sir pwnage

[quote name='Vladimir Nikanor' timestamp='1301766385' post='2682948'] Congratulations on your new positions! Also, is "Glorious" a mandatory word in all announcements? [size="1"]Once a Reichsburger, always a Reichsburger. Craig, you know what to do. [/size] [/quote] "Glorious" (as well as "Workers" or "Proletariat") is only mandatory in things that involve a change in government. For wars, "Patriotic", "Revolution", or "Red" are the necessary words. For treaties, "Commies", "Socialism", or "Collective" are the words to look for. Also, we've know Craig was a Nordreich spy for ages. We just don't ever do anything worth spying on, so we don't mind. Also, we tend to discuss opsec things in random foreign channels, so it's not like you're hearing anything that all of #tge hasn't heard. Oops, wrote "has" instead of "hasn't" as the second to last word. My bad.

Congrats to everyone elected. Also, for shame to Comrade Craig for not being active on weekends to post this. For shame. And we would like to wish FC good luck in all of his circular, useless ventures until he inevitably rejoins The International

[quote name='Wabooz' timestamp='1301623153' post='2681805'] I'm not even sure why you all wasted slots on people that were on an applicant AA for over 3 weeks, no wars and no war preparation for that matter. Waste of your resources ya know [/quote] I believe I already explained why I was at war with applicants (hint: it wasn't intentional, I'm just a dunce). Anyway, the two POWs turn this into a moral victory, regardless of how much damage I take, so I'm happy with it.

I feel like one of the WOLF-related threads HAS to have passed 23 pages.

[quote name='KaminaSama' timestamp='1301598729' post='2681543'] @All of left: congrats you declared when the heavy hitting was done, your smart ( Still not april fools? ) [/quote] Looking at the massive nations in range of me, I'd say there's quite a bit of heavy hitting to be done. Also, two POW's for me! Woohoo! And a message loaded with expletives. you too GeneralVanDurmeI Now I have to go attack some real G-6ers.

Just a side note, LEFT would like to apologize for ruining the PLOW acronym. If you all would like to consider this a separate war so you can keep the acronym, we'll understand.

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1301485971' post='2680598'] The Club Can't Even Handle Me Right Now. Confusion. [/quote] The Club is attacking you too? Where can I contact them for coordination purposes?

For anyone who wants to know, our IRC chan is #LEFT. And we have all sorts of OPSEC discussions in there including target coordination. G-6 is welcome too. Also, as far as coordination, I prefer to use IRC, but not everyone uses it, so I usually wind up using in game PMs. Those have the advantage of everyone having access without needing a tutorial (If I had a nuke for every newb I've taught to use IRC, G-6 would be in a LOT of trouble). In the past, it has been difficult to coordinate with people in other alliances, on IRC or otherwise.

[quote name='Axolotlia' timestamp='1301463782' post='2680492'] anyways... have fun with our applicants LEFT [/quote] Funny story about that. I searched "G-6", and got some guy that was sitting on minimum soldiers, DEFCON 5, and no military improvements. I was like "Wow, cool!" and attacked him. Only after I had declared war did I notice that he was an applicant. To avoid looking foolish, I attacked another one to make it look intentional. It seems that others followed my example. We're cutting you off at the source G-6! Anyway, tomorrow night should be interesting to say the least. We at LEFT have seen how well G-6 can blitz (very), now we get to see how good they are at mounting a counter attack.

I can't imagine why, we don't have anyone strong enough to hit their [s]flag chasers[/s] top tier.

I hoped this was going to be another person going off about "rogue" versus "rouge"

Oooooh, there was this place called "Uncle Pete's" near my town that sold REALLY GOOD baby back ribs. I didn't care for their mashed potatoes though. Ball's in your court HoT.

[quote name='Fadeev' timestamp='1301263892' post='2678513'] You haven't lost your sense of humour - that's good! [/quote] Maybe he hasn't, but you should hear some of the terrible jokes that Q has been telling recently. It's getting ridiculous. Except not. At all. Also, I touched up the grammar and spelling in the quote, hope you don't mind

When, if ever, will a Mafia-playing requirement be added to your charter? Will potential applicants have to win a game as wolf in order to be accepted?

o/ T5E A few questions though: What is your alliance policy of lynching on four? How about six? Who is BP? What if only T5E and GOONS members are playing Mafia? Are we allowed to change nicks for communication in your public channel? What about posting logs? Isn't it true that Sardonic is always either seer or a wolf? ...that's all I've got as far as mafia-related joke questions. Now if you'll excuse me, !start harrypotter.

Join The International. We are, by far, most equal with all other Leftist alliances

Yay for NEAT! I always forget how cool your flag is.

16. Always default on tech deals. It's free money! 17. Buy only level one planes. They're cheaper!

[quote name='Frost' timestamp='1299783500' post='2658793'] Yeah, that's why I think the Central Comittee of The International does not fairly represent what the alliance stands for. Sadly, those who don't vote won't probably see my OP either. However, it's worth to try. [/quote] *sigh* Do you want me to go find your lack of posts in all the threads about increasing forum activity? Because I'll do it. Don't you test me. The way you're wording this makes it seem like the members of the Central Committee somehow prevent other members from voting. This is not the case. We [i]always[/i] encourage participation from all members, and by no means do we attempt to block dissenting opinions during votes. The fact is that nobody in INT agrees with you. Deal with it.

Yes, because us joining C&G was totally something done entirely by the Central Committee If you look at the vote (well, not YOU, you resigned. Just a hypothetical you), you'll see two things: 1. The vote, which lasted 3 days passed unanimously, 20 Ayes to 0 Nays. 2. You (this time I mean YOU, Frost), never voted. In addition, I went back and looked through the multiple threads in our Gov and private general forums that were about C&G. Let's have a look at what you said... "Well, I've been a bit AWOL the last week, but I'm alive again. Count me in for that QnA meeting with CnG. Also, I'll try to find tR govs and get in touch with them to have a talk about all this. " With regards to our second QnA with C&G: "Sadly I've already missed the first one, and I'll doubt to be available to the second one, but I'll try. Don't count me in, I'm having a hell of a day, today." With regards to the first C&G QnA: "*censored* you, I have no Internet at home right now. So I had no chance to pass on by, though I was certainly awake :-/" Wow, some truly stirring arguments against us joining CnG. I'm surprised you didn't convince anyone! You had ample time to voice your concerns about us joining CnG. You had ample time to object to our joining the NPO-DH front. However, in the thread about our joining that front, you said "Sure, let's get our piece of Poland." Again, GREAT argument. You then went on to complain about how you didn't think INT's nations could handle the fight, and you made some statement about how the war was unsound strategically as well as morally. That was the sum of your argument against our involvement in this war. All you did was worry that LEGION, of all alliances, would be too much for us, along with the rest of CnG, to handle, and make some vague reference to morality. Changes of policy are not hard to enact in INT. If you want something changed, start a vote in Congress. Anyone can do so. I did it with the SOS treaty, and FinnishCommie did it with the UED protectorate treaty. We presented our argument, and attempted to sway people to our side. And both of us managed to get some momentum going and enact the changes that we wanted. On the inverse, both myself and FC have watched as INT went a different way than we wanted. FC wanted to change our flag, but the motion never passed. I didn't really want to sign the treaty with GARO, because at the time I didn't really know anything about them, but it passed anyway (and I eventually got to know Chris Kaos a little better, and started liking GARO. Worked out nicely for me). Neither of us quit. Neither of us posted on the OWF. Everyone in INT has, at some point in their careers, voted Aye on a vote that failed, or Nay on a vote that passed. MOST of us have sucked it up and moved on. Congratulations on being the whiny, immature exception.

It always amuses me when people hit a bunch of alliances and claim it's "fair". It's not. Coordination is far more important than sheer numbers, as we saw when Pork Shrimp demolished Murder Inc. a few rounds ago. EDIT: Of course, any time you attack LE, it becomes an uphill battle. Good luck with that G-6/Warriors.

You appear to have a lot of nations in peace mode. Are you currently, or do you ever intend to be, at war with Doomhouse?

What about TP(C/F?) with IDIOT? That was a pretty glorious example of stomping a smaller alliance.

Stupid moralists in our AA being opposed to tech raiding

Noted. In the future, when LEFT decides to prey on micro alliances, we will keep it under the table like the rest of you