trimm

Been quite awhile since we had a good GOONS thread around here.

I find this development...interesting.

How interesting that you assume I would have let him be pounded. Can you point to anything concrete to support that assertion? Can you find somewhere that says I'm the kind of guy to let someone hang out to dry like that? Anything at all? I'll stand on my record here. You continue to use snark to bypass the real thrust of the point. You had options available to you other than 1) Letting DBDC hit RP while he was unaligned and 2) Letting RP onto your AA with a promise to DBDC that OBR would nail RP if he left the OBR AA. There is a whole spectrum of choices in between those two options. And the simple fact is, you picked option two. And that it what it is.

Politics are not a zero sum game. I would not have left him to be pounded. I also would not have accepted him to my AA with a precondition that I myself would wreck him if he left my AA. There is a world of diplomacy in between those two options. You simply chose option B, and now you have yourself tied all in a knot that people don't see that choice as being consistent with the paragon of virtue you parade yourself around here as.

Would I respond to it? Absolutely. There's always room for diplomacy. Would I have accepted your objection to him in this case as a legit one? Not likely. Would I have made the promise to you regarding him that OBR did? Not on the best day of your life.

You accepted a member on the condition that you would sell that member out if he left your AA. Cowardice, plain and simple. If DBDC was willing to risk war with OBR because you accepted someone before they could catch him, fine. That's a risk that's up to you to calculate. But to claim that your actions in accepting RonPaul under these pretenses is courageous somehow is flat laughable, and has nothing to do with ego.

Your sarcasm is a touching as ever dear lady, but it does nothing to change my point. You gave an oath to attack someone who left your AA in good standing, and accepted him to your AA on that same condition. That's all by your own admission, and it is also detestable.

If you wanted him badly enough, and knew he was a target, you could have actually done something courageous and let him on your AA before DBDC hit him and told DBDC that they could get in line. That would have taken courage. As it is, you promised to attack a person who was a member in good standing if he left your AA. That's something we frown upon, and that's pretty close to my textbook definition of cowardice.

Dulra had no business giving you that oath, anymore than you had any grounds to demand it.

He left OBR to hit DBDC, so you should be hitting him, not OBR. And your "objection" to him joining their AA was only that you wanted to hit him. Which in my book, and most people around here's book too, is not a legit reason to not accept a member.

Save for the fact that once he joined OBR, he was no longer unaligned. Once he's on an AA, you've got nothing on him. Nada, zilch, zero, nothing. If you didn't manage to hit him when he was unaligned, then you have to wait your turn for him to be unaligned again like every other raider on Bob. That OBR would be so cowardly as to let you dictate to them what they could do to accept a new member, and what they would be OBLIGATED to you to do to him when he left, is staggering.

Oh, I did. You were not at war with RonPaul when he joined OBR, you just wanted to be. You had zero rights to him at that point, just desires. That's all well and good, you would of course be well within your rights to hit RonPaul if he were to then leave OBR. What you shouldn't do, what they shouldn't have let you do, is extract a promise from OBR that they themselves would hit a former member if he left their AA in good standing. That sir does not fly, does not compute, and is utter garbage. You can cry to the heavens about how you don't care how things have been done around Bob in the past, and it will STILL be utter garbage.

So let me get this straight, you essentially told OBR that the only way they could accept RonPaul onto their AA, a guy you were not at war with at that time, was if they promised to declare on him themselves if he subsequently departed OBR? Have I got that right? I get that you guys have essentialy said that community standards around here can frak right off, but that is some grade A one hundred percent grain fed free range bull@#$ right there.

I'm confused (honestly) as to why OBR would have to promise DBDC anything in regards to what a former member did if they legitimately departed the OBR AA. I'm even more confused as to what grounds OBR has to attack a former member if that individual left the AA in good standing.

Congrats on the treaty. Can't fault you for not including a non chaining clause, since no one around here seems to want to use them anyway. Good luck to you both going forward.

My distaste for DBDC aside, I think virtually every alliance in CN has had hypothetical conversations in their gov channels that would be absolutely scandalous if they leaked onto a public forum. That's why you don't talk about them on a public forum. But to read anything into most of the logs and screenshots that do get passed around is pretty silly.

Welcome aboard folks.

Oh joy.

Freaking seriously Tywin, do you even know what "OOC" means?

QFT. And it was getting increasingly shaky well before that.

Now there's the kind of raw honesty I love to see on the OWF.

I do so love learning new things.

Lolwut? At any rate, IRON has a far better track record of actually honoring treaties with actual, yknow, WARS than Val can claim right now.

Oh I don't? Please feel free to provide some evidence to back up this assertion. Go ahead, I'll wait.

This is the shining example of having so many treaties that you end up being unable to meaningfully do anything with them.