Vilien

You mean the people who were in alliances that have already been on the receiving end of a roll, or the ones who are still on the list?

Be a good boy and you wont have any trouble. Unless, of course, we deem your alliance to be a threat. If that's the case, we'll get around to rolling you.

It's unfortunate that people who try to take the actions you just endorsed get ZI'd. Eternally.

Way to go above and beyond. Great work Bob.

I thought he was pretty clear in his meaning.

I thought they thought that the Continuum was a shadow of its former self.

Absolutely. If you desire change, then work for it. If you need change, fight for it. Change will not happen by itself.

Why the largest alliances in the game need to prevent good, active players from playing the game is beyond me. It only shows weakness on your part.

Congratulations STA. To many more!

Sphere unity is fine by me. Let's see the reemergence of this doctrine.

Everyone knows its coming. Despite all the coy responses and deliberate dodging of questions, its obvious where we're headed. It's just a matter of time at this point.

Speaking of self-important morons... The difference is that you were the leadership for a large alliance, and you bailed on all of your members. It is evident that you actively recruited from the upper ranks of your alliance. Ivan Moldavi didn't remove the leadership of any alliance intentionally. He didn't even remove the leadership from any alliances. Frankly, Ivan showed a lot of class and TSO made itself look like a group which had no respect for its comrades in MCXA.

Not at all.

One of these alliances was received well by CN, and one was not.

You're right, there's really no point in conjecture here. Good luck to TOP and her allies.

Thanks for putting a diplomatic face on. We're all friends here.

Glad this was resolved. No one needs this kind of thing to develop into something that gets blown way out of proportion. Good luck to Viridia and the International.

Who remembers what happens when people from opposite sides of the web start calling each other out and shedding diplomatic language? Anyone?

TOP is a sovereign alliance, and can choose who it wants to sign treaties with. But I definitely would not have extended this, especially in the current climate. You're giving way too much to the other side, way too easily.

A higher moral standard? They booted one of their leadership because he dared to discuss moving away from One Vision. Don't talk to me about a moral standard.

For once GGA showed they had a spine. One time, they did something that wasn't necessarily the safe route. They had a chance to take an entirely different direction, to reverse their past mistakes. And they got beaten down for it by their "allies". We've seen too much of this crap, and I'm tired of it, and I know a lot of other people are tired of it as well.

That wasn't the point. The point is that I believe that they had absolutely nothing to do with OPSEC, and you're just trying to make it look like you weren't censoring your members. Frankly, it's way too late for that.

So where are they supposed to talk about it? Whatever excuse you gave, and I still have no idea what those people said, you still stifled free discussion. You shouldn't let the enemy dictate your actions, especially when they have as little an effect as a poorly placed spy.

We have a winner.

I'm not sure if you understand this, but, you're not winning.