Jump to content

This Week in the Network


Recommended Posts

[quote name='Charles Stuart' timestamp='1303366054' post='2695339']
It wasn't a provocation but an actual question. The question mark should have made it obvious.
[/quote]

You can phrase "you're trying too hard" as a question or however you like but it's still an attempt to get a rise out of Os.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 406
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1303343307' post='2694965']You look at a guy like Yates... try to call out Meth for "declaring war" on those nations--like there's some mini-war inside the war that ODN DECLARED--and you wonder if he lives on a ventilator due to an inability to remember to breathe. I don't see any other way.[/quote]
Awesome reading comprehension abilities, Schatt. Seriously. My Meth posts had [i]nothing[/i] to do with illustrating how [b]Methrage had no reason to act smug[/b] and was *like* *totally* about how he's a big meanie waging war on the poor defenseless nations of the ODN! And there is *like* *totally* no sarcasm in this thread whatsoever...

Continue to fail. Soldier on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So wait, since when is it conventional to allow an alliance who is not at war to aid an alliance who is at war and not hold them responsible? OS needs to get his head out of his rear.

Any war that has ever raged on this planet non-involved nations who aid involved nations get a warning. And if that doesn't work, they get smacked across the face with a few nukes.

Say what you will about Schattenman, he at least does things to make this place interesting instead of running around acting like a jackass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='darkfox' timestamp='1303347656' post='2695048']
I made an assumption not a false claim. False claims are your department.
[/quote]
That is one of the worst defenses I have ever heard. An assumption and a claim can be the same.

"An alliance that didn't know any better" is a claim. That is a "factual" statement that involves no opinion nor does it involve any sort of moderate language. Just because you made that claim with no data doesn't mean it isn't a claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='AirMe' timestamp='1303392880' post='2695517']
Say what you will about Schattenman, he at least does things to make this place interesting by running around acting like a jackass.
[/quote]

Fixed your typo there. I agree that Schatt's antics are quite entertaining. Bob would be a drearier place without him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Pingu' timestamp='1303398318' post='2695542']
Fixed your typo there. I agree that Schatt's antics are quite entertaining. Bob would be a drearier place without him.
[/quote]

It was no typo, I said what I meant.

And since you ignored it, why didn't you address my point about an apology being out of line here? Because that really was the meat of what I said. You have been here longer than I have and know that no matter the circumstances, aid from an uninvolved party going to an involved party is considered an act of war. Going by that Internationally accepted standard, it is ODN who owes the apology to the Cult and not the other way around.

I would assume that a man that sponge once described as one of the most intelligent people here would have gone to the relevant and substantial content of the statement and not the anecdotal content of the statement.


While I do love me some GOONS, I respectfully disagree with their assessment that Schattenman is evil and that the Cult is out to destroy them. You need to stop drinking the kool-aid and use your brains. Because that is the main complaint that your critics have about ODN is that you always seem to be sheeple instead of independent thinkers. I personally had thought you had moved beyond the sheeple stage but it looks like I might be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='AirMe' timestamp='1303402540' post='2695586']I personally had thought you had moved beyond the sheeple stage but it looks like I might be wrong.[/quote]
Speaking of "sheeple," that's a mighty fine avatar you have there. :smug:

Lulz aside, there was a better way for CoJ to handle the situation. You know it. I know it. Let's move on.

Edited by Yates
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='OsRavan' timestamp='1303180234' post='2693049']
Other then that, im not sure what Schatt hoped to accomplish with this. It is not going to change our stance that CoJ should apologize for their treatment of our protectorate and our applicants. The goal of that apology was not to publicly humiliate them. But apparently they want to make it public. So be it. I don't think most people will find this half as interesting as CoJ thinks they will.
[/quote]

Your internal workings are your business, but I would still appreciate seeing some evidence of why you think the Cult did anything wrong in their dealings with your protectorate and applicant AA. I know he has only presented his side of the story here, but ODN has not provided any evidence to the contrary.

[quote name='King Charge' timestamp='1303185659' post='2693163']
I'd like to see HoT's logs with TFE. We all know that he was probably really respectful and not threatening at all. :rolleyes:
[/quote]

HoT55 is 64 Digits, not CoJ. Maybe you are lumping them together, but what he did should not have any bearing on peace terms that CoJ has to agree to.


[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1303194650' post='2693396']
[i]
Super awesome double great amazing read as always, Shattenman!!!!@@![/i]


...
[/quote]

If I ever have my factories start making dart boards with Schattenmann's face on them, I know who my best customer will be... :rolleyes:

[quote name='darkfox' timestamp='1303272764' post='2694271']
[b]All I see is CoJ being rude to a protectorate[/b] who mind you is composed of nations brand new to this world, and then complaining about a private apology. Maybe ODN should have demanded tech and money.

Darn you ODN how dare you be so immoral.
[/quote]

re: the bolded text: Where?

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1303324307' post='2694749']
Also, how would you respond if an alliance which you'd not had any contact with before approached you and asked you to stop your means of obtaining cash from your ally because it's hindering their war efforts and because of "tradition"?
[/quote]

I would stop the deals, or make other arrangements. I guess it comes down to whether your alliance honors that tradition or not. I know mine does, but being a micro you just don't engage in behavior that might easily get you blown apart. TFE could very easily have ended up being attacked in this situation, and frankly CoJ and the others were very nice not to do so; those nations would very likely be poorly prepared for a war compared to ODN nations, and thus would be a much softer target. I imagine that since CoJ and the others want to wind this war down, they avoided what would obviously be an escalation in ODN's eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Yates' timestamp='1303408994' post='2695684']
Speaking of "sheeple," that's a mighty fine avatar you have there. :smug:

Lulz aside, there was a better way for CoJ to handle the situation. You know it. I know it. Let's move on.
[/quote]

Again, another statement not addressing the issue. And there really isn't a better way for CoJ to handle the situation because every time they try traditional means they get met with an LOL Schattenman or LOL CoJ. There are only so many times a man can attempt to do things the traditional way before you have to think outside the box. CoJ has been trying to resolve their conflict in a traditional manner for about 2 months now and has been met with nothing that resembles a fair resolution for an alliance of it's size.

Don't crap in a box and put a bow on it and try to tell me it's a gift. I have been around the block a few times and I know whats what.

And who cares about my avatar, I have been using a version of it since day one. If you don't have anything constructive to add to the argument please don't post. Protip: people will take you more seriously if you participate in the debate instead of a making sorry attempt at attacking ones character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1303324307' post='2694749']
Also, how would you respond if an alliance which you'd not had any contact with before approached you and asked you to stop your means of obtaining cash from your ally because it's hindering their war efforts and because of "tradition"?
[/quote]

Having run FA for a major alliance in the past that you may have heard of....called the Mushroom Kingdom, when we encountered a situation like this we approached the alliance that was aiding and informed them that they were are war with us and would be considered at war as well if they did not stop their aiding. They stopped their aiding. In some cases offending alliances were also told that they needed to make equivalent aid packages to the nations at war with the originally aided nations.

Even if MK ended up losing the war, we were never forced to apologize to the alliance we approached about aiding our combatants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='AirMe' timestamp='1303392880' post='2695517']
So wait, since when is it conventional to allow an alliance who is not at war to aid an alliance who is at war and not hold them responsible? OS needs to get his head out of his rear.

Any war that has ever raged on this planet non-involved nations who aid involved nations get a warning. And if that doesn't work, they get smacked across the face with a few nukes.

Say what you will about Schattenman, he at least does things to make this place interesting instead of running around acting like a jackass.
[/quote]

Inb4 ODN's reply:

well, when you aid an alliance at war, yes you're risking being targeted, but in this case obviously it's fine because none of us are going to get targeted.

might, right, etc etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='AirMe' timestamp='1303416284' post='2695777']
Having run FA for a major alliance in the past that you may have heard of....called the Mushroom Kingdom, when we encountered a situation like this we approached the alliance that was aiding and informed them that they were are war with us and would be considered at war as well if they did not stop their aiding. They stopped their aiding. In some cases offending alliances were also told that they needed to make equivalent aid packages to the nations at war with the originally aided nations.

Even if MK ended up losing the war, we were never forced to apologize to the alliance we approached about aiding our combatants.
[/quote]

Hey, I agree that CoJ shouldn't have to apologise for approaching TFE about their tech deals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='hizzy' timestamp='1303416498' post='2695780']
Inb4 ODN's reply:

well, when you aid an alliance at war, yes you're risking being targeted, but in this case obviously it's fine because none of us are going to get targeted.

might, right, etc etc
[/quote]

Not so sure if might makes right applies, since while aiding people in a conflict is a cause of action, its not exactly a horrific and abhorrent offense that leaves hordes of crying women and children in its wake. The phrase is usually reserved for when someone does something wrong in the ethical sense, not the mechanical.

Also, I'm guessing they are asking for the apology since the micros in question basically tried to pull the wool over TFE's eyes in an underhanded attempt to scare them away from a particular cluster of alliances and play on their assumed nativity via knowingly empty threats (knowingly empty being the operative part), badgering, and oxymoronical overt attempted deception in reference to the severity of implied repercussions. In short, the demand is based off of a totality of the circumstances view of the situation, and not the specific action in an objective categorical sense (i.e. "we think people should apologize for saying aiding parties at war is a cause for war, etc"). That being said, a reasonable person could see that to be offensive and worthy of an apology given, and a reasonable person could also disagree. Either way, it shouldn't be a huge deal breaker or sticking point as far as the party on the loosing end of the war is concerned.

Edited by Il Impero Romano
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1303418137' post='2695803']
Not so sure if might makes right applies, since while aiding people in a conflict is a cause of action, its not exactly a horrific and abhorrent offense that leaves hordes of crying women and children in its wake.[/quote]

Agreed. Yet I'm sure the next guy who wants to use it as a CB will spin it as such, and as long as that person is in a position of power, then it'll stick.

Maybe I'm just getting old but I'm fairly certain there's been a number of times where a small amount of aid transfer has lead to a massive global war, and I'm also fairly certain VE supported it, so for you to come on here and basically chalk it up to "no big deal" is retarded at best.

I'm not sure where you're coming from with the ethical/mechanical dilemma, but in this case, ODN feeling like they're owed an apology when they're obviously in the wrong is a clear case of someone's position dictating acceptable practices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='hizzy' timestamp='1303420221' post='2695836']
Agreed. Yet I'm sure the next guy who wants to use it as a CB will spin it as such, and as long as that person is in a position of power, then it'll stick.

Maybe I'm just getting old but I'm fairly certain there's been a number of times where a small amount of aid transfer has lead to a massive global war, and I'm also fairly certain VE supported it, so for you to come on here and basically chalk it up to "no big deal" is retarded at best.

[b]I'm not sure where you're coming from with the ethical/mechanical dilemma[/b], but in this case, ODN feeling like they're owed an apology when they're obviously in the wrong is a clear case of someone's position dictating acceptable practices.
[/quote]

You missed my point, probably due to the bold and the fact that I responded quickly without explaining. So yea, I fully agree with you that it's a cause for war, but I don't think that has any bearing on it being right or wrong, or that right and wrong should even be a consideration in such circumstances. The distinction between the two lies in the difference between ethics and procedure, the latter deriving its cause for war not out of equity but communal procedural efficiency.

More importantly though, I don't think the simplistic genre of asserted offense is why ODN is asking for the apology (see the rest/brunt of my post you quoted as to why). I meant the above as just an academic aside.

Edited by Il Impero Romano
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='hizzy' timestamp='1303416498' post='2695780']
Inb4 ODN's reply:

well, when you aid an alliance at war, yes you're risking being targeted, but in this case obviously it's fine because none of us are going to get targeted.

might, right, etc etc
[/quote]

Well isn't that funny, look what I happen to have right here...

[quote]
[23:42] <Joraway> We're not the ones with the majority of our upper tier in peacemode
[23:43] <Joraway> ODN has been more than willing to get into what ever fight we'd be needed in
[23:43] <Joraway> We will not allow you to dictate who we can and cannot techdeal with
01[23:43] <HeroofTime55> So here's a theory
01[23:44] <HeroofTime55> Lets say I started doing widespread tech deals on behalf of my upper tier, since this is such a slow war and all
01[23:44] <HeroofTime55> We got, some uninvolved alliance to send our upper tier a whole lot of tech
01[23:44] <HeroofTime55> Tell me, would ODN be cool with that? I mean, that upper tier isn't fighting you, right?
01[23:45] <HeroofTime55> Would you just let that third party keep sending our guys the tech? Hell, they're probably not going to declare on you anyway
01[23:45] <HeroofTime55> Like I said our focus is on Doomhouse
01[23:46] <HeroofTime55> Would you let that go?
01[23:46] <HeroofTime55> No answer? It seems like an easy question to answer for me
01[23:46] <HeroofTime55> Were I in your position
01[23:47] <HeroofTime55> Minus the fact that I'd look like a big stinking hypocrite given this TFE deal
01[23:48] <HeroofTime55> Tell me, would you allow that aid to occur without a response?
[23:48] <Joraway> If you sent aid
[23:48] <Joraway> Toa third party
[23:48] <Joraway> And that third party
[23:48] <Joraway> Send aid to nations not at all involved in the war?
01[23:48] <HeroofTime55> and then that third party sent tech to our upper tier
01[23:48] <HeroofTime55> The upper tier in PM currently
[23:49] <Joraway> Uhh
[23:49] <Joraway> First of all
01[23:49] <HeroofTime55> I mean, we aren't as big as you, but imagine it's a huge operation like you and TFE got going
[23:49] <Joraway> I don't believe you can accept aid like that in hippy

[color="#FF0000"][discussion about physics (OOC: game mechanics), cut for brevity][/color]

01[23:51]<HeroofTime55> But would you allow that massive aid operation to take place
01[23:52] <HeroofTime55> Like say, Duckroll members are encouraging their little guys to do those deals with us
[23:52] <Joraway> We've had situations like this in the past
[23:52] <Joraway> We generally don't do much but make some noise
[23:52] <Joraway> Especially not in the current situation you're in
[23:52] <Joraway> It's all situational of course
[23:52] <Joraway> and I'm not really one who cna make this decision
01[23:53] <HeroofTime55> So you'd just rattle your sabre a bit? What happens when that doesn't work and the deals continue?
01[23:53] <HeroofTime55> Well work with me here
01[23:53] <HeroofTime55> We're speaking in hypotherticals so assume you are the guy who makes the call
[23:53] <Joraway> Fine
[23:53] <Joraway> There are some benefits of winning the war
[23:53] <Joraway> Thats one of them
01[23:54] <HeroofTime55> Now doesn't it feel better to get that off your chest?[/quote]

Edited by HeroofTime55
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Guffey' timestamp='1303426232' post='2695920']
Lol that was golden
[/quote]
ODN's ability to keep a straight face this entire war has been an amazing feat in itself: declaring war on CoJ to "defend" MK after MK attacked us first, claiming it's inappropriate to spam "you might be attacked" messages to ODN Applicant, claiming it's perfectly OK to aid alliances at war, demanding apologies for both of the previous, calling Methrage a bully after declaring war on him, refusing to accept surrender, claiming that lulz terms are a guarantee against our ability to claim victory in the future. It's like Bizarro World; I would find it funny if I didn't know that ODN is dead serious about all these absolutely asinine positions.

Edited by Schattenmann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ubermeir' timestamp='1303428489' post='2695959']
Oh look ODN wants someone to apologize to one of their protectorates and is a democracy. Wait wut! Terrible. Ha!
O/ free speech and light terms.
[/quote]

The problem is not that people believe that ODN is being [i]harsh[/i] or [i]bad[/i], simply that, on the face of the facts here, it is [i]wrong[/i].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1303428817' post='2695969']
The problem is not that people believe that ODN is being [i]harsh[/i] or [i]bad[/i], simply that, on the face of the facts here, it is [i]wrong[/i].
[/quote]
And as the o/ squad has demonstrated, the average ODNista is apparently unable to tell the difference, which is always pretty disturbing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='AirMe' timestamp='1303402540' post='2695586']
It was no typo, I said what I meant.

And since you ignored it, why didn't you address my point about an apology being out of line here? Because that really was the meat of what I said. You have been here longer than I have and know that no matter the circumstances, aid from an uninvolved party going to an involved party is considered an act of war. Going by that Internationally accepted standard, it is ODN who owes the apology to the Cult and not the other way around.

I would assume that a man that sponge once described as one of the most intelligent people here would have gone to the relevant and substantial content of the statement and not the anecdotal content of the statement.


While I do love me some GOONS, I respectfully disagree with their assessment that Schattenman is evil and that the Cult is out to destroy them. You need to stop drinking the kool-aid and use your brains. Because that is the main complaint that your critics have about ODN is that you always seem to be sheeple instead of independent thinkers. I personally had thought you had moved beyond the sheeple stage but it looks like I might be wrong.
[/quote]

How are we even relevant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lord Velox' timestamp='1303433270' post='2696031']
How are we even relevant?
[/quote]

The only relevance that you would have in this situation is you, in theory, could influence the way your allies think. Allies are more inclined to accept some views as their own or in sympathy/empathy then non-allies are.

Edited by AirMe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...