Open Invitation from the SuperFriends

[WalkerNinja]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1312854228' post='2775378']
[color="#0000FF"]Where should I begin? Well, I'll start with the one off the top of my head.

2008: The RicoValian incident. GOD tech raids an unaligned nation. Nothing wrong in and of that, but when the guy fights back and nukes back (GOD nuked him first, keep that in mind), Xiph has the nation sanctioned and sentenced to PZI. GOD also played a part in the LoFN fiasco, forcing the disbandment of several dozen micros. Most of these nations were sentenced to eternal war on trumped up charges (the logs used against them were later found to be fabricated), many which ultimately disappeared.

2009: TPF takes Kaiser Martens off of its PZI list, and lets him join an alliance. Once that has been announced Xiph somehow conjures KM onto GOD's PZI list, for rather weak reasons mind you. He extorts 60 million for KM's release.

Let us not forget GOD's attempted to disband AB during Karma, either.

2010: During both BiPolar and 6 Mil Xiphy attempted to hijack peace talks for his own end.

2011: His attempt disband UPN, and his role in the extortion of DT.

And then GOD's constant meddling in the affairs of other alliances (for example, his response to TOP and MK signing a treaty). Xiph's constant fabrication of lies and rumors. So much and more. I couldn't possibly tell them all here.

But believe me, there are misdeeds*, and we can very well identify them. But nice try there hotshot.[/color]
[/quote]

This is what makes RV one of the most dangerous players in the game. Just when you start to think that he's a nut that writes in techni-color for the glory of his one-nation alliances, he reveals that underneath all of the psychadelic cotton candy there's a steel trap that can summon every pertinent fact to hand at the drop of a hat.

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1312856361' post='2775409']
Who are you trying to fool?
[/quote]

For some reason, he's trying to talk to you, Xiph Jr--the only other nutjob that cancelled a treaty in response to The Unholy Alliance. Why he's wasting his time is beyond me, he should just stick to ridiculing your Twilight Fanfic.

Edited August 9, 2011 by WalkerNinja

[KainIIIC]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1312858157' post='2775434']
Phew ... *wipes brow* ... I was worried you were going to continue to incorrectly recount history and rail on about all the things Xiphosis might have accomplished if he actually had power or influence. Bye.
[/quote]

yes, however. For all of his 'failed' disbandment attempts, he instead has a pointy feather on his hat of quite unnecessarily holding Echelon at war for 3 months, and even being abhorrent enough to get 2 other alliances to offer separate white peace. He also holds as a proud accomplishment of beating UPN down for a month and a half, probably longer than need-be, and holding up a dozen and a half alliances at war until his own egotrip had been satisfied. He ALMOST punished DT with 40,000 tech in reps, but only managed to procure an extractment of 20,000.

It's not exactly a pretty picture any way you paint it, despite your hardest attempts at revisionism.

[Hecate]

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1312855313' post='2775393']
Yes, because I couldn't be bothered to spend the time to fuss up a list of what everyone already knows occurred. Fortunately for you, RV made an effort (though he understandably left out Xiphosis's uncountable less-major episodes of asinine behavior). Now you know. Happy?



Remember what Sardonic was saying about you and strawman tactics?
[/quote]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1312857643' post='2775428']
[color="#0000FF"]I'm well aware of Xiphy's roll. It was just as important as some of the other leading figures of that war. Still, Xiph took advantage of NPO's power, directly or indirectly. Had it not been for NPO sheltering his partners and crimes he would have had to pay for LoFN. Quite a few of us were annoyed.

But bah, a worthless Xiphy apologist isn't worth my time. I've got better things to do with my time than talk to walls.[/color]
[/quote]


[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1312858157' post='2775434']
Phew ... *wipes brow* ... I was worried you were going to continue to incorrectly recount history and rail on about all the things Xiphosis might have accomplished if he actually had power or influence. Bye.
[/quote]
[b]
This derail needs to stop or all of you will be facing your warn level endangered. This is a QnA and questions should be directed at SF alliances, while tangents with members of SF is allowed, this is not the place for this. Get back on track.[/b]

[D34th]

Just saw the mod post.

Edited August 9, 2011 by D34th

[Gibsonator21]

[quote name='TimLee' timestamp='1312855228' post='2775392']
I think you are blurring the facts between reality and your fantasy-land. You should do better and I have no intent to go around the marry-go-round with you. Everyone who needs to know the facts does and they don't lie, but people do. Why would I take credit? I didn't make you quit, but I did make GATO realize what a parasite you are. To suggest anything of the contrary has no basis in fact.
[/quote]
No. Really, I was there. You weren't. SOM, who was also there, is telling you that [i]you're[/i] wrong. Getting facts second, third hand doesn't give you the proper facts. When two of the four people who participated in it tell you you're wrong compared to gossip from people who heard about it, there's a good chance you're wrong.

I'd love to see you prove any accusations you have on me. Something tells me you can't.

[Master Holton]

How does SF as a whole feel about forced disbandment? (GOD need not answer)

[deSouza]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1312858236' post='2775436']
Xiph was a major contributing factor to bringing down NPO. For that we can be grateful. It doesn't make him a nice person and it doesn't mean we necessarily approve of everything else he has ever done. I personally don't know what to make of him. I have a long memory and he said some quite offensive things about me in #cupcakery (heh), and I know how unpleasant he can really get from other logs that I've seen, but on the other hand I chatted with him the other day on IRC and he seemed like an ordinary, nice guy.
[/quote]

I think you overestimate xiphosis' part in history

[Xiphosis]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1312820888' post='2774937']
How do you feel about the recent FOK govt changes and its cancellations?
[/quote]

FOK govt changes? I don't know. I think Wietze will put emphasis on IA, which is a good thing for FOK. The cancellations? Interesting, but not unexpected.

[WorldConqueror]

What was your reaction to the butterbeer review?

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1312848992' post='2775317']
And you're too dense to discern the very obvious basis of the post, namely that Xiphosis ran insensibly roughshod for two years and was supported by his fellow signatories all the way.
[/quote]


And by MK/CnG/VE/PB/XX members too. They propped up and supported everything Xiph has done post Karma through their treaty ties.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1312861965' post='2775490']
How is that common sense? Common sense dictates higher penalties for an aggressor since they did not have to deal with being beaten down in the war. As time goes on, the reps would have lessened, probably to a white peace. This is literally how it has worked forever. Reps start out higher, get negotiated lower. Except you took them public, and it would have looked bad for SF to cave to public pressure, so they... didn't. Thus, higher terms.

I happen to know the intentions of CSN .gov. You don't. When DT's supporters brought it to the OWF, they forced CSN to dig in and enforce harsh terms to avoid "looking weak." You forced the white peace option off the table. Deal with it.[/quote]

It has already been well established that people who activated treaties were considered "aggressors" in at least one SF member's eyes--MADP, ODP, it didn't matter. I would be curious if that is still the case, a question not directed at you, but at SF.

So the bottom line was your "street cred" was in danger if you didn't do something harsh--how very sad for you and CSN. Actually more like pathetic. SF is lucky you aren't actually a member of one of their alliances anymore.

Oh and I'll "deal with it" just fine. Once again, you're all about blaming others for actions under your control and that were 100% your responsibility, no one else. Not Xiph. Not Valhalla. No one but CSN.

My final question, keeping admonishments in mind to keep it Q&A and less side bar would be the following:

Xiph's part in history is one of someone who does his best work behind the scenes, pressuring allies, leveraging against opponents (both current and potential) and his reputation is of someone who is willing to do this with very few scruples. Now that white hot spotlight of public exposure has been given to this tactics through this thread, does GOD anticipate that their leader will have difficulty doing behind the scenes FA work in the future?

[hizzy]

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1312861965' post='2775490']
How is that common sense? Common sense dictates higher penalties for an aggressor since they did not have to deal with being beaten down in the war. As time goes on, the reps would have lessened, probably to a white peace. This is literally how it has worked forever.[/quote]

you do make a good point there. we never really needed a huge war like Karma to change things around from the good old days where white peace was at the end of every road.

[quote]Reps start out higher, get negotiated lower. Except you took them public, and it would have looked bad for SF to cave to public pressure, so they... didn't. Thus, higher terms.[/quote]

I might not agree with the rationale, but I do believe you when you say that SF (specifically CSN, I suppose) would rather not cave to public pressure. They did put Liz in charge after all. Hey if I get everyone to sign a petition to get CSN to not ZI themselves.... hmm...

[quote]I happen to know the intentions of CSN .gov. You don't. When DT's supporters brought it to the OWF, they forced CSN to dig in and enforce harsh terms to avoid "looking weak." You forced the white peace option off the table. Deal with it.[/quote]

someone from CSN who knows their head from their ass can correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm willing to bet they probably don't want you to sit here telling people to "deal with it". You're literally reinforcing the popularly held belief that the amount of damage you cause an alliance is directly proportional to how much you support them.

[Sniper Joe]

[quote name='hizzy' timestamp='1312870667' post='2775624']someone from CSN who knows their head from their ass can correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm willing to bet they probably don't want you to sit here telling people to "deal with it". You're literally reinforcing the popularly held belief that the amount of damage you cause an alliance is directly proportional to how much you support them.[/quote]

It's Penkala, no one takes him seriously.

[EgoFreaky]

[quote name='Chickenzilla' timestamp='1312850612' post='2775342']
Who is your favorite and least favorite ally of your respective alliances?
[/quote]
meh, i hate playing favorites, at the same time i also dislike saying "we love all our allies equally" cause well, there are always allies that you relate closer to then others, these alliances change over time, sometimes someone does something that is not your own style and relations take a bit of a hit, or they end up on the other side of a war or another helps you out in a way that makes everyone instantly love them so much more. So i can't really give a good answer to this.

I could look at what place most people that resign from R&R go to.. but that changes from time to time and people aren't able to go to just anyone of our allies (FOK being all dutch and all). So i really can only tell you where I would go myself if R&R disbanded today or kicked me out. And that would be FOK, Fark or int depending on who could use me the most.

So yeah thats the answer to a question you didn't really ask, but the closest i can give you to an answer XD

Least favorite ally: Well not so much least favorite but the one we have least contact with at the moment is DMI but thats how it goes with small(er) alliances, few people take a break and contact goes down.


[quote name='Aeros' timestamp='1312856572' post='2775412']
I have a question. Is the reason for this thread because Superfriends believes they have a serious reputation problem and need to try and shore up their moral defenses before they become politically isolated?

Because reading some of what has gone on before my time here makes me think that certain elements in SF do indeed have much to answer for.
[/quote]

Not so much, it was more about getting some things straight and finding out from some what exactly the problem is (some alliances make their grievances clearer then others). But mostly it was just, let's do this and see what it brings.

SF is an old bloc, during it's time it went from a group of alliances banding together hoping to survive, to one of the (if not the) dominant bloc in CN to where it is today. You can't make a journey like that without a few skeletons in your closet. For some thats more then others.

[quote name='Gofastleft' timestamp='1312857287' post='2775420']
SF, I blame you for bringing Crymson out of his hiding place.

You should be ashamed.
[/quote]

Hi there GFL 1.0

[quote name='KainIIIC' timestamp='1312863818' post='2775505']
yes, however. For all of his 'failed' disbandment attempts, he instead has a pointy feather on his hat of quite unnecessarily holding Echelon at war for 3 months, and even being abhorrent enough to get 2 other alliances to offer separate white peace. He also holds as a proud accomplishment of beating UPN down for a month and a half, probably longer than need-be, and holding up a dozen and a half alliances at war until his own egotrip had been satisfied. He ALMOST punished DT with 40,000 tech in reps, but only managed to procure an extractment of 20,000.

It's not exactly a pretty picture any way you paint it, despite your hardest attempts at revisionism.
[/quote]

I don't know about Echelon, before my time so don't know a lot more then that R&R received a wooping 1 tech reps from them handled nicely in a 2.970.000/100 tech techdeal but there are 2 corrections i would like to make to your post.

1. Whatever Xiph's role may or may not have been in the DT situation. Any and all things said done and agreed on there were by CSN and DT. "But xiph bla bla" even then it was CSN's choice to listen or not. I know it's fun to blame Xiph (a lot of fun even ) but let's try to not blame him for dinosaur extinction shall we?

2. You do give UPN to little credit here. I would have loved to get UPN out quickly so we could move to a different front, they did not intend or wish to surrender. When they eventually decided to want out of the war, yes then it took a few more days (not exactly sure how long). But UPN being at war for a month and a half had more to do with them then with GOD as i suspect they will agree. I talked to their gov during the war, we tried to get them to surrender they weren't going anywhere without their allies. That's their accomplishment and not Xiphs crime.

[quote name='Tiber Septim' timestamp='1312865219' post='2775534']
How does SF as a whole feel about forced disbandment? (GOD need not answer)
[/quote]

I never say never, but certainly don't think lightly about it. Oh sure, from time to time someone pisses me off and something is said like: "can't we just disband them" or something like that. But in truth i think it's a last resort which most likely will not be done by R&R before the end of planet bob.

[Alterego]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1312858157' post='2775434']
Phew ... *wipes brow* ... I was worried you were going to continue to incorrectly recount history and rail on about all the things Xiphosis might have accomplished if he actually had power or influence. Bye.
[/quote]

You - what are these alleged misdeeds
RV - Here is a long list of some of his misdeeds
you - Ignore the list


Karma is coming, deal with it.



Question to SF. Do you think letting all your allies burn for one guy and telling people this guy isnt controlling you are contradictions?

Edited August 9, 2011 by Alterego

[EViL0nE]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1312886763' post='2775704']
-snip-
Karma is coming, deal with it.
-snip-
[/quote]

<not gov>
Wait, SF is now so ebil and dominant we get our own Karma war? Is Archon going to come back and write the DoW for us, too?
Will our Karma war be the end of harsh terms and tactics of political isolation and fear?

Edited August 9, 2011 by EViL0nE

[Fulgrim]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1312891481' post='2775746']
<not gov>
Wait, SF is now so ebil and dominant we get our own Karma war? [/quote]

Nope. Although due to the fact that you are widely disliked, you are [i]apparently[/i] next in the sights. Such is the way of CN

[kriekfreak]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1312891481' post='2775746']
<not gov>
Wait, SF is now so ebil and dominant we get our own Karma war? Is Archon going to come back and write the DoW for us, too?
Will our Karma war be the end of harsh terms and tactics of political isolation and fear?
[/quote]

He didn't state you would be getting your own Karma war. You know that 'karma' is a word on it's own right? I think what Alterego wanted to state (correct me if I'm wrong here AE) is that what goes around, comes around.

[chefjoe]

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1312861965' post='2775490']
Go away...
[/quote]

Now that weve settled the fact im right and you are wrong as demonstrated by your complete inability to form a coherent reply, ill do just that

[Alterego]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1312893536' post='2775761']
He didn't state you would be getting your own Karma war. You know that 'karma' is a word on it's own right? I think what Alterego wanted to state (correct me if I'm wrong here AE) is that what goes around, comes around.
[/quote]

Correct, the Karma war coalition was a one off that will never happen again. Its the cycle of cause and effect I was talking about.

[Daimos]

Superfriends without Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman? I believe this is why you are an easy target today.

You never had Superman ever in your bloc...curious. Do you think NPO would have fit the bill? People sometimes call them the "Big Red" you know If not, who do you think would have been a perfect Superman in your bloc?

[EViL0nE]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1312893536' post='2775761']
He didn't state you would be getting your own Karma war. You know that 'karma' is a word on it's own right? I think what Alterego wanted to state (correct me if I'm wrong here AE) is that what goes around, comes around.
[/quote]
I'm well aware of what karma means.
However given the contents of this thread, that is, a few select alliances railing SF gov for all their horrible horrible deeds (read: DT's reps, random unnamed events and pre-karma shenanigans that almost every alliance at the time took part in at some point or another.) and then someone says something about how karma is coming for SF.

As a non-gov member who sees nothing of the backchannel shenanigans, this thread quite clearly demonstrates to me what alliances on Bob want to see SF on the losing side of a war and that either (a) they're so morally centered that the mere existence of an unjust act without proper penance or punishment it hurts their very soul or (b) some people just really like curb stomps and are willing to find any excuse to try and drum up enough support to cause one.

Now, again, as one without access to the smoke-filled back rooms of the world, and watching the same alliances who are in this thread expressing their outrage also express joy at NPO getting beat down a couple months ago for the sake of beating them down or even being a part of that beat down I'm guessing (a) simply isn't on the table.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1312854228' post='2775378']
2008: The RicoValian incident. GOD tech raids an unaligned nation. Nothing wrong in and of that, but when the guy fights back and nukes back (GOD nuked him first, keep that in mind), Xiph has the nation sanctioned and sentenced to PZI. GOD also played a part in the LoFN fiasco, forcing the disbandment of several dozen micros. Most of these nations were sentenced to eternal war on trumped up charges (the logs used against them were later found to be fabricated), many which ultimately disappeared.
[/quote]
You have the essentials here mostly correct, but as one of the people who was directly impacted by this, I have to say there's stuff wrong in this paragraph.

The ruler in question was RicoVacilon, a former member of the VG Coalition who had moved to Black Team after VG left Red. He was raided by GOD and ArGo. He demanded that they pay reps or he was going to nuke them; they refused to pay reps so he nuked and was promptly sanctioned by Sparta. (Yes, years ago, Black still had the same policy it does now - be at war with a well-connected alliance and we will sanction you).

One reason GOD gave for attacking LoFN (an unannounced ODP bloc) was that LoFN awarded RicoVacilon a medal for heroically nuking his raiders. Rico deleted not long afterwards of course.

He did nuke first though.

Learz's thread about RicoVacilon: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=22199

GOD, ArGo, Andromeda DoW with a CB of "It's Walford": http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=23632

Edited August 9, 2011 by Haflinger

[Buds The Man]

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1312861965' post='2775490']
How is that common sense? Common sense dictates higher penalties for an aggressor since they did not have to deal with being beaten down in the war. As time goes on, the reps would have lessened, probably to a white peace. This is literally how it has worked forever. Reps start out higher, get negotiated lower. Except you took them public, and it would have looked bad for SF to cave to public pressure, so they... didn't. Thus, higher terms.

I happen to know the intentions of CSN .gov. You don't. When DT's supporters brought it to the OWF, they forced CSN to dig in and enforce harsh terms to avoid "looking weak." You forced the white peace option off the table. Deal with it.



Go away...
[/quote]
White peace was never going to be an option and if you knew .govs intentions you would know that. Goose was pissed about the ODP entry so NO penkala white peace wasnt going to be an option. Goose felt like DT should pay as he felt the entry of DT was opurtunistic and they should pay for it. stfu and quit trying to look more important than you really are. Oh and yes I was there and yes I do know how things went down. IMO Xiphs role in this is limeted and it was GOOSE who did this and xiph was only a sounding board as any good ally would have been.

I do have a question though.

With the recent decline in both members and popularity, and the fact that SF is redundant as all of you hold high level treaties with each other has it ever come up to possibly dissolve SF in order to shed some of the heat comming your way?

[EgoFreaky]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1312886763' post='2775704']

Question to SF. Do you think letting all your allies burn for one guy and telling people this guy isnt controlling you are contradictions?
[/quote]

Are we? Did someone offer us eternal peace in exchange for the punishment of one guy? If so i probably have missed it.

Just talking for R&R here, we fought countless wars, some against little rogue alliances no one will remember, many part of some bigger global conflict. During Bi-Polar we fought on the side of raiders instead of "moralists" and sides changed because of a pre-emptive strike on none of our allies. We fought NPO during Karma, who all in all did little to provoke R&R itself. I can name many more that we fought for reasons not of our own, often even reasons not even of our allies but reasons of allies of allies or even further up the chain. So do we expect anyone to burn for whatever person? No we expect our allies to honor their treaties or give us a good reason why they can't as have we done... as hundereds of alliances have done throughout dozens of wars over the years. Nothing more, nothing less.

If an ally fight on our side, all praise. If they have a solid reason to not fight on our side, we can understand, for most we are not their only ally so treaties sometimes conflict. But if an ally doesn't want to fight on our side when they suspect they MIGHT end up on the losing side of a war... Well piss on them, you're either our ally or you're not, not just when it's convenient to be so.