Kevin Cash

i dont understand how this is relevant to my point. gremlins and mha have stated repeatedly that they 'act as one' and that they're 'basically the same alliance' according to the harmlins treaty, which transcends the notion of any other kind of treaty. can you please tell me how my understanding of other kind of treaty holds any relevance?

threatening me because of my words? i thought you guys at karma were for 'change' and 'free thinking,' this is silly. free thought only if i 'freely' support your side i suppose, eh?

either he is bull****ing on behalf of gremlins, or he just admitted that mha is so dishonorable they could not even be counted on to honor a 'blood brother' pact. which is it?

except all ive ever seen from sparta is dodging the issue that you backstabbed the people you swore to protect, telling me to look elsewhere, saying im wrong without backing it up, performing ad-hominem attacks, ignoring main points while selectively responding to minor points, taking things out of context, etc. all i want is a consistent response as to why sparta feels it is acceptable to backstab people they swear to protect

then you have forgotten your ic tags when commenting on your distaste for the man, this is an ooc forum and words here are taken ooc unless otherwise indicated. sorry for the misunderstanding but you should be more clear about that

this game, much like life itself, is not fair. nobody was stopped from playing this game, no communities were forced to be destroyed, people did these things of their own will because they lost and were unwilling to strive for victory, they were unwilling to play the hard game. fan is to be commended for their determination, while i share the opposite sentiments towards those who decided to up and leave the game after losing one time. even under pzi it is very easy to reroll and play again as a new nation, and i have already stated how it is impossible to destroy a community without illegally compromising forum software which lies completely external to the game database. face the facts, npo were simply the best at this game, this recent war shows that they were finally bested at this game. all this pretend morality is silly, it is a dog eat dog world, and if youre not ready to play i dont have much sympathy for when you cry and leave, thats how it is. people need to stop pretending the world should be all flowers and rainbows and unicorns and butterflies and wake up to the harsh reality that this game is not for the meek and it is not for those who want to win without putting in any effort.

except it has been my claim that you backstabbed those you swore to protect in order to protect your database values and, consequentially, become 'number one'continue to dance around the facts though, its really the only thing you can do at this point.

-why not include my entire response, why just quote only the part you can respond to semi-out-of-context? now you have switched 'alliance' and 'community' as if they are the same thing which they most certainly are not. consistency is required if you want to make a valid point. yes they can destroy the individual parts of an alliance through the mechanics, no they cannot destroy a community. and no it has all the relevance to the discussion at hand and is therefore not an ad-hominem. i believe you take this game far too seriously, and i honestly believe you should reconsider where it is that you stand on attacking peoples ooc persona over an interactive database

how did he make it impossible to 'play' the game? he made it difficult to 'win' the game for sure, but when did he ever inhibit their ability to log in and play the game within the confines of the rules? it sounds like youre the type who want to declare 'everyone is a winner' and hand out medals for participation, hell even gga doesnt do thatalso, i dont think his 'days of dictating are over' because of anything the community had to say, and even alluding that the community takes any part in what happens is a silly idea. this war is people making a power grab, they have led you to believe it is your 'say' taking effect because it suits them to have you believe that.

neither of you who responded (from sparta) have yet in all of these posts to address the 'meat' of my post, the fact that you turned around and backstabbed those you swore to protect. this little dance that people buy for those who simply ignored their obligations doesnt work for them and it most certainly will not work for you. and the ad-hominems and backseat moderating, which you continue to do even now, is the only point you seem to focus on, i wonder why, is it that you cant actually refute my points? and even if i did have this imaginary multi you accuse me of, are you going to attack me simply for the expression of words that i make? i was under the impression that you guys were for 'change' and all that jazz. funny how you ignore things at your own convenience. anyway, not to stray off-topic and into a derail in clear violation of the rules, i will reiterate my point: you turned around and backstabbed those you swore to protect. this is the main point i am trying to get across and you have yet to attack this point directly instead opting to quite literally dance around the issue in an assortment of ways.

having scanned the thread i apologize for throwing you in with that crowd, that said this is still an ooc forum and you are attacking this man ooc for things he did ic, within the confines of the game.-how can one 'sentence to death' a community if they lack the resources or ability to follow through? it seems like a rather silly thing to get upset over at any rate, crying about empty threats. -that wasnt an ad hominem that was a serious suggestion

given that you are attacking his irl persona (as opposed to his ic character or even merely his ooc internet personality), i find that this thread speaks volumes about how very butthurt you and others are over a silly database of numbers on the internet. furthermore it is physically impossible to destroy a community through the mechanics of said database of numbers and so your argument holds no water whatsoever. i would suggest you go outside for at least a couple of minutes and consider just exactly what it is you are doing

perhaps i am a reroll of a long-time player? perhaps i have been observing the boards before joining? there are many possibilities, and all of them are entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, this is the exact definition of an ad-hominem attack, and id like if you would quit your backseat moderating and accusing me of breaking rules. i aim to debate, and id rather not be accused of silly things like 'trolling' and 'harassment,' and even 'being a multi' when i bring up facts that you dont like to admit. this is not what the debate is about, it is irrelevant, a logical fallacy, and a rules violation though i will not be so petty as to report it as for the topic at hand, since your entire post brought nothing new to the table, and indeed nothing old beyond the ad-hominem attacks, i will reiterate my points, hopefully you can actually respond to them sparta did indeed have a right to ignore the aggression clause of their treaty with npo due to the fact that npo, as silly and trivial as the mistake was, did not inform them of the war (probably because they knew you would betray them but that is another debate). however, the defense clause of a treaty is something separate (you can even see its usually given a separate section in the treaty itself). due to the nature of defensive wars, it is generally impossible to predict exactly when an alliance is going to be attacked and so it is accepted that the alliance who is attacked doesnt need to share information they do not have access to. instead of honoring your treaty when npo was attacked, you ignored your obligations (even though the cancellation clause had not yet expired), and when it finally did expire, now having failed to honor your word and defend npo, you decided to attack them instead. no amount of e-lawyering in this pathetic little show you are putting on can change that fact. at most, and this is stretching it considerably, you would have been justified to declare neutrality. instead, you decided to backstab the alliance you had given your word you would defend. try as you might you will never be able to justify this act of incredible treachery, and i sincerely hope history remembers you and your alliance for who they are, for you are among the lowest scum in this game, even lower than the cowards that populate much of this game. why did you do it? well to me that is obvious, and deny as you might it is clear you wanted to be the top dog in cn... which brings the debate to a full circle back to the op. perhaps thats a stretch, but it is obvious that you at least did not want want to lose your precious 'pixels,' though i dislike using that term as the numbers this game involves are even less significant than any graphical element. you sacrificed honor so that the values in your data structures would not decrease. thats really sad

oh, silly me, i forgot how karma likes to justify its hypocracy. if what you say is true (which i highly doubt, why did you not make an effort to clarify that tp had other options in the discussions?), why do so many of you wear sigs that contain names like tdsm8 who disbanded during peacetime for internal reasons? nevermind those pesky facts, they jut get in the way of what you want to believe! nevermind that goons \m/ and genmay were killed of by polar, nevermind that a number of those disbandments had nothing to do with npo. every post you make twists the truth to your convenience, this goes for all of karma

itt: people are still crying about an internet game. this is hilarious keep it coming

answering each paragraph:1) please show me where npo declared on any element of citadel, i'm a bit confused about this one. 2) what? is this a new game where we throw all logic and fact out the window now? i can't even respond because i have no idea how you are even getting your misinformation. 3) yes i spared you the embarrassment in responding to your ad-hominem attacks by willfully ignoring what is both a logical fallacy and a violation of the forum rules, but apparently you want to make it an issue. why dont you try attacking my points instead of commenting on the age of my account? the point is, from what i can gather, ov committed acts of aggression against npo by aligning itself with underground groups set out to destroy it. however that fact is irrelevant, unless your treaty had a clause which stated 'its ok to plunge a knife in our back if you think our cb is not watertight.' i dont even know why i am debating with someone who clearly has no idea how the cyberverse works (claiming npo attacked citadel, among other silly remarks), because your type will just pull facts out of the air, you are so convinced of your own lie that youll go to any length to 'prove' it, and youll claim anyone who says otherwise is a 'troll' set out to 'harass' you. can we get someone who at least knows what hes talking about in here? thanks

the only legitimate reason to declare on an ally is if they were actively and obviously planning to harm your alliance. you are traitors, 'bawww they didnt tell us about the war' is not a valid reason to not only throw your defense obligations out the window but later directly attack your so called 'ally.' i will agree that you did not have to uphold the aggression end of the treaty but thats it. the whole 'treaties dont chain' idea is just a convenient excuse for people to not honor their word, and i call !@#$%^&* on it. when you sign a treaty, its not for show, its your word, and sparta among others has demonstrated that their word is utterly worthless

not that you held an individual madp or anything oh wait, yeah you did, canceled after the war started and then you directly attacked npo traitors are the only thing worse than cowards

o/ karma o/ change one thing i find funny is the people in here trying to defend their position saying 'oh well you know tp had other options'. yeah, so did every other alliance that ever disbanded in war, the other option being to fight on in a miserable excuse for existance. what, did you think npo could just walk up to someone and say 'alright you guys have to disband?' no, it only happened because alliances were unable to uphold the terms imposed on them, which is exactly the case here, they couldn't pay any reps because they were all in bill lock. so way to go, karma, for imposing reparations on a friggin protectorate and leaving them no choice but to disband, hell i dont think npo even ever did that to a protectorate, good job

i don't know anyone who was predicting that sparta would leave their allies out to die, only returning to kick their bleeding corpse further into the dirt.no wait i think a few people did expect that.

so, it just felt like a good day to break out the ultra recruitment megadrive now instead of during peacetime where it actually would have contributed massive growth to the alliance? sure thing.

congrats sparta i hope it was all worth it

itt: people get butthurt over an internet game