Announcement from those Dark Templar people

[D34th]

[quote name='mmansfield68' timestamp='1316702414' post='2805915']
CIN
GUN
FIST
NADC

Ok, thanks.
[/quote]

CIN 2007
GUN June 18 — July 4, 2008
FIST January 26, 2008 – February 6, 2008
NADC June 18 — June 24, 2008

One more time, as expected, you have nothing to say about Polaris acting like bullies in the past [b]4 years[/b]. And before you ask "Why four years?": Because anything that Polaris did before that I don't care since I wasn't a member and is too much in past for someone care about too. So nice try, but you failed.


[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1316703332' post='2805921']
On top of the list of alliances provided by mmansfield, I will include

the terms given to \m/ during the UjW, the beginning of the UjW (BoTS vs Gen[m]ay), FPI, BiPolar (if you want a more recent attempt), not to mention the many instances where Polaris allowed their allies to bully other alliances.
[/quote]

Everyone is DT has a problem to count how much time has passed? You really want to bring events that happened 5 years ago to the table? That's the best you can do?

But I'm really interested to know what Polaris did in Bi-Polar who can be classified as a bully behavior, please tell me.

Edited September 22, 2011 by D34th

[Beau Vine]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1316703350' post='2805922']
CIN 2007
GUN June 18 — July 4, 2008
FIST January 26, 2008 – February 6, 2008
NADC June 18 — June 24, 2008

One more time, as expected, you have nothing to say about Polaris acting like bullies in the past [b]4 years[/b]. And before you ask "Why four years?": Because anything that Polaris did before that I don't care since I wasn't a member and is too much in past for someone care about too. So nice try, but you failed.
[/quote]

You know, 2007 was four years ago. And 2008 happened [i]after[/i] that, so...

[mmansfield68]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1316703350' post='2805922']
CIN 2007
[b]GUN June 18 — July 4, 2008
FIST January 26, 2008 – February 6, 2008
NADC June 18 — June 24, 2008[/b]

One more time, as expected, you have nothing to say about Polaris acting like bullies in the past [b]4 years[/b]. And before you ask "Why four years?": Because anything that Polaris did before that I don't care since I wasn't a member and is too much in past for someone care about too. So nice try, but you failed.[/quote]
Dear friend, not sure what calander you're using, but at the bare minimum, the high-lighted items [i]were within the last four years.[/i]

[quote]Everyone is DT has a problem to count how much time has passed? You really want to bring events that happened 5 years ago to the table? That's the best you can do? [/quote]
Please see above.

[quote]But I'm really interested to know what Polaris did in Bi-Polar who can be classified as a bully behavior, please tell me.
[/quote]
The Bipolar War, sometimes referred to by several other names, is a global nuclear alliance war which encompasses two major and differentiated sub-conflicts: the NpO-\m/ War and the TOP-C&G War. [b]The first phase of the war, the NpO-\m/ War, began on January 20, 2010 when the New Polar Order declared war on \m/,[/b] while the second phase, the TOP-C&G War, began with a preemptive attack on the Complaints and Grievances Union by the Order of the Paradox on January 28.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1316703350' post='2805922']
CIN 2007
GUN June 18 — July 4, 2008
FIST January 26, 2008 – February 6, 2008
NADC June 18 — June 24, 2008

One more time, as expected, you have nothing to say about Polaris acting like bullies in the past [b]4 years[/b]. And before you ask "Why four years?": Because anything that Polaris did before that I don't care since I wasn't a member and is too much in past for someone care about too. So nice try, but you failed.




Everyone is DT has a problem to count how much time has passed? You really want to bring events that happened 5 years ago to the table? That's the best you can do?

But I'm really interested to know what Polaris did in Bi-Polar who can be classified as a bully behavior, please tell me.
[/quote]


It is 2011... so 2008 was 3 years ago, and 2007 was 4 years ago. So it appears that it is you who has the inability to count properly. I will late it out for you:

2006= 5 years ago
2007= 4 years ago
2008= 3 years ago
2009= 2 years ago
2010= 1 year ago
2011= current year

So now that you understand that everything I and mmansfield have given are all examples that are from no more than 4 years ago you can get off of that no-legged high horse you are sitting on.

As for what you Polaris did in the BPW- simple, you attempted to force (aka bully) \m/ into changing their charter to suit the wants of Polaris. That is textbook bullying and is what kicked off the entire war.

But do tell what DT has done in its entire lifetime that could be considering bullying (other than raiding)? mmansfield and myself came up with several, can you do the same against DT?

Edited September 22, 2011 by Dochartaigh

[Leet Guy]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1316701293' post='2805906']
OMG! Two *whole* days!!!

You didn't mean to do so, but you just undermined the justification for both the reparations amount and this thread. Wow.
[/quote]

Reps have never been simply a means to repair the damage inflicted

While I agree forced topics are dumb, I'm glad FOK was able to reach to a peaceful resolution.

[D34th]

About the years you are right and I'm wrong, my ratiocination was counting one thing( 3,09 years that I'm a Polaris member) and I was for some other reason using 4 years as counting. But my point stands, if you guys can't pointing nothing that we've done in the past [s]4[/s] 3 years I'm not interested, since as I said I wasn't a member and we had 4 different emperors after that.

[quote name='mmansfield68' timestamp='1316703928' post='2805931']
The Bipolar War, sometimes referred to by several other names, is a global nuclear alliance war which encompasses two major and differentiated sub-conflicts: the NpO-\m/ War and the TOP-C&G War. [b]The first phase of the war, the NpO-\m/ War, began on January 20, 2010 when the New Polar Order declared war on \m/,[/b] while the second phase, the TOP-C&G War, began with a preemptive attack on the Complaints and Grievances Union by the Order of the Paradox on January 28.
[/quote]

Since when declare war against an alliance who insulted us and start a global war is bully behavior?


[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1316704080' post='2805934']
As for what you Polaris did in the BPW- simple, you attempted to force (aka bully) \m/ into changing their charter to suit the wants of Polaris. That is textbook bullying and is what kicked off the entire war.

But do tell what DT has done in its entire lifetime that could be considering bullying (other than raiding)? mmansfield and myself came up with several, can you do the same against DT?
[/quote]

First you're lying, we didn't attempt to force \m/ to change their charter and you know that, don't be silly. We just asked them to follow their own charter. (Totally evil and bully behavior!!! )

I don't claimed that DT did any other thing than raiding, but be a raiding alliance is enough to make DT lose any credibility to come here and complain about how FOK was bullying you in this situation.

Edited September 22, 2011 by D34th

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1316702265' post='2805914']
Maybe they thought DT loved getting bent over and paying reps? I mean, I thought we learned that last war.


Also, good on FOK for showing mercy, they didn't need to. Glad to see this concluded.[/quote]

No mercy, just a screw job, just like the business during the last war was a screw job.

Of course if you weren't so politically invested in FOK and CSN (through GOD because of the MADP), you'd admit that. See, I can admit that those DT members should have stopped after 24 hours and therefore a day's worth of reparations and a private apology was probably a good idea "for the good of the order", but you...you are in a position that you must overlook certain "excesses" by your allies or stand a very good chance of getting rolled. The VE I once knew wouldn't have had that problem, because the VE I once knew never allowed itself to be placed in that position.

Enjoy your fleas. You laid with the dogs, you earned them.

[RandomInterrupt]

You guys (DT ex-Polars and D34th) are being silly. Polaris has a long history and yes much of that was spent as one of the most powerful alliances in the game. Polaris has made good decisions and made bad decisions, I'll be the first to admit that. However to state that Polaris is a fan of bullying is pretty absurd considering how much time we spent trying to oppose and remove bullying. Also your examples are lame. CIN was fully justified (and depending on where you sit they were the bullies). GUN wasn't our war, we just helped our ally OcUK. NADC was also fully justified. FIST you could make a claim on, sure. But one or two incidents in 5 years does not undo or invalidate all of the good work we have done.

Still though this argument is pretty silly and I recommend everyone return to the topic as there is nothing to be gained by such a display.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1316705076' post='2805947']
No mercy, just a screw job, just like the business during the last war was a screw job.

Of course if you weren't so politically invested in FOK and CSN (through GOD because of the MADP), you'd admit that. See, I can admit that those DT members should have stopped after 24 hours and therefore a day's worth of reparations and a private apology was probably a good idea "for the good of the order", but you...you are in a position that you must overlook certain "excesses" by your allies or stand a very good chance of getting rolled. The VE I once knew wouldn't have had that problem, because the VE I once knew never allowed itself to be placed in that position.

Enjoy your fleas. You laid with the dogs, you earned them.
[/quote]

You're really reaching there.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1316705071' post='2805946']
First you're lying, we didn't attempt to force \m/ to change their charter and you know that, don't be silly. We just asked them to follow their own charter. (Totally evil and bully behavior!!! )

I don't claimed that DT did any other thing than raiding, but be a raiding alliance is enough to make DT lose any credibility to come here and complain about how FOK was bullying you in this situation.
[/quote]

First off, it was Polar's interpretation of said charter. \m/ apparently had a different interpretation of it. Which means that yes, Polaris did in fact attempt to force \m/ to change their charter to suit the wants (aka interpretation) of Polaris. So no, I am not lying and I was there, for the most part defending Polaris but that does not mean I did not know what ya'll were doing.

Second, so you have nothing else. Thanks that is exactly what I thought you would say.

@Random- I agree, this should not have come up but all those situations (CIN, GUN, NADC, FIST) could easily be defined as bullying. I know the circumstances behind each and fought in all of them, but yes, Polaris can easily be made out to be bullies since from what I remember not much diplomacy was really used in any of those situations other than strong-arm "do it our way or we war you" style. That is not exactly the image of someone who is not a bully.

But, due to our friendship, I will drop this and ignore D34th should he attempt to reply.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1316705076' post='2805947']
but you...you are in a position that you must overlook certain "excesses" by your allies or stand a very good chance of getting rolled.
[/quote]

Sounds vaguely like threatening PB, please tell me more. Odd to be throwing around such phrases when your blocmate had the opportunity to do just that...well, if it were true. Instead, they were forced to eat it. So I dunno man, stands to reason that either you think you're bigger then your britches, that FOK was completely justified, or both. I'm banking on both.

Winter may be coming, but us and ours pay our heating bill so we simply don't give a $%&@. No one is going to give you special treatment because you run around spouting catchphrases.

Edited September 22, 2011 by Il Impero Romano

[Sarmatian Empire]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1316703350' post='2805922']
CIN 2007
GUN June 18 — July 4, 2008
FIST January 26, 2008 – February 6, 2008
NADC June 18 — June 24, 2008

One more time, as expected, you have nothing to say about Polaris acting like bullies in the past [b]4 years[/b]. And before you ask "Why four years?": Because anything that Polaris did before that I don't care since I wasn't a member and is too much in past for someone care about too. So nice try, but you failed.
[/quote]

[img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-truN1kzeeiI/Tj6n-jTmfTI/AAAAAAAAACU/YB02RK_ieHg/s320/jackie-chan-meme.png[/img]

Did you polar too stupid to math?

[mythicknight]

A pox on both your houses!

[Timeline]

Well i find this funny how FOK $%&@s up and blames DT so i made something for FOK

[img]http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/7315/fokul.png[/img]

[D34th]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1316705993' post='2805955']
First off, it was Polar's interpretation of said charter. \m/ apparently had a different interpretation of it. Which means that yes, Polaris did in fact attempt to force \m/ to change their charter to suit the wants (aka interpretation) of Polaris. So no, I am not lying and I was there, for the most part defending Polaris but that does not mean I did not know what ya'll were doing.
[/quote]

No it wasn't, \m/ charter had a clause saying that raid alliances with more than 10 members were forbidden and they ignored it and raided an alliance with 15 members IIRC, said clause had no room to other interpretation. And even if it had, since when act to stop a bullying behavior is a bullying too?

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1316705993' post='2805955']
Second, so you have nothing else. Thanks that is exactly what I thought you would say.
[/quote]

Of course I have nothing else, I really don't know why you are expecting something different since I never claimed otherwise. May be you are just saying that to avoid my the entire point that I raised before this silly argumentation begun: [b]DT has no room to complaim about FOK acting like bullies when DT, as a raiding alliance, act like bullies in every raid that it does. And the fact that you and your allies are complaining because one of your raids went wrong is extremely amusing AND ironic.[/b] KKTXBB

@Sarmatian Empire too late, I already apologized for my wrong math.

[Sarmatian Empire]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1316707032' post='2805968']
No it wasn't, \m/ charter had a clause saying that raid alliances with more than 10 members were forbidden and they ignored it and raided an alliance with 15 members IIRC, said clause had no room to other interpretation. And even if it had, since when act to stop a bullying behavior is a bullying too?



Of course I have nothing else, I really don't know why you are expecting something different since I never claimed otherwise. May be you are just saying that to avoid my the entire point that I raised before this silly argumentation begun: [b]DT has no room to complaim about FOK acting like bullies when DT, as a raiding alliance, act like bullies in every raid that it does. And the fact that you and your allies are complaining because one of your raids went wrong is extremely amusing AND ironic.[/b] KKTXBB

@Sarmatian Empire too late, I already apologized for my wrong math.
[/quote]

I saw, but the chance to use the jackie chan meme was too good to pass up xD

[Leet Guy]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1316705076' post='2805947']
but you...you are in a position that you must overlook certain "excesses" by your allies or stand a very good chance of getting rolled.
[/quote]

Something something throwing stones in glass houses.

[MCRABT]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1316684557' post='2805829']
I think he didn't miss the crux of his argument, it was just a little bit weird to talk about something not happening if another thing would not have happened. I mean if I FOK wouldn't existed, neither would iFOK and we would never have started trouble on Purple and Invicta would still be there. In my eyes it's very simple. Yes FOK messed up with authorizing the raid and the attacks that happened until then were not taken into account. The fact remains that DT continued to raid willingly even after they were instructed to stop attacking. This willingness is the key argument here. Both members that continued the raid were a) active every day, b) were (ex) high gov members. So they did read their message (I'm sure they also were told to stop on their forum or irc to stop attacking), but yet continued to attack. And those nations that choose to ignore the request to seize attacks are now paying the reps. I think that is an absolutely fine arrangement.

[/quote]

I think it's a little weird to talk about the situation as if it was two separate events, it was a line of miscommunication from the get go that resulted in one end product.

I agree entirely with the arrangement you've suggested, it's completely appropriate regardless of whether or not their was some sort of miscommunication on DT's part, what we have here however is an apology that far from bringing closure to the issue seems to have dragged it out. I've never seen much sense in requiring a public apology, it's not like they are ever heart felt, in fact far from bringing reconciliation I find they just tend to leave a sour taste in the mouths of those involved. All we have achieved here is airing both sides laundry in public and it's clear that both sides have stains from where they had an accident. For that reason I'll take my leave


[quote name='Timeline' timestamp='1316706691' post='2805965']
Well i find this funny how FOK $%&@s up and blames DT so i made something for FOK

[img]http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/7315/fokul.png[/img]
[/quote]

I try so hard to ignore your posts but they are getting progressively more idiotic.

Edited September 22, 2011 by MCRABT

[Wu Tang Clan]

[quote name='MCRABT' timestamp='1316708727' post='2805983']
I think it's a little weird to talk about the situation as if it was two separate events, it was a line of miscommunication from the get go that resulted in one end product.

I agree entirely with the arrangement you've suggested, it's completely appropriate regardless of whether or not their was some sort of miscommunication on DT's part, what we have here however is an apology that far from bringing closure to the issue seems to have dragged it out. I've never seen much sense in requiring a public apology, it's not like they are ever heart felt, in fact far from bringing reconciliation I find they just tend to leave a sour taste in the mouths of those involved. All we have achieved here is airing both sides laundry in public and it's clear that both sides have stains from where they had an accident. For that reason I'll take my leave




I try so hard to ignore your posts but they are getting progressively more idiotic.
[/quote]

I said I was done, and I avoided this thread for a while. But I'd just like to note how much more I respect you every time you post. Seriously, mad love.

[Supa_Troop3r]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1316707032' post='2805968']
No it wasn't, \m/ charter had a clause saying that raid alliances with more than 10 members were forbidden and they ignored it and raided an alliance with 15 members IIRC, said clause had no room to other interpretation. And even if it had, since when act to stop a bullying behavior is a bullying too?



Of course I have nothing else, I really don't know why you are expecting something different since I never claimed otherwise. May be you are just saying that to avoid my the entire point that I raised before this silly argumentation begun: [b]DT has no room to complaim about FOK acting like bullies when DT, as a raiding alliance, act like bullies in every raid that it does. And the fact that you and your allies are complaining because one of your raids went wrong is extremely amusing AND ironic.[/b] KKTXBB

@Sarmatian Empire too late, I already apologized for my wrong math.
[/quote]


You are over generalizing the term raiding and or raiding alliance. You have no clue why we raid or how we handle our selves in a raid, so to say we DT act like every other alliance that raids is misinformed. Because if you knew DT we have throughout our history allowed and banned raiding at times, offered protection after the raid and even signed treaties with the alliances we've raided. So Casper, before you start ranting on again about people being bullies and their right to complain know who you are talking about.
Also two wrongs make a right?

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1316705828' post='2805954']
You're really reaching there.[/quote]

No, I'm not sadly. Anyone who knows my opinions of VE knows that at one time I held them in very high regard. My respect for them has diminished over time, though they do have moment that give me hope.

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1316706163' post='2805956']
Sounds vaguely like threatening PB, please tell me more. Odd to be throwing around such phrases when your blocmate had the opportunity to do just that...well, if it were true. Instead, they were forced to eat it. So I dunno man, stands to reason that either you think you're bigger then your britches, that FOK was completely justified, or both. I'm banking on both.[/quote]

I let other people hand out free CBs. You want one from me, you're going to have to come get it yourself and I already know you aren't going to do that.

In case you weren't reading what I wrote, I admitted that what those DT members did was a party foul and that some money should have changed hands for it. What separates us is that I'm in the "it was really no big deal why do you have to be that way, FOK?" camp and you are in that special camp that wants to make this an extra special episode of "Dawson's Creek"...

[quote]Winter may be coming, but us and ours pay our heating bill so we simply don't give a $%&@. No one is going to give you special treatment because you run around spouting catchphrases.[/quote]

Aw, now there's some fire. Good. War doesn't scare me, I enjoy it. The only special treatment I want is to get to enjoy a good fight, be there at update to do it, and hopefully walk away at the end without someone wearing Preparation H. Maybe that's against VE, maybe it's against someone else. I let other people figure out who I am supposed to shoot.

[Ardus]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1316705076' post='2805947']
but you...you are in a position that you must overlook certain "excesses" by your allies or stand a very good chance of getting rolled.[/quote]

As to both this immediate incident and future projections, your calculations could not be more inaccurate. It's advisable to stop pressing on this matter.

Mistakes were made. They were repaid. Move on.

[Supa_Troop3r]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1316710412' post='2805997']

Mistakes were made. They were repaid. Move on.
[/quote]


People keep missing that..

[Wu Tang Clan]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1316710412' post='2805997']
Mistakes were made. They were repaid. Move on.
[/quote]

Brain cells... the OWF has little.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1316708012' post='2805975']
Something something throwing stones in glass houses.
[/quote]

Hey man, seeing as you made the golem, not very nice to criticize its living arrangements.

Also, I tried to think of a funny title for my post but for some reason I'm drawing a blank.

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1316710371' post='2805996']
You want one from me, you're going to have to come get it yourself and[i] I already know you aren't going to do that[/i]. [/quote]

Depends, really. But yea, likewise on the italics.

[quote]
"it was really no big deal why do you have to be that way, FOK?" camp and you are in that special camp that wants to make this an extra special episode of "Dawson's Creek"...[/quote]

So "but you...you are in a position that you must overlook certain "excesses" by your allies or stand a very good chance of getting rolled" means "it's really no big deal"? Interesting, I'm not so sure I believe you though. Sounds more like you did exactly what I said, was acting bigger then your britches, and now wish you could go back and throw in an edit.

Edited September 22, 2011 by Il Impero Romano