WarriorConcept

You've been railing against my argument to try and point out this magical "reason" to need to talk to \m/ while not being able to provide a reason. I'm paying plenty attention. What timeline have I made up? Feel free to back that up.

No, arguments need proof to back them up. And you don't have any. I haven't seen anyone claim that \m/'s apology wasn't sincere enough No, you're just mad you have nothing to back up your claims when called out on them.

So you're not gonna say it instead you're going to make some witty comment about this being repetitive just because you don't want to say what you want to say?

You said you're sure they were sincere iirc. So you can't back up your own argument at all is what you're saying. And these other people who are "more informed" are just leaving you out to dry instead of presenting that valid reason you keep claiming is there. Okay... So there was a "reason" yet no one claims to know it. And the second part I've already agreed they were dicks about. I also agreed that they apologized for it. You have nothing to back up your argument. That's what it means.

When are you attacking GOONS and MK? Those are 2 separate lines of thought, good attempt though.

So you're claiming it but just unable to back it up and when called on it you lay the blame to others. Only if he's not too big right? If he had outlined his reason or responded for it I'd gladly talk to him then wouldn't I? As it stands he had no real reason to contact them since the matter was closed. If he has claimed a reason beside that feel free to point it out. No you're just the one with arguments full of saying they were going to "resolve" or "mediate" with nothing at all to back up those claims then when getting called out on it you just throw up your hands and say it's a "strawman".

So you don't think their apology was sincere? Make up your mind.

I'm fairly certain it was grub who poked \m/ first.

So you're attacking all alliances that raid other alliances? Do you know your ally's at all?

So they had nothing to mediate for despite you claiming they were there to mediate. Yes, because you said you'd hit only those you're capable of hitting while getting away with it. From where I'm standing Grub coming in with no reason at all for a closed matter is provoking. So you don't know of anything needing resolving despite you claiming there was something to be resolved? My it's like you have no argument at all.

What are you asking for? I agreed with your post.

I'm sure they were sincere in their apology as well. Thanks for agreeing.

What needed mediating then? Good thing we're not talking about assault. So like I said, negotiations for what? And they already apologized for their actions there. Grub did not miss it and I know for a fact his advisers did not. Now what situation needed "resolving"? I'm waiting.

I've never heard of two threads being made for one apology where just a clarification in one can suffice. It'd probably be marked as spam as far as I know. Again just because you didn't venture to see their clarification in the thread doesn't mean they were not sincere.

So you're claiming their apology wasn't genuine? Is that it?

I believe Grub was the first one to pick a fight considering the whole situation didn't require him to butt in. And I won't get pulled into just putting random name, when branimir and whoever did it it was kinda weird. So you'd only punch those you're capable of? Sounds familiar... Negotiate what? I've yet to see what needed to be "negotiated" in the first place. This isn't an argument about qualifications. The Corp were the ones whom just got to it first and this it was handled by the time polar got there, thus disqualifying the need for polar to do anything. And no there was no mixup at all as the official announcement was made here rather quickly.

I am asking because the main reason why Grub would even need to have gone to \m/ in the first place would've been regarding FoA. And if Grub is fighting because of the bad language directed his way that's fine, but \m/ did in fact apologize.

I have not considered joining \m/ but it's easy to overlook some things certain times, just like I just recently did so I had to update my charter

So Polar's problem with \m/ wasn't at all related to the tech raid on FoA?

I don't get how in good consciousness you can just freely admit you didn't try to obtain clarification for something and instead just base hate off of something that I just proved to you was wrong. If polar didn't find their apology good enough then that's fine, but the fact of the matter is that they did apologize.

So foul language wasn't what set him off to declare war? Okay glad to know you agree. Again another throwaway line with no real argument behind it. Don't you get tired of the same old tactics? So he thinks all his ally's are just using "tech raids" as a cover for attacking alliances and is going to tell them to stop? I could have sworn the FoA situation was handled well with The Corp.

Really I thought you were the one claiming it was all for flipping the finger to grub over their diplomatic attempt. Or are you backpedaling from that argument already? Considering the main motivator for polar being involved at all was because \m/ raided, that similarity holds a lot more true. So it's against tech raiding alliances? I know several alliances whom allow that. Hey they happen to be allied to polar too.

You know maybe that's why they apologized. Good of you to discount that though. There is a relation, just because you're arguing otherwise and now trying to veer the relationship off doesn't mean there isn't.

What shady activities? Tech raiding?

There is regret. Their reference to it happening all the time is in regards to the channel itself between themselves so nobody should be offended when they witness the language. If you'd read the thread further or talked to \m/ you'll have seen that they are making sure that doesn't happen again in regards to talking to foreign diplomats.