Open Invitation from the SuperFriends

[EgoFreaky]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1312895110' post='2775777']
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?
[/quote]

FOK, because we already used to have a batman i believe and Superman is the only other Superfriend that was on dutch TV so leave it up to the dutchies to not know the rest (yes that means that green lantern meant nothing to me until i found out R&R was it )

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1312896272' post='2775786']
*snip*
[/quote]

All so far in the past that i have no comment on the subject itself. Though wanted to say nice post, i always appreciate it if people regardless of opinion (or side of the argument) supply facts and sources.

[quote name='Buds The Man' timestamp='1312898305' post='2775806']
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?
[/quote]

Apart from the fact that i personally believe the hight was somewhat connected to the length of their involvement in the war (so they could probably have been lower), i believe you're right when you say white peace might not have been an obtainable goal. Thanks for reaffirming that Xiph's role in this is way overblown though.

Actually R&R only holds some ancient MDP with GOD, we have no treaties with either RIA or CSN apart from SF itself. Of course that's easily fixed, but may i ask. If 4 alliances all hold MDoAP's together, for improved communication they share a government/coordination channel, and hell maybe even a forum. Would things really change? I mean the only thing i would see possibly change in this scenario is dropping the forum, XX doesn't have a separate forum, does that make it not a bloc? It would become basically a DH kinda discussion, where one side refuses to call it a bloc, and others say if it looks like a bloc and acts like a bloc, it's a bloc.

Edit: please don't take this as me starting that whole DH discussion again, Bloc, 3-way treaty, i really don't care XD

Edited August 9, 2011 by EgoFreaky

[Buds The Man]

[quote name='EgoFreaky' timestamp='1312900200' post='2775842']
FOK, because we already used to have a batman i believe and Superman is the only other Superfriend that was on dutch TV so leave it up to the dutchies to not know the rest (yes that means that green lantern meant nothing to me until i found out R&R was it )



All so far in the past that i have no comment on the subject itself. Though wanted to say nice post, i always appreciate it if people regardless of opinion (or side of the argument) supply facts and sources.



Apart from the fact that i personally believe the hight was somewhat connected to the length of their involvement in the war (so they could probably have been lower), i believe you're right when you say white peace might not have been an obtainable goal. Thanks for reaffirming that Xiph's role in this is way overblown though.

Actually R&R only holds some ancient MDP with GOD, we have no treaties with either RIA or CSN apart from SF itself. Of course that's easily fixed, but may i ask. If 4 alliances all hold MDoAP's together, for improved communication they share a government/coordination channel, and hell maybe even a forum. Would things really change? I mean the only thing i would see possibly change in this scenario is dropping the forum, XX doesn't have a separate forum, does that make it not a bloc? It would become basically a DH kinda discussion, where one side refuses to call it a bloc, and others say if it looks like a bloc and acts like a bloc, it's a bloc.

Edit: please don't take this as me starting that whole DH discussion again, Bloc, 3-way treaty, i really don't care XD
[/quote]
Yes it would still be a defacto bloc with out a doubt just wondering if their were any thoughts to dropping the SF name so to speak due to recent times.

[EgoFreaky]

[quote name='Buds The Man' timestamp='1312901366' post='2775855']
Yes it would still be a defacto bloc with out a doubt just wondering if their were any thoughts to dropping the SF name so to speak due to recent times.
[/quote]

Have you met RIA? They would probably stay in the bloc all alone

But no, it might have been mentioned during a discussion but no serious thought has been put in to that, nor do i think that it would "fool" anyone or thus change anything.

Edited August 9, 2011 by EgoFreaky

[LegendoftheSkies]

[quote name='EgoFreaky' timestamp='1312907407' post='2775918']
Have you met RIA? They would probably stay in the bloc all alone
[/quote]

Or turn it into a non-chaining Optional NAP

[Daimos]

If SF were to be attacked by hostile forces what kind of CB do you think they will use against you?

[Sarmatian Empire]

[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]

CSN told DT that the reps were staying 40,000 tech if it last one week, or another month, it didnt matter.

Their intentions were to "hurt an alliance that will oppose us in the future"

Dont act like you were there, you werent.

[Dracule Mihawk]

[quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1312653167' post='2773581']
To all member-alliances of SF:
In the war mentioned above, BLEU (Hyperion specifically, an alliance protected by a BLEU alliance) was attacked by both GGA and Valhalla originally. Valhalla was a member of continuum then, and GGA was a member of the 1vision bloc. BLEU could have hypothetically won that war if they only counter declared on GGA and taken out 1vision.

Do you feel as though you can employ a strategy in this seemingly inevitable war to only go to war with MJ alliances instead of MJ/PB/DR alliances?
[/quote]

Replying along the same lines as Drai, though I'm not in SF either: Hyperion was protected by GR at the time, and we weren't BLEU then IIRC. That's moot, though, considering our engagement would have brought in NpO eventually (as indeed it did). I was coming in as the new Archon of GR when the war started and we certainly weren't going to defend against only half of the threat to our protectorate (and, considering the odds at the time, it didn't make much difference strategically). By the time NpO and the rest of BLEU engaged, they didn't have much choice but to fight both 1vision and Continuum.

-Drac

[Johnny Apocalypse]

Xiphosis: So lately I keep hearing about some kind of secret PB/MK meeting. Now I this find fascinating considering I wasn't there and neither were any other Umb gov officials. After a bit of poking around I found that you were the source of this rumour. So my question is: how did you obtain information about said meeting and who exactly attended?

[Goldie]

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1312774356' post='2774618']
Please answer the following questions about each of the alliances listed below:

VE
Umb
GOONS
FOK
NG
NV
Argent
TOP
MK
NoR

The questions:

What do you think of each of those alliances' governments? About their membership?
What do you think each of those alliances' governments think about you? Their members thoughts?

I would like to see answers representative of each of the four alliances in here. Thank you.
[/quote]

Thank you in advance for your time and answers GOD, RIA, and CSN.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Buds The Man' timestamp='1312898305' post='2775806']
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?
[/quote]

Honestly, it won't shed some of the heat; as you said, we are still a de facto bloc and the bulk of SF!'s animosity is extended toward CSN and GOD, so the means do not change the end.

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1312911106' post='2775955']
If SF were to be attacked by hostile forces what kind of CB do you think they will use against you?
[/quote]

Who knows, probably something about spying or something... we haven't had a real creative CB in a long while now.

[Aeros]

I've always thought "we don't like you" makes as good a CB as any other that has been thrown around lately.

[Vol Navy]

With the open hostility for the Polar upgrade, the NG gov spying issue and now Ardus, Prince of MK confirming that he is trying to undermine XX, do you think XX should just go ahead and get the war started before MK diplomatic corps further isolates them?

[mattski133]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1312856940' post='2775416']
[color="#0000FF"][i]Stuff about this guy Xiphosis[/i]

But since he has been considered such a small fish he was left alone because other more important alliances (TOP, Polar, NPO) had to be dealt with first. Now Xiph's time has come.

[i]Other stuff about being superior or something.[/i][/color]
[/quote]

TOP, Polar, NPO; probably could not have been dealt with without the presence of Superfriends alongside their allies. To the point of pushing away ROK, if my understanding is correct. Which leads to-

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1312868395' post='2775606']
And by MK/CnG/VE/PB/XX members too. They propped up and supported everything Xiph has done post Karma through their treaty ties.
[/quote]

Truth there. This power cluster has found its success by operating in unison. There is a lot of finger pointing going around but I don't recall anyone calling for the Superfriend's head when they were needed to win wars. It seems like a couple eccentric people are being persecuted because they make the easiest target in a lineup of many offenders.

[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]

Then we've all got something coming some day.

To Superfriends: Now that you can see who your supporters and detractors are, who and what are causing this conflict, do you intend to change anything or pull the hatch down on the shelter as the storm rolls in?

[hizzy]

[quote name='mattski133' timestamp='1312920936' post='2776088']
Truth there. This power cluster has found its success by operating in unison. There is a lot of finger pointing going around but I don't recall anyone calling for the Superfriend's head when they were needed to win wars. It seems like a couple eccentric people are being persecuted because they make the easiest target in a lineup of many offenders.
[/quote]

People may not have called for their heads at the time, but they sure as hell didn't support or even like SF. That much is obvious if you read the Polaris QnA that MK made public... in that same thread they discussed how big of a !@#$head GOD was, but they recognized that they (SF) would be useful in trying to topple a bigger !@#$head: TOP, which is why they begged NpO not to hit \m/. At no point does anyone say "hey GOD are an awesome bunch!"... they were simply needed from a tactical perspective to take down TOP and it makes sense.

[MaGneT]

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1312861965' post='2775490']
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]
You do realize that this is the same stupid argument that alliances used to use to justify a PZI on a raid target that didn't know about any backchannels and would come out in the OWF and say "why are these guys attacking me?"

There was an issue that was being widely discussed without much knowledge to the details. We at DT sought to clarify that discussion. CsN looked weak (and continues to do so) by not admitting that they were wrong. That is no one's fault but their own.

[Alterego]

[quote name='mattski133' timestamp='1312920936' post='2776088']
Then we've all got something coming some day.
[/quote]

Most alliances dont go into every war with an agenda of trying to get an alliance to disband against their will for their own kicks if they win the war, GOD does. Luckily his allies knew where this would lead them and didnt go for it, but still they repeatedly tried. So no we dont all have something coming because we all dont try to do something that has since the karma war been seen as a serious crime against the wider world.

Edited August 9, 2011 by Alterego

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1312861965' post='2775490']
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]
You can't honestly tell me that CSN looked strong at any point through that whole ordeal can you? Ignorantly charging forward in an attempt to maintain credibility does not mask weakness. It more often highlights it.

[Gibsonator21]

[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]
No. He's an ally and a friend. I'm not one to ditch my allies or friends because people don't like him.

[quote name='Sarmatian Empire' timestamp='1312911450' post='2775957']
CSN told DT that the reps were staying 40,000 tech if it last one week, or another month, it didnt matter.

Their intentions were to "hurt an alliance that will oppose us in the future"

Dont act like you were there, you werent.
[/quote]

Well yeah, had to tell them that. Do you not remember the part where we said (in private), should they accept it, we'll forgive reps after 5k (or 10k?) of it they accept that? If we give them those two options (40k tech vs. fighting for a week) it's an easy choice. But either way, like we've said a bunch, it was handled poorly.

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1312913394' post='2775987']
Thank you in advance for your time and answers GOD, RIA, and CSN.
[/quote]

Well I don't really know most of those alliances personally, but if you insist...

[b]VE[/b] Impero seems cool, and the few times I've been in a channel with you, you've been funny. That's all I really know of you guys, though.
[b]Umb[/b] Most of them seem cool, but they've got a few scrubs.
[b]GOONS[/b] I like a lot of them.
[b]FOK[/b] Don't really know them.
[b]NG[/b] I don't really know them personally, but from the outside perspective I'd fit in with a lot of them so I like them.
[b]NV[/b] I don't know them.
[b]Argent[/b] Only thing I know about them is Janax, and I like him because he speaks his mind.
[b]TOP[/b] I don't like Crymson, but Feanor seems fun. All I "know."
[b]MK[/b] I've never liked anyone here, running back about a year now.
[b]NoR[/b] I don't know anyone there.

I agree with Ego that it's pointless to assume what they think of us.

[quote name='mattski133' timestamp='1312920936' post='2776088']
To Superfriends: Now that you can see who your supporters and detractors are, who and what are causing this conflict, do you intend to change anything or pull the hatch down on the shelter as the storm rolls in?
[/quote]
Of course we'll try and change things, but judging from responses in this topic, no one will have any of that. We're much too stubborn to sit and do nothing.

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1312922118' post='2776101']
You do realize that this is the same stupid argument that alliances used to use to justify a PZI on a raid target that didn't know about any backchannels and would come out in the OWF and say "why are these guys attacking me?"

There was an issue that was being widely discussed without much knowledge to the details. We at DT sought to clarify that discussion. CsN looked weak (and continues to do so) by not admitting that they were wrong. That is no one's fault but their own.
[/quote]

I think we have admitted we were wrong and handled that situation poorly. We just won't apologize for it, at least I won't, because it's just something to keep for the future, a learning experience if you will.

[WarriorConcept]

For CSN:

Why won't you apologize for the DT debacle?

Are you trying to make any amends over it seeing as that lifeline was thrown earlier in the thread?

For the rest of SF:

What do you feel about gib's desire to not apologize for what happened with DT? Do you not think that what they pushed for was wrong and they handled it wrong?

[Crymson]

[quote name='Gibsonator21' timestamp='1312927519' post='2776153']
[b]TOP[/b] I don't like Crymson, but Feanor seems fun. All I "know."
[/quote]

You should note that what you think of myself, feanor or TOP in general is pretty much irrelevant, because nobody in TOP likes CSN. I know you said the above-quoted bit in response to a question, but I figured you'd want to be made aware of this.

Edited August 9, 2011 by Crymson

[NoFish]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1312856940' post='2775416']
[color="#0000FF"]You're an idiot. I was just about to give up on you though, but I've always been one to fight lost causes.

I'll admit, others have done those things, but not nearly as often and not so extreme as GOD. More importantly, however, most of those alliances guilty of such things have either been rolled at least once, or otherwise apologized and made amends for past wrongdoings. Xiphy will not even admit to wrongdoing.

Also, most of those tied to the Continuum were merely enablers, guilty mainly of standing by and doing nothing out of fear. Xiph was a notable exception in that he used NPO's power for his own purposes. He was as criminal as they were, but as he latched onto the winning side of Karma he has been able to continue his power trip without having to face the consequences. While most of the acts seen under the NPO's rule are now reviled, Xiph continues to embrace those acts. I doubt there is any alliance other than GOD that has an ideology centered around forcing disbandment.

But since he has been considered such a small fish he was left alone because other more important alliances (TOP, Polar, NPO) had to be dealt with first. Now Xiph's time has come.

I doubt you will understand any of this, however. So I have no idea why I am wasting my time on the likes of you.[/color]
[/quote]
These past few pages Sally has just been making things up. I wouldn't even be bothering to reply if it didn't seem like people were agreeing with him.

We were using NPO's power for our own purposes? We were one of the few alliances on our side who never signed a treaty with them. The closest thing we did to abusing NPO's power is when we got them to drop Illuminati so we could settle our old score with them. We "latched onto the winning side of Karma"? Clearly. It's not like the Karma War happened when our direct MADP ally was attacked or anything.

Edit: Forgot that R&R didn't sign with NPO, and I'm pretty sure CSN didn't either.

Edited August 10, 2011 by NoFish

[MaGneT]

[quote name='Gibsonator21' timestamp='1312927519' post='2776153']Well yeah, had to tell them that. Do you not remember the part where we said (in private), should they accept it, we'll forgive reps after 5k (or 10k?) of it they accept that? If we give them those two options (40k tech vs. fighting for a week) it's an easy choice. But either way, like we've said a bunch, it was handled poorly.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps if you had competent leadership then you wouldn't have had to outsource your decisions. You might have also had the capacity to analyze your situation with some degree of objectivity, because the fact that your actions were reprehensible alone could not deter you. Then again, senseless bloodlust always seems to take charge over reason...
[QUOTE]I think we have admitted we were wrong and handled that situation poorly. We just won't apologize for it, at least I won't, because it's just something to keep for the future, a learning experience if you will.
[/quote]
Ah, and what have we learned? Don't treat people like crap when they did nothing wrong at all? Don't let Pxychosis run your alliance for you? Try your jolly hardest to grovel for public support when you don't even have the humility to make amends for your wrongdoings?
Truly admirable. Hats off.

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1312927877' post='2776155']
For CSN:
Why won't you apologize for the DT debacle?
Are you trying to make any amends over it seeing as that lifeline was thrown earlier in the thread?
[/quote]
Well, clearly because it was our fault for entering on an optional treaty and then beginning peace discussions when we heard the front was closing off! We still haven't admitted our grave mistake, so why should they apologize for responding justly and in kind!


WC, the answer to your question is swimming deep in a pool full of a delightful mixture of stupidity, pride and paranoia.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1312927877' post='2776155']
For CSN:

Why won't you apologize for the DT debacle?[/quote]

That is, indeed, a fantastic question.

[quote]Are you trying to make any amends over it seeing as that lifeline was thrown earlier in the thread?[/quote]

While it was a nice gesture in the thread, I'll make it clear that that particular lifeline has been available for longer than just this thread (don't know exactly where, but it was mentioned at some point in a thread a long while back). Whether or not the lifeline is a "forgiveness" lifeline is beyond me, but I'd agree that it was a bit of a lifeline.

[quote]What do you feel about gib's desire to not apologize for what happened with DT?[/quote]

Admittedly it is a bit of a pride thing... actually, no, it's totally a pride thing. It's one of those "we stand by our decision(s)" sort of deal (which led us all into that fun situation to begin with); it's a fun cycle I know. I doubt Gibs is saying that he doesn't desire to apologize for what happened with DT. Apologizing for what happened and apologizing to DT are two entirely different things and I do believe DT would agree (one must bear in mind that other stuff did occur outside of that event in particular). Personally, I am split on an actual apology nonetheless, but those are for slightly different roundabout reasons that should be fairly obvious.

[quote]Do you not think that what they pushed for was wrong and they handled it wrong?
[/quote]

I'm pretty sure everyone (CSN included) agrees that it was handled wrong and what was pushed for was wrong.

[MaGneT]

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' timestamp='1312934486' post='2776227']
<snip>
[/quote]
Seriously, every time I read one of your posts I wonder why you're not in DT.

[Vol Navy]

To any in SF, especially CSN.

Do you find it odd that the same people who decry you as evil etc about charging reps have themselves been guilty of charging reps and giving terms that were far more harsh than those you gave DT?