An Invitation from the Mushroom Kingdom

[Stonewall Jaxon]

My question for Polar: When will the Ordinance of Orders be re-signed? You can't say it wouldn't give MK conniptions

[D34th]

[quote name='Stonewall Jaxon' timestamp='1309349547' post='2744136']
My question for Polar: When will the Ordinance of Orders be re-signed? You can't say it wouldn't give MK conniptions
[/quote]

Maybe it already is secretly re-signed and you don't know?

[lebubu]

[quote name='Stonewall Jaxon' timestamp='1309349547' post='2744136']
My question for Polar: When will the Ordinance of Orders be re-signed? You can't say it wouldn't give MK conniptions
[/quote]

Small fry.

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Dajobo' timestamp='1309330656' post='2744060']
Fun fact, the "ever likable Penguin" (I agree with that btw) was the one who decided his successor. Regardless of what other alliance leaders may think, I whole heartedly believe it was the best choice for Polaris and am glad he did it. The Legion treaty just demonstrates how paranoid half of CN is as it was never anything to do with Pacifica.
[/quote]
It may have been a good decision for you internally but it was a stupid move when in terms of foreign affairs. It'd be akin to us bringing back Crymson. The part of the web your alliance was intertwined with considered Legion to be part of the enemy/opposition and it caused you to lose a considerable amount of political capital. After this no one wanted to stand up for you on that side of the web. This of course coming after the WCE and Random's coronation. Still, we're getting away from the overall point I was making.

You've neglected to inform the world's population how you have suffered more than IRON, DAWN, TORN, TSO, and TOP. Perhaps your decision not to answer this question or even make a remark on it is proof that you realized how utterly retarded your comment was.

Edited June 29, 2011 by Feanor Noldorin

[shahenshah]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1309343527' post='2744110']
I love it how every sub-standard Polaris poster seems to bring up the ODN for no apparent reason when they are on the back foot. It's like their version of Godwin's law.
[/quote]

When even IRONers have given up on (c) pot shoting ODN, you know its gotten too old.

Edited June 29, 2011 by shahenshah

[Moridin]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1309368460' post='2744277']
It may have been a good decision for you internally but it was a stupid move when in terms of foreign affairs. It'd be akin to us bringing back Crymson. The part of the web your alliance was intertwined with considered Legion to be part of the enemy/opposition and it caused you to lose a considerable amount of political capital. After this no one wanted to stand up for you on that side of the web. This of course coming after the WCE and Random's coronation. Still, we're getting away from the overall point I was making.

You've neglected to inform the world's population how you have suffered more than IRON, DAWN, TORN, TSO, and TOP. Perhaps your decision not to answer this question or even make a remark on it is proof that you realized how utterly retarded your comment was.
[/quote]

When looking at the effect our actions had on Polar, I do not think "suffered" is at all the right word, and indeed Dajobo originally used the word "cost". Suffering implies victimization which we certainly can't claim, whereas cost is without such connotations.

It's difficult to deny that Polar did pay a significant price for its actions in the war; whether one quantifies it as being more or less than TOP, IRON, DAWN, TORN, or TSO's is a different issue entirely. Rather than turn it into a competition where we try to quantify intangibles and then determine whose position was damaged more by Polar's actions during that war, I believe Dajobo's original point was that it was an era we do not enjoy remembering, in part because of the significant repercussions of Polar's actions, which were not isolated to only TOP/IRON/et al. If Dajobo wants to insist Polar was damaged more he certainly can, but I am taking his disinterest in continuing the topic as an indication that it was probably not really meant to be the salient point of the post.

[zoskia]

[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1309245046' post='2743308']
I see you aren't a fan of transparency judging by the fact that you seem to have a problem with them posting this on owf. It makes me question why? What do you say in private forums that you don't want public? Is it possibly because you are afraid to "do something about it?"
[/quote]

Which one is your Alliance?

I would like to request your Alliance to make the WHOLE of their forums public, 'cause I want to read it. Failure to do such thing will mean to me that you are a hypocrite and a coward who does not reserve my respect, because you are unable to stand by your words.

make public the WHOLE forums of your Alliance... or shut up.

[chefjoe]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1309348071' post='2744126']
If our mistakes boil down to appoint a new emperor and sign a treaty with an alliance who had no hostile behavior toward none of the people who hate us, I can say that we're doing pretty good.
[/quote]

To bad we all know that your mistakes are far more numerous and egregious.

[Cataduanes]

[quote name='Moridin' timestamp='1309349273' post='2744132']
Wait, what does that have to do with anything?
[/quote]
I am sure it makes perfect sense in D34th's mind.

[pd73bassman]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1309348071' post='2744126']
If our mistakes boil down to appoint a new emperor and sign a treaty with an alliance who had no hostile behavior toward none of the people who hate us, I can say that we're doing pretty good.
[/quote]

But that one treaty was Legion

[AlmightyGrub]

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1309379706' post='2744366']
To bad we all know that your mistakes are far more numerous and egregious.
[/quote]

Now now CJ, that's no way to get a jiggle. You could count many of your actions as mistakes if you are so inclined.

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Moridin' timestamp='1309375264' post='2744319']
When looking at the effect our actions had on Polar, I do not think "suffered" is at all the right word, and indeed Dajobo originally used the word "cost". Suffering implies victimization which we certainly can't claim, whereas cost is without such connotations.

It's difficult to deny that Polar did pay a significant price for its actions in the war; whether one quantifies it as being more or less than TOP, IRON, DAWN, TORN, or TSO's is a different issue entirely. Rather than turn it into a competition where we try to quantify intangibles and then determine whose position was damaged more by Polar's actions during that war, I believe Dajobo's original point was that it was an era we do not enjoy remembering, in part because of the significant repercussions of Polar's actions, which were not isolated to only TOP/IRON/et al. If Dajobo wants to insist Polar was damaged more he certainly can, but I am taking his disinterest in continuing the topic as an indication that it was probably not really meant to be the salient point of the post.
[/quote]
He responded to Shah with [u]"I think our decision to honour the treaty ultimately cost us a lot more than it cost you."[/u] I'm merely wondering how he came up with that ridiculous comment. Perhaps he misspoke?

[Moridin]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1309385698' post='2744424']
He responded to Shah with [u]"I think our decision to honour the treaty ultimately cost us a lot more than it cost you."[/u] I'm merely wondering how he came up with that ridiculous comment. Perhaps he misspoke?
[/quote]

Right, and my point is that the part I took away from the post was the sentiment that Polar faced significant consequences from our actions, not just TOP/Duckroll, and that in the long-term, the war was not a clear-cut "Polar won, you lost" situation. For my part I don't think it's really possible to measure which alliance was damaged more, but I think it's still possible to interpret the post in a meaningful way without getting bogged down in such a pointless and silly argument.

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Moridin' timestamp='1309386325' post='2744432']
Right, and my point is that the part I took away from the post was the sentiment that Polar faced significant consequences from our actions, not just TOP/Duckroll, and that in the long-term, the war was not a clear-cut "Polar won, you lost" situation. For my part I don't think it's really possible to measure which alliance was damaged more, but I think it's still possible to interpret the post in a meaningful way without getting bogged down in such a pointless and silly argument.
[/quote]
Fair point except he directly said [u]"cost us a lot more than it cost you."[/u] That's saying you got the worse end of it. Period. There is no skipping around that. I've just been merely wondering aloud how that's possible. Nevertheless, I give you credit for your responses. [img]http://mushroom-kingdom.info/boards/Smileys/kickass/golfclap.gif[/img]

My apologies to my friends in the Kingdom for derailing your thread. I simply could not let such baseless claims go without response.

[chefjoe]

[quote name='AlmightyGrub' timestamp='1309383592' post='2744401']
Now now CJ, that's no way to get a jiggle. You could count many of your actions as mistakes if you are so inclined.
[/quote]

I never said I made no mistakes AG. I was just replying to D34th.....fruitless as that may be.

[Harry Dresden]

This thread is about Polar's thread on the MK forums and MK's release of it. It's not about other war coalitions or the non MK related actions of Polar.

[Duncan King]

All of MK's embassies are user group restricted so only people with specific masks (usually MK member and that alliance's diplomats) can see them. That makes them private. There's usually an understanding and expectation between the alliances that when this is the case with the embassies, the content there is between the host alliance's members and the visiting alliance's diplomats. The same effect is achieved by password protecting all embassies.

This is in contrast to other forums where there's just one general diplomat mask that can see all embassies and consulates. This content is public and there's not an expectation of privacy because everyone with a diplomat mask and above can see that area of the forum.

What MK did here was a pretty gross breach of conduct and Polar's privacy. They posted something that was presumed to be confidential and written with a reasonable expectation of privacy for all diplomats to see. I imagine that if one of the alliances that MK has embassies at moved a thread from a private area to a public area, MK wouldn't be too happy. The fact that you'd do something to someone that you'd get really upset at them for doing to you is pretty jerky.

So -1 point from MK for asshattery and +1 to Polar for taking it well, at least in public.

[Groucho Marx]

A lot of what happened from \m/'s side of the fence (particularly raiding FoA to begin with followed by many other stupid mistakes down the road) were entirely preventable and that falls on me. I foolishly decided to act on a raid offer brought to me by other parties and handled it rather poorly. Our saving grace was Chief bearing the brunt of the diplomatic fallout and he had a hell of a lot on his plate. Given how everything played out, I still would have liked to go back and do everything differently from the ground up, 6 months prior to that war's beginning. MK's view on what \m/ was is exactly what we expected it to be and truth be told, they were beyond correct in their assertions. It was an incredibly lame attempt for a group of people to have fun, many of whom had been in the original, at the expense of what the alliance really had been for shock value. It was retarded.

My actions put a lot of people through a lot of undue stress on multiple occasions and this, for me, is one of the most shameful and absurd. I am sorry for all these issues I created and allowed to go unmitigated. People like Chief, Goby, Inmate, King Xander, Derwood, TwistedRebel, Van Hoo, MLK and countless others are owed my gratitude for their patience with me through the situation and subsequent events that followed, internal and external, and in helping \m/ solve some of the issues between "us" and Polar when they absolutely did not have to. Posthumously, Poison Clan deserves more than my personal thanks for sticking by my previous alliance, but also an apology. I acted poorly throughout the situation and even afterwards and deeply regret having strained our previously longstanding relationship over a little bit of personal pride and stupidity. Ragnarok and the Corporation both deserve my personal apology for the situation I placed you guys in. It was something unfitting for the both of you.

Apologies on the internet mean nothing to a lot of people, and particularly more so in games, but to those I affected the most I hope you can see the sincerity in these words.

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='Emperor Marx' timestamp='1309399138' post='2744575']
A lot of what happened from \m/'s side of the fence (particularly raiding FoA to begin with followed by many other stupid mistakes down the road) were entirely preventable and that falls on me. I foolishly decided to act on a raid offer brought to me by other parties and handled it rather poorly. Our saving grace was Chief bearing the brunt of the diplomatic fallout and he had a hell of a lot on his plate. Given how everything played out, I still would have liked to go back and do everything differently from the ground up, 6 months prior to that war's beginning. MK's view on what \m/ was is exactly what we expected it to be and truth be told, they were beyond correct in their assertions. It was an incredibly lame attempt for a group of people to have fun, many of whom had been in the original, at the expense of what the alliance really had been for shock value. It was retarded.

My actions put a lot of people through a lot of undue stress on multiple occasions and this, for me, is one of the most shameful and absurd. I am sorry for all these issues I created and allowed to go unmitigated. People like Chief, Goby, Inmate, King Xander, Derwood, TwistedRebel, Van Hoo, MLK and countless others are owed my gratitude for their patience with me through the situation and subsequent events that followed, internal and external, and in helping \m/ solve some of the issues between "us" and Polar when they absolutely did not have to. Posthumously, Poison Clan deserves more than my personal thanks for sticking by my previous alliance, but also an apology. I acted poorly throughout the situation and even afterwards and deeply regret having strained our previously longstanding relationship over a little bit of personal pride and stupidity. Ragnarok and the Corporation both deserve my personal apology for the situation I placed you guys in. It was something unfitting for the both of you.

Apologies on the internet mean nothing to a lot of people, and particularly more so in games, but to those I affected the most I hope you can see the sincerity in these words.
[/quote]

Dude I know it sucked (obviously I was there with you) but basically all \m/ was was a spark in that situation. The house had been drenched in napalm months beforehand, all it needed was one obstinate alliance to make the fire start. So yeah, don't beat yourself up over it.

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

[quote name='Emperor Marx' timestamp='1309399138' post='2744575']
~Marx being classy~
[/quote]


[quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1309404608' post='2744738']
~Chief being sober~
[/quote]

In the eons to come, historians will agree that whatever the motivations \m/ and Polar set into motion a series of events that set fire to the world and that the aftershocks were felt for a long time.

As for the grand reveal announced in the OP, i think it is a dick move, but hey, its your castle, open whatever doors you want to.

[Lord Fingolfin]

[quote name='Fallen Fool' timestamp='1309242797' post='2743291']
Expect to find a smoking gun? If so, you are probably going to be disappointed.

Note: I say probably because I have learned over the years never to underestimate people's ability to build illogical misconceptions on the flimsiest of evidence and then embrace them till death.
[/quote]

You made two errors. One, that I'm actually going to take that much time out of my personal life to go digging through thousands upon thousands of posts searching for something to make you look bad, I'm not HoT. Two, the only smoking gun I'll ever need was on the evening of 1/29/2010. See, I was in those aforementioned channels and I watched as the peace agreement between \m/ and NpO went up, the channel did a collective "the $%&@?" and within seconds of shouting for an explanation watching Grub and the rest of the NpO officials present /quit out of every coalition channel we had.


[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1309242938' post='2743293']
If anyone has coalition logs of any sort they should share, in the interest of transparency

I mean, what harm could it do? (I for one have no logs despite my presence in many such channels sorry)
[/quote]

I lost almost all my logs when I switched computers but I have one where the pre-empt was discussed that you might find interesting. I need to check with some of the participants if they're ok with me releasing it though.


Also, Unsure's rant in that thread is a piece of priceless beauty

[Kzoppistan]

[quote name='Duncan King' timestamp='1309394151' post='2744522']
What MK did here was a pretty gross breach of conduct and Polar's privacy. They posted something that was presumed to be confidential and written with a reasonable expectation of privacy for all diplomats to see. I imagine that if one of the alliances that MK has embassies at moved a thread from a private area to a public area, MK wouldn't be too happy. The fact that you'd do something to someone that you'd get really upset at them for doing to you is pretty jerky. [/quote]

While I agree with that as a general principle, I also think that if a relationship between two parties breaks down, you can't expect one to respect the privacy of the other.

Of course, not ever relaying private convos is, perhaps, more honorable, but the opening of it, warts and all, for the public to see, a service which benefits the public good over the two parties involved, rectifies such a breach, imo. It's a historical document so I find the vituperative nature (thanks Fallen Fool, that word is awesome) of any objectors not equal to the justification for releasing such information of this significance.

Edited July 1, 2011 by Kzoppistan

[Sephiroth]

This will be interesting to see, I'll come look it over.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Kzoppistan' timestamp='1309545294' post='2746089']
While I agree with that as a general principle, I also think that if a relationship between two parties breaks down, you can't expect one to respect the privacy of the other.
[/quote]
Only if the two parties in question are trustworthy, which is an adjective that you'd have to make a huuuge stretch to imagine applying to either of the two parties in this case.

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='Lord Fingolfin' timestamp='1309540306' post='2746045']
You made two errors. One, that I'm actually going to take that much time out of my personal life to go digging through thousands upon thousands of posts searching for something to make you look bad, I'm not HoT. Two, the only smoking gun I'll ever need was on the evening of 1/29/2010. See, I was in those aforementioned channels and I watched as the peace agreement between \m/ and NpO went up, the channel did a collective "the $%&@?" and within seconds of shouting for an explanation watching Grub and the rest of the NpO officials present /quit out of every coalition channel we had.
[/quote]

Would have liked to be a fly on the wall in that situation.