bad. I'll be here a while. [/quote] Because you won't declare on anyone like you said you would? [quote name='Matthew PK' date='17 June 2010 - 01:21 AM' timestamp='1276752063' post='2340365'] First: I may have been rash at the time and circumstances are apt to change over the scope of a few months. [/quote] Nice backpedaling. I didn't know you could move that fast in the other direction. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='17 June 2010 - 01:21 AM' timestamp='1276752063' post='2340365'] Second: There are still no IRON nations out of PM in my range. Raidon, CT, UNROCK (or any other such ghosts) are not the IRON I went to war with and are not culpable for the motivation behind the present action. [/quote] They are not ghosts, they are members. They have applied and been masked as members. Again, nice backpedaling though. So who is culpable? Who [i]would[/i] you attack? We better save that somewhere so there will always be evidence of you not following that, too. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='17 June 2010 - 01:21 AM' timestamp='1276752063' post='2340365'] Third: We elected a conclave that we [b]entrust[/b] to issue orders like when to declare war and the appropriate targets. [/quote] lol?

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='15 June 2010 - 11:06 PM' timestamp='1276657563' post='2338998'] Perhaps your should pose your question to our leadership circa January. I can't answer as to what circumstances put as at war with IRON and not any other of the members of your list. Though I stand by what I told gamemaster: we don't need to stand in front of a train to stand for something. It is possible to oppose moral wrong without simultaneously going to war with all those who have done wrong (and this is [b]your[/b] premise not mine, that those groups are equally culpable) If, in fact, those alliances are as culpable as you imply they are then I should hope that IRON demonstrating some accountability would be a great motivator for all alliances on the planet. [/quote] You have missed the point yet again. Why IRON? Why DAWN? There were 6 alliances, why those two? Why not TSO [i]instead[/i] of DAWN? Is there any other way to ask these questions? Seriously?

[quote name='Gamemaster1' date='13 June 2010 - 10:57 PM' timestamp='1276484250' post='2336680'] You attacked two, citing the reason for your attack as 'they are guilty and should surrender to us'. You leave the others. Now, I will ask my question [b][i]again[/i][/b]. Try to respond without attempting to reduce my ethos. [size="4"][b] Why [u]specifically[/u] IRON and DAWN? [/b][/size] [/quote] Since you ignored my question again (again, again, again, again), I underlined it, bolded it, and made it larger for your convenience. Try and notice it this time. Maybe even try and respond to it.

[quote name='Lord Gobb' date='15 June 2010 - 03:18 PM' timestamp='1276629483' post='2338521'] You do have about 60 nations at or above 4k infra who are not top tier or in peace mode. But do as you may, dear! I hold nothing against you! [/quote] Stop the posturing. I'd rather not have a time clock started on reps without the full ability of IRON to begin paying those reps. It's just easier that way. Gremlins are the only thing that is keeping us from allowing our entire alliance to pay reps. They go away, and reps begin.

Remember, when an IRON nation is in his range he will declare. We look forward to you backing up your words. I even reposted what you said earlier.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 June 2010 - 11:43 PM' timestamp='1276486987' post='2336764'] Paying reps is incomparable to "going to jail" so don't bother with that line of reasoning. However, since you brought it up.... we're obstructing you from walking away and paying cash bribes rather than any viable allocution of your actions. [/quote] As with any analogy, it has certain failures. Reps and terms are the functional equivalent of a CN jail. And I used criminal because you perceive us as such. Actually, come to think of it, what the heck is a viable allocation that you would accept? [quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 June 2010 - 11:43 PM' timestamp='1276486987' post='2336764']Now.... you would have us leave the criminals (your words) we're obstructing to chase down others we have never met.[/quote] Yet, you clearly have met at least TOP. You [i]were[/i] allies with them. But yet [i]again[/i], you ignored my question. Why. IRON. And. DAWN.

[quote name='Thorgrum' date='13 June 2010 - 05:38 PM' timestamp='1276465084' post='2336400'] Yes he is, you genius's are still replying to him and arguing. I assume you all are reading your own posts, perhaps I shouldnt. You know he is wrong, gre screwed up, Matthew is full of !@#$ (something like those sentiments) If you all were reading your own posts, and believed the content I cant fathom why you would need or want to reply to matthew in any form at all, again perhaps its intelligence. He's winning, your game. [/quote] If he continues to spout nonsense, I'll continue to answer it. It does directly involve me, after all. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 June 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1276465797' post='2336409'] Are you suggesting that GRE should be at war with TOP and TORN? Go find a time machine and bring it up in January. For now, there is no reason for you to continue to spout it except to whine that we're at war with you and not them. It is possible to stand for a cause without standing in front of a train. [/quote] First off, I'm not whining. But nice choice of words to try and reinforce your statement. Maybe I should use a few derogatory remarks to bring down your ethos before I actually respond to your argument too. Maybe you'll understand an analogy since you clearly do not understand you own hypocrisy. 1 person goes to rob a bank because he thinks the bank is cheating people. He gets 6 other people to go distract the cops by robbing a nearby bank of the same branch. The person goes to rob his bank. He robs it then quickly escapes without penalty. The other 6 people rob the other branch. They are stormed by citizens trying to stop them, including the robber of the other bank. There is a lot of fighting. One surrenders a bit earlier then the others, but eventually they all surrender. All 6 agree to go to jail. One, however, does not get off so easily. One of the citizens continues to punch two criminals that he attacked first. He will not allow them to go to jail. Instead, they have to agree to do whatever the citizen wants, and then go to jail. The citizen, however, does nothing about the remaining criminals. They are free to go to jail, and eventually continue with their lives. Not the two. They, for apparently no particular reason, are the subject of this citizen's experiment. And he is indignant they do not do want he wants. They should do want he wants solely because he wants it done. Never mind the fact that their punishment already awaits them. Hypocrisy. All of the coalition has done the same thing. They are all equally guilty. You attacked two, citing the reason for your attack as 'they are guilty and should surrender to us'. You leave the others. Now, I will ask my question [i]again[/i]. Try to respond without attempting to reduce my ethos. Why IRON and DAWN? [quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 June 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1276465797' post='2336409'] I've fought Matt Miller before, multiple times. He's a great guy to go to war with. Classy and capable. Right now he's not in my range. I suspect that eventually he will build up and declare war on me. Please do us all a favor and spare your keystrokes about why [Person A] hasn't attacked [Person B], it is irrelevant. Your attempt at baiting isn't going to work on me. [/quote] Thanks for trying to avoid the point. When he gets into range, I expect you to declare on him. You already said you would. He shouldn't have to do all the work. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 June 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1276465797' post='2336409'] Or it could be that we don't care what the OWF clamors on about. I'm here for the sport of it and to answer questions for those genuinely interested in understanding. My friends and allies pretty much all have their own discussion threads with us in their own forums away from the hilarious posturing of the disconnected (and deliberately ignorant) parties here. [/quote] You continue to try and paint everyone else in this thread as a disconnected and ignorant idiot. They aren't.

[quote name='Thorgrum' date='13 June 2010 - 04:10 PM' timestamp='1276459800' post='2336350'] He dosent need any help, as expected, matthew is performing brilliantly. [/quote] No, he isn't. This entire thread Matthew has responded to many points, but he has missed out the ones that are key. Why IRON? How is it morally wrong? In addition, his repeated use of 'Reading Comprehension' is the most pompous thing that has been said in the thread, and makes him come across to everyone (excluding you) as a self-righteous $@!. People don't need to read better. Matthew himself needs to write better. Bad definitions, mistaken though process on how this world works, incorrect view of what a surrender is...I should not have to go on. The Gremlins who have posted in this thread have not improved anyone's impression of their alliance, they have worsened it. You have people from all aspects of the world coming in here to tell Matthew that he is wrong. And he is.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 June 2010 - 03:18 PM' timestamp='1276456695' post='2336320'] As I stated before, we are not at war with TOP, TORN or any other alliances you listed. We are at war only with IRON. Therefore, we are discussing the surrender process for IRON. [/quote] That's such a load of crap. Any particular reason you are at war with just us? You are such moralists, after all. TOP and TSO should have to turn themselves in just because they were on the other side. You shouldn't even have to fight them. For a paperless alliance, you sure do try to do things by the book. Also....I found this little gem. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='01 April 2010 - 01:05 PM' timestamp='1270141533' post='2243950'] [quote name='Matt Miller' date='01 April 2010 - 12:51 PM' timestamp='1270140688' post='2243924'] Yet here I sit with an open war slot and 25 Gramlins in range. But please, do tell me more about it being solely on IRON. [/quote] Build more infrastructure and I'll happily declare on you. It's not that you and I have never tangoed. As for your vacant slot, I'll see what I can do. [/quote] I can't wait.

Oooh, this line of reasoning again. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 June 2010 - 12:31 AM' timestamp='1276403497' post='2335855'] I leverage my demand for unconditional surrender on virtue: that it is the right thing to do for IRON to turn themselves in for their transgression.[/quote] ...and the rest of the coalition? TOP? TSO? FEAR? Oh right, they are innocent. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 June 2010 - 12:31 AM' timestamp='1276403497' post='2335855'] In fact, a primary basis for my position is (by my own admission multiple times) that GRE cannot "force" IRON do to anything; nor do we want to. Might does not make right.[/quote] You couldn't force the coalition to do anything either. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 June 2010 - 12:31 AM' timestamp='1276403497' post='2335855'] Spend more time reading what I write rather than waiting impatiently by your "declare war" button. [/quote] And you should do the opposite. Put your pen down and back up all the crap you say. And no, you are not doing anything by sitting there. You will be in range. And you will get attacked. [i][b]Acta non verba. [/b][/i]But you never will. EDIT: [quote name='Stetson' date='13 June 2010 - 12:51 AM' timestamp='1276404695' post='2335879'] I guess I really enjoy being ignored since I'm going to try this for a fourth time... And if it's not to much to ask Matthew, could you please explain to me how turning yourself in is not giving up all freedom to make decisions for yourself? Oh, right, generally when a criminal (which is how I believe you guys refer to IRON) turn themselves in if they don't like the sentence they can just walk away. Got it! [/quote] Good luck. I posted the same thing, albiet a bit less wordy. It's been ignored no matter how many times I repost it or a variation of it. Like above.

This whole thing really is making all parties involved look...pretty stupid.

To take a page from MPK's book...[i]could[/i], and [i]should[/i], are two different things.

The smack talk from Tecumseh is interesting. The fight is against BAPS, but in order for the nearest BAPS nation to fight him, the BAPS guy would have to buy over 4,000 levels of infra. That's a billion dollars. Completely draining any warchest he might have had after the long war he has already fought. You say you'll sell down to 110k, but admittedly that costs you nothing. Nice smack talk.

Sky wins.

Lines being drawn?

I gotta give you props for having the spunk to do the same review twice.

Let's at least be decent human beings in this. Just leave him alone, or ignore him. Poor shows all around.

Yay, message.

I want a message. I feel unimportant.