Vladimir Poutine
-
Posts
139 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Vladimir Poutine
-
-
On 8/25/2016 at 3:37 PM, Caustic said:
Furthermore, since I know Vladimir didn't actually read the logs:
That's not "just a MoFA" feeding information. That's a !@#$@#$ spy, working for chim, who everyone knows is the reason why no one is ever M twice. Stop spinning, stop lying. You're busted and done.
Oh I've read those logs, but to me they are just further proof of Chimaera's/Holton's idiocy. Not spying.
-
14 minutes ago, Caustic said:
So you're saying your defacto leader calling various members who give him opsec information spying isn't actually spying? This is exactly why you're getting rolled into the !@#$@#$ dirt lol.
I'm not going to even bother getting into this debate with you, Caustic.
1 minute ago, Blackatron said:I don't really have a side in this debate, but I can certainly see someone who once leaked information to him being referred to by Chim as a spy.
He didn't leak it to Chim, he leaked it to NSO, who was Polar's coalition's target at the time, because he didn't want to see them rolled. Sure, he shouldn't have done that, but at least his intentions were good.
-
1 minute ago, Caustic said:
Yeah because logs indicating otherwise HAVEN'T been posted multiple times in this very thread directly implicating both Holton and Chim. The MI6 spin machine is in full force today holy !@#$.
Chim liked to refer to his contacts in other alliances as his 'spies.' Go ahead and spin that in whatever way you want, I could care less.
-
On 8/21/2016 at 10:01 AM, KahlanRahl said:
Poor word choice? It's pretty black and white, Holton. You were a spy. You got burned.
He wasn't and was never a spy for Chim, he was MoFA for Polar and was talking to several people, as MoFAs do, and leaked something to NSO, who then promptly burned him as a spy. Naturally, we here at MI6, as the repository for all the scum and villainy in the galaxy, welcomed him with open arms.
-
52 minutes ago, kingzog said:
Oh yes, let's kick people off of colors. That's an excellent idea.
Morons.
Oh well, since there was no reason for this in the first place, an unreasonable conclusion is to be expected.
Grub wanted to wear the big boy pants and prove that he could force someone else to do something. He's probably still holding a grudge from when NAAC was forced to disband over 9 years ago and wanted to take it out on someone.
-
8 hours ago, kingzog said:
Also, stop hitting yourself.
We'll try, but no guarantees.
-
16 hours ago, Neo Uruk said:
that's a complete lie but i mean okay
Believe whatever you want, even if it is completely false.
-
On 8/19/2016 at 5:08 AM, Immortan Junka said:
In regards to Holton's leadership, he is always welcome to inbox me and ask me how I stabilized SNX internally. I'm always glad to help other alliance leaders if they are willing to make a serious effort at it.
First step is to abandon ego, stop pretending it's just for fun, and really put some belief into it... there's no need to care what the "cool kids" think, if you don't believe in what you are doing, neither will your membership.
I will let him know and I am sure he will take whatever advice you have regarding becoming someone's lapdog into account.
On 8/19/2016 at 9:55 AM, Immortan Junka said:Wanna debate producerism?
no
16 hours ago, Mogar said:It's strange he hasn't just let things go considering he already lost over half his membership, kinda odd to repeat history so quickly down the line.
I am sure it was meant as one, I like your new avatar doll, very classy.
>started war with 100 members
>have 89 as of twenty seconds ago
Yeah I can see where 10% = 50%
15 hours ago, kingzog said:Wish you guys would get back on-topic. Which is....I dunno....MI6 is dying but not dying and Chim both is and isn't running it and....seriously, I'm more than a little lost here.
Chimaera is no longer in CN. He no longer affects government policy in MI6. However, being an integral part of it, he is involved in the MI6 community.
-
58 minutes ago, OsRavan said:
Heh, im one person and I would hardly say my personal views reflect ODN as a whole. Anytime you gather a hundred folks together there's going to be places people agree and places they disagree.
However, if ODN wasnt of one mind in backing our allies involved in this war, we wouldnt have.
So no, I dont pass my views (which I dont think forsparta is even aware of) as perse being representative of ODN as a whole. But my personal views also had little to do with ODN going to war here. Or with ODN liking and supporting our good friends in NPO for that matter (NPO is widely trusted and respected in our alliance. As is fitting for an mdp ally).
So mostly I would chalk the question up as irrelevant
As a member of ODN's government, especially as its secretary of state, your words are, in fact, representative of ODN as a whole. And as its leader for a long while, your words certainly carry much weight within and outwith the alliance. Do not pretend as though you are but some sweet, baby-faced new member whose words are irrelevant to the wider world. You may be 'one person' but you are one of very few about whose words anyone actually cares.
As for the rest, I have no problem with you declaring war on Sparta here. Good on ODN for declaring in support of its allies.
-
5 hours ago, DragonsPhyre said:
Being 100% committed to defending another alliance means that you, as an alliance not just the government, need to be 100% sure that other alliance will never make a choice entering a war that you disagree with vehemently. It also means having the kind of relationship between alliances that survives when that inevitably happens. Ideally, a MDoAP is a sign of that kind of relationship and built trust, a public statement that your two alliances have enough shared values and goals that you can't see each other operating at their best without the other one behind their back.
Reality is, of course, very different. Treaties are political tools, same as wars. And similar to wars, they've become heavily leaned on and somewhat devalued over the years as the treaty web expands, contracts, and splits according to whatever winds the various governments and active members feel blowing. Right now, those winds are highly in favor of Oculus so the treaty web is centered around them and they are the instigators of major alliance wars. Some alliances are just far more able and willing to put their values and plans into motion and so those become the norm around which most of the rest operate. Could it change? Yes, sure, but it requires a deep cultural shift. That takes time and risks on behalf of alliances both big and small. Not everyone is willing to commit to that for different reasons. It's about playing it safe and comfortable vs risky and potentially very volatile.
And this notion of 'playing it safe' versus 'risky and volatile' is precisely what everyone is complaining about in CN these days. People want to go back to the heyday of 2006-09? (or whenever you want to define it) Then start playing riskier hands.
4 hours ago, Duderonomy said:And that's a diplomacy problem for a portion of AAs. I've seen plenty of MDs without the n in the last year. If you got ally problems, I feel sorry for you, son. I've got 99 problems and MnDs ain't one.
You know, I find myself agreeing more and more with NG members. I must be losing my mind.
-
10 hours ago, DragonsPhyre said:
This is really all it's about. You can't force your allies to only ally people you like and so on, even as small as the game is now.
Non-chaining MDPs also allow for containment of wars before they go global, which means less ridiculous amount of bloodletting because someone got bored and hit the right part of the treaty web to make some drama.
I think the problem as OP sees it is that every treaty these days is an MnDoAP. Meaning that no one wants to be 100% committed to defending another alliance.
-
Godspeed, Tsar Robert.
-
Right, right. It all blends together after awhile.
-
4 hours ago, Auctor said:
This became a thing because everyone wanted to keep signing 35-40 treaties apiece.
This.
I have never supported MnDoAPs, save for briefly in 2008 when we were attempting to renegotiate BLEU (ended up as just a trade pact [Agora] since blocs were, are, and always will be a terrible idea), which I then quickly reneged on with a poorly written speech about how we need to stand together.
But, since no one else I've met seemed to share this view, except Oculus, I have been forced to be content to sign treaties with a non-chaining clause. And people have been decrying Oculus for its lack of a non-chaining clause. Absurd.
-
1 hour ago, Immortan Junka said:
some of these wars don't seem to have much rhyme or reason.
Do you think so?
-
Welcome to the fray, my friends.
-
There are only like 5 alliances that still bother to do enough to secure the foundations required to do anything, and none of them are brought up in this thread, save for the OP. I do not understand this mindless babbling about SUN and TTK. All but pawns in the grand scheme.
-
43 minutes ago, Lord Hitchcock said:
interesting fashion. I was never actually inclined for a kiwi interview on the basis for the fact that Invicta wasn't the originators.
For example: Invicta was called out during during some atlas dumps... specially because atlas said some things, so i interviewed them.
And this war: invicta was hit by NPO... but it's mainly focused on MI6
So whether you hate us or not, interviewing you isn't on the basis of anything more than others seemed more plausible to interview at the time, based on the scenerio.
regardless, I'll poke you eventually.
MI6? U wot m8?
*beats chest*
-
30 minutes ago, Lord Hitchcock said:
It's hard to hear either of you two- from the 'winning' side
And and to be fair, the first oculus war we stuck up for mi6, only for them to be asshats after the war. So let's not call it an opportunistic bandwagon. They've earned it.
Well I don't presume to speak for the rest of my alliance, but I am certainly a hat of an ass.
-
18 hours ago, President Hardin said:
Who's Lord Hitchock?
The guy who makes every other post in figuratively every thread. It's his way of pretending he and this game still matter.
-
10 minutes ago, devin15 said:
I was refering to TBC. TBC is not as big.
My mistake.
-
1 minute ago, AlmightyGrub said:
I am glad you have now reached a judgement. Given you are completely clueless I feel very comfortable knowing that this treaty is exactly what we want. Polaris can not betray itself BTW, it exists to serve itself, not you, your memories or your fantasies.
If this is exactly what you want, I can only imagine what sponge, Ivan, ski, z, KP, Penguin, GE, DA, and countless numbers of your own members and your former members think of you right now.
-
Just now, devin15 said:
Thats not an insult its a fact. You are not as big as NG or Polar.
You are correct, we are not as big as Polar.
-
9 minutes ago, Thrash said:
We're more then happy to be fighting NPO again. The fallout between us happened long ago and is irrelevant to the current reasons for disdain of Pacifica.
Hail Invicta.
And more specifically, hail you, Thrash, for sticking around for so long.
Peace is in our time
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
I realize that NADC was not forced to disband, because that is not kosher for CN nowadays. What I am curious about is what your grudge has to do with? It certainly has nothing to do with NPO, since you signed that treaty with them. So, what?