trimm

I hope not, I can't take too much more of this guy.

Well, I for one hope this is settled with diplomacy. Not that I don't love the drama and such.

Good grief, are you people really going to make me root for GOONS? Really?!

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1351804185' post='3047320'] I was hoping it would be a threat. But I'm glad it took AI's MoFA (if I'm up to date with the in kids) to come and try doing some damage control. [/quote] I wouldn't call dismissing your idle "hurp durp you threatening me kid?" nonsense damage control, but you go on speaking your own language over there.

[quote name='asawyer' timestamp='1351707415' post='3047030'] Never forget the dozens of posts that died in this horrible event. Is it a coincidence that these crashes deleted records of lucrative tech transactions and secret military plans? Wake up sheeple, the forum takedown was an inside job! [/quote] It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

Good luck to you.

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1351049258' post='3044718'] I miss Janax and Rusty. [/quote] Not nearly as much as we do.

[quote name='Diomede' timestamp='1351014815' post='3044550'] I was boycotting this thread, but I've been ordered here or some such. Roll Argent, their gov is full of bronies or some such. Except that dio guy, he's cool. [/quote] I agree with everything you said except that last part.

I think the point has been more than made now.

[quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1350879993' post='3044006'] I'd say him and Ardus are probably the two best on Bob. (no homo? ) But to be fair, they do have the most experience [/quote] Practice does make perfect.

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1350879513' post='3044003'] Sardonic in damage control mode is always amusing to see. [/quote] Sardonic has more of a talent for it than others in DH.

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1350878002' post='3043986'] Alright, since you asked nicely and without overt malice I'll tell you. 1. EoGing somebody for fighting back because of a raid action diminishes the importance of the EoG list. The EoG list should be reserved for those who have committed unjustified wrongs against us. 2. It is arguable that he didn't, strictly speaking, do anything morally out of line, though he chose the incorrect path in attempting to secure peace for his group by striking at us like a rogue, rather than getting a protectorate from somebody. 3. After conferring with our allies on how they deal with similar situations, we decided that ours was out of line with traditional raiding norms. Of course, I fully expect CoJ and other irrelevant parties to take credit for this massive victory in defense of the raided, but in truth, the peanut gallery had little to no effect on our process. [/quote] I appreciate the thoughtful answer.

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1350877134' post='3043980'] Hurf Durf. Kaskus made no threats, and we had no contact with them other than that one discussion with issac. We conducted an internal investigation and decided that while a terrible person, doornail should not have been placed on the EoG list. [/quote] Ok, I'll buy that. Care to share WHY he should not have been on your list, at least the why that you came up with internally?

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1350876383' post='3043973'] Kaskus had no demands, nor were they a factor in our decision. [/quote] Are you selling any bridges in Brooklyn by chance?

The whole "You're just mad because GOONS are doing it hurr durr pllbh" is so damn stupid. Lots of people on Bob rail at all sorts of alliances over all sorts of perceived injustices. Trying to argue that people wouldn't be mad if it wasn't GOONS is just a sad attempt to divert attention from what was in fact done.

My compliments to Kaskus.

Now this should be entertaining. I wonder what will happen if Kaskus sends more than one round of aid.

[quote name='Amossio' timestamp='1350751005' post='3043377'] were you involved in the whole situation then mate, because I don't support what some mk members did nevertheless it's for hoo and kate take it up with them and it should not be used as an reason for some(not pointing fingers at anyone tbh) to bash mk whenever it suits them. [/quote] It was one of the worst incidents I've seen in my time here, and MK deserves every bit of scorn that can be heaped upon them for it, especially when their members walk in here and treat it like a joke.

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1350721076' post='3043276'] I must confess I'm struggling to see the connection between posts on this forum, and OOC harm being caused. It may have damaged their IC credibility, but unless you're saying that posts here are going to be read and change the opinions of those they know OOC or something I'm at a loss to see how it would have affected them OOC. No one knew who Hoo and Kait were OOC until the story was plastered on these forums. I would hazard a guess and say that MK members are involved in this discussion simply to put some of the hyperbole to rest, since you and your ilk are going out of your way to blow it out of all proportion with your likening it to rape and racism. That is their prerogative, just as it is the prerogative of the Kingdom to set the record straight. Can't make the horse drink and all that. [/quote] If you can't see how what was done didn't cause harm to Hoo and Kait the people, and not the CN personas, then there is very little point explaining it to you. And, as has been pointed out, no one has actually compared what was done to rape and murder. Reading comprehension for the win and such.

I am sorry to see this go.

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1350616436' post='3042763'] Multiple things happened and there were multiple parts that took on a life of their own. The "biodad kingom" thing really took on a life of its own separate from Hoo and Kate. It was silly, but not in and of itself damaging to anyone. I agree with Ardus that a lot of people unjustly rushed to judgement on what was happening with Hoo/Kate and their daughter. People took it a lot further than they should have. As far as I know nothing was done to them outside of the confines of criticizing them on these forums or the in-game attacks so to say we "brought harm" to them in an OOC sense is a major exaggeration. It's also worth noting that their were some IC motives dating back to the pre-noCB era for attacking them in-game. I wouldn't have done it given how it would have been seen as connected to the OOC stuff going on. [/quote] Dragging damaging and inflammatory (not to mention biased and innaccurate) details of their personal lives onto the OWF to be fodder for the lower inclined people around here wasn't doing them OOC harm? Details that your members had little to no buisness digging up in the first place? Come off it man. The sooner that you all just accept that your members did something flat terrible and stop trying to spin it and/or minimize it the better.

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1350416569' post='3041923'] My membership and the interalliance community in general, including those with whom you regularly associate, was pissed and worried for the well-being of a child and attacked those they believed were not acting in the best interests of such. I will not condemn them for being concerned and angered by the conclusions they did reach, only for reaching those conclusions with evidence that did not pass muster and hurting the feelings of those who potentially did no wrong as a result. [/quote] You changed the name of your forum. YOU CHANGED THE NAME OF YOUR FORUM. Don't come out here trying to portray your alliance as anything other than culpable in an awful act. Your members sought out information that was both inaccurate [b]and[/b] none of their damn buisness and then plastered in all over Bob in an attempt to do people they didn't like harm. Worried for the well being of a child my foot. There were MK members all over the OWF with the <Redacted> Kingdom in their sigs, avatars, and whatnot. Don't try and sell people a damned bill of goods about how those people were so concerned about doing the right thing and ended up just making an error in judgement. Because that is not what happened.

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1350426190' post='3041969'] The unaligned aren't people, and groups of unaligned of insufficient size and political connections are not alliances. How would any good alliance deal with an unaligned nation attacking them? Simple, treat them as any other rogue. The cause for attacking GOONS members is irrelevant, the punishment will be the same regardless. Cute how CoJ thinks they represent the mainstream thought on these matters. [/quote] I would venture a guess that his position is more representative of mainstream thought than yours.

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1350415233' post='3041916'] Members of my alliance, along with half of this game, aggressively condemned those they believed to have performed reprehensible acts beyond the confines of this game based on incomplete and insufficient evidence. That is not evil; it was stupid jumping to conclusions that hurt people, an error an a scale which I can condemn without eternally disassociating from those who succumbed to the error. And therein lies the difference between our respective positions. [/quote] To call that, and all the ill that sprang from it, an "error" is disingenuous in the extereme. Your membership took advantage of those circumstances, manipulated them for maximum effect, and proudly and publicly reveled in it. That is a damn sight worse than an error. And you are right, that will always be the difference between us over it.

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1350413622' post='3041904'] Because the strongest possible language are reserved to things like rape and racism and acts of similarly utmost malicious intent. You cannot in one breath backpedal and say "no it's not as bad as those things" and then say "but it was intended to be just as mean." That's ridiculous. There are things that people shouldn't do, things that are bad, things that are unacceptable, and things that are plainly evil. This thread, and the lot of you, have circlejerked right into calling us "evil". We are not. We're now being accused of deriving IC benefit from the incident. I see no such benefit and you have offered none to answer my question. The error, as I see it, was taking as gospel the word of a biased source and, driven by it, unleashing all manner of condemnation on folks who may not have done the wrongs believed to have been done. That is bad and should not be done. But you cannot in sound mind claim that such a wrong is malicious on par with hate crimes. Doing so belittles the thing to which you're comparing our error and makes it more difficult for us to have any sort of serious conversation about what happened and what must be prevented in the future. [/quote] Members of your alliance purposefully acted to cause harm to people caught at a low and difficult time in their lives using information and tactics that were deplorable in their nature and employment. You better goddamn well believe that those were evil acts carried out with malice. It is insane that you would come here and even try to minimize that. Is your whole alliance evil? No. Does your alliance continue to deserve scorn for that incident? You better frakking belive it.