Global United Nations

[Solaris]

[quote name='Kzoppistan' timestamp='1302310052' post='2687170']
Nothing more needs to be said, you're you but Zenergy is awesome.
[/quote]
That is debatable at best.

[Chaoshawk]

That's too bad I liked reading monthly reports from UNSC.

[Tupac]

[quote name='Hadrian' timestamp='1301821583' post='2683367']
Zhaan, stop it. No, I am serious, enough of your !@#$%^&*.

You created UNSC only to suddenly bail on everyone halfway through, citing OOC reasons (which I frankly don't believe). Why should anyone expect you to do better this time?

You did the exact same thing in BCOM. You left when we were peaking, again citing OOC reasons, only to come back a few weeks later under Skywalker, and then you left [i]again[/i] when you realised BCOM was crumbling- off to form UNSC.

Your behaviour is unbecoming of a GUNner. I fully expect you to hand the reigns to someone better fit to lead GUN.

I am not impressed with this at all.
[/quote]
Im glad someone smells the bs in the air. I hardly speak on these forums but I will post to say I curse your sad attempt at reforming GUN.
Mason (Zhaan) you worked so hard against the old GUN in its dying days when we wouldn't accept your forced ascension to power. You call yourself a founder but you were inactive for 90% of its existence. I would hardly call Zhaan a gunner. More like an alliance hopper.

[quote name='MFC' timestamp='1301884602' post='2683750']
Hope someone uses shout to mglockwo as a CB for war, he was not a fan of many
[/quote]
Funny, because he is on your team now. Shout out to Mglockwo for not eating his meat sammich without a fight.

I totally agree with Zenergy, shouldn't be longer then a month. Let the alliance be dead, the real GUNners called it quits last year. It doesn't need any more dragging through the mud.

[Mason]

[quote name='Tupac' timestamp='1302460662' post='2687947']
Mason (Zhaan) you worked so hard against the old GUN in its dying days when we wouldn't accept your forced ascension to power. You call yourself a founder but you were inactive for 90% of its existence. I would hardly call Zhaan a gunner. More like an alliance hopper.

I totally agree with Zenergy, shouldn't be longer then a month. Let the alliance be dead, the real GUNners called it quits last year. It doesn't need any more dragging through the mud.
[/quote]

To the contrary, I came back twice because of the disappointment I felt watching my creation be destroyed by the stagnation of the inept leadership and so called GUNners that did nothing for the alliance beyond hiding behind it's AA. During those return trips, I tried to revive the community and that is what was met with hostility. You were content with being nothing more than a shell of an alliance. Oh yes, I worked against GUNners because I wanted to help the alliance, not hurt it. In my return, despite resistance, I still managed to push for and get a completely new charter and form of government. More activity and interest took place each time I came back than any time I was gone. But, yes, both times I left again because I got sick of the bs and pathetic attitudes of the membership. It's not what GUN was intended to be. There were never more than a handful willing to be on board for making GUN a decent alliance again, and even those few realized what they were dealing with and were afraid to make things happen without me prodding them on.

So, what do we have here? A bunch of bitter ex-GUNners that let your alliance die without a true fight and mad because I decided to reform it without you? At 7 members, we've already got better quality than the whole of those of you who were left when you shut it down. There was a time when you, Tupac, and others like you, were the pride of GUN. But you accepted defeat and I left before then because you no longer embodied the spirit of what it meant to be GUN. Just a bunch of stubborn over-the-hill CNers riding on the coat-tails of a name that used to demand respect.

Go ahead. Place your bets.

[Cesar Julian]

[quote name='Mason' timestamp='1302466913' post='2687993']
To the contrary, I came back twice because of the disappointment I felt watching my creation be destroyed by the stagnation of the inept leadership and so called GUNners that did nothing for the alliance beyond hiding behind it's AA. During those return trips, I tried to revive the community and that is what was met with hostility. You were content with being nothing more than a shell of an alliance. Oh yes, I worked against GUNners because I wanted to help the alliance, not hurt it. In my return, despite resistance, I still managed to push for and get a completely new charter and form of government. More activity and interest took place each time I came back than any time I was gone. But, yes, both times I left again because I got sick of the bs and pathetic attitudes of the membership. It's not what GUN was intended to be. There were never more than a handful willing to be on board for making GUN a decent alliance again, and even those few realized what they were dealing with and were afraid to make things happen without me prodding them on. [b]So, what do we have here? A bunch of bitter ex-GUNners that let your alliance die without a true fight and mad because I decided to reform it without you? At 7 members, we've already got better quality than the whole of those of you who were left when you shut it down.[/b] There was a time when you, Tupac, and others like you, were the pride of GUN. But you accepted defeat and I left before then because you no longer embodied the spirit of what it meant to be GUN. Just a bunch of stubborn over-the-hill CNers riding on the coat-tails of a name that used to demand respect.Go ahead. Place your bets.
[/quote]

I know this is a gravedigg, I apologize in advance and will accept the warning if the mods want to give it with no complaints. [OOC]I will add though that I had a cornea transplant which prevented me from using the computer for quite a long time.[/OOC] I was away and missed this thread when it was created. As an ex-member, and part of the leadership that decided to disband the alliance I want to have my say in this.

I can not allow you to say things like the one bolded. It is a lie. We fought extremely hard and did the best we possibly could to try and save GUN. I can't deny the impact you had when you came back, it was positive considering our state, but even what you brought to the table wasn't enough to save it. Every active member of GUN is very aware of how hard we worked, even some old friends from allies know how hard we worked. It is true we failed, GUN as it existed could not operate; and as the one who proposed disbandment I stand today by my decision and still believe it was the best course of action. The resistance you say you encountered was of your own making and you know it (and you know I stood behind you). You are in no position to complain about or criticize our commitment and our effort. Those bitter ex-gunners gave a lot to the alliance, more than you with all your hopping. The GUN I joined, the GUN I led, is now dead and it's for the best.

Yours is a new project with an old name, and I wish you the best.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Cesar Julian

[Mason]

Yes, Cesar, it is a grave dig and since this post, I took time to reflect on a few things and posted a very lengthy and sincere apology thread, which is found [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=101098"]here[/url]. And you are right, the GUN you joined is dead and it is for the best. I stand behind the majority of the post you quoted, however, I agree with your comments regarding resistance and the rest is detailed in the thread I linked you to.

[Captain Nathan Brittles]

Here lies Lester Moore,
four slugs from a .44,
no Les, no more.