Derwood1 Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1326829587' post='2901601'] I have learned a few things: FARK is nuts. Not the fun kind of nuts, but nuts like... lets watch the white noise snow on the tv because there is a message inside. There is an instability plain and simple. For all their talk of being straight forward, wanting peace or similar, they are simply full of !@#$. [/quote] Brehon I could have told you this, almost every time I talked to Fark leadership I came away thinking what !@#$@#$ short bus did they just come off of..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brehon Posted January 18, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 And before tomorrow comes and goes without changes, due to a RL need of one of the parties, the deadline is moved to Thursday for meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GulagArchipelago Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='Timberland' timestamp='1326843850' post='2901791'] I don't agree with disbandment but reps should be put in to place. [/quote] Perhaps I should clarify. I don't mean forced disbandment, rather voluntary disbandment. There have been rumors of VietFAN2.0/VietFARK, although once the WC's exhaust themselves, people will either delete or refuse to pay the exorbitant amount of reps and disband. Since both AA's refuse to accept peace, I can only assume there are no plans of rebuilding in the near future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) So, we've got Doitzel and Schattenman, two people who prioritize the attainment of attention above all else, bleating about this affair... and some of you are actually allowing them to get you riled up? Nobody cares what those two think. Leave them to wither. [quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1326833804' post='2901650'] That FARK is still trying to spin this as them defending a treaty partner in the 11th hour is absolutely laughable. [/quote] Absolutely. That said, it doesn't approach the stupidity of Polar's arguments to us as to why they "deserve" white peace in this war. Edited January 18, 2012 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) If they don't want to surrender, keep on blowing the $%&@ers up. It's fairly straightforward matter I woulda thought? Edited January 18, 2012 by Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Doomee Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 Brehon, Brehon, Brehon, while as a spin doctor you don't hold a candle to Philosopher, I give you kudos. Nobody will read all that shiat and your monologs are outstanding. Bottom line is you are basing everything on a single word "acceptance". You know in damned well in your heart that we and FARK WERE going to sign off on YOUR terms. I have in my possession both the gun porn and the statement you requested and if anyone thinks for even a mili-second we would have spent the time we did on all that for no good reasons they are nothing short of fools. The only question I have which will never be answered was whether all your negotiations were just an NPO sponsored sham or if you did negotiate in earnest only to have your leader make you look the fool and believe me, after all those negotiations, to come back to us and say oops, Mary said I misunderstood her sorry I wasted your time. WOW! Thanks for posting all the walls of text so I didn't have to. Sadly, I have to say I was right all along. NPO has not changed a bit. Same egotistical arrogance with a few new names. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MitchellBade Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) [quote][20:41] <Jack_Tarr[FAN]> If this is NPO's final decision, then they prove me right for the last time. FAN will fight as long as Mary is in power. We will continue to trash your lowest ranks until nobody wants to join NPO out of fear of being mauled by a group of angry gnats.[/quote] I'm game. Hit me up when you get down to my level. Better yet, I'll find you Edited January 18, 2012 by MitchellBade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheeKy Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote]You know in damned well in your heart that we and FARK WERE going to sign off on YOUR terms.[/quote] I hope you aren't talking about the first terms proposed. What I don't understand is the following: According to those logs Fark pretty much "agreed" to the initial terms offered(they thought the terms were lenient and acceptable), however as soon as FAN got involved they decided to change their views entirely and the terms weren't as acceptable anymore. Later on in the logs, Brehon asks FAN a question, redirects the answer to Fark and Fark decides to start bickering about the word "surrender" as well. Honestly, as far as I can tell, Fark is just trying to make NPO look like a fool. I don't even understand why Brehon decided to move the deadline towards Thursday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Doomee Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='MitchellBade' timestamp='1326854694' post='2901907'] I'm game. Hit me up when you get down to my level. Better yet, I'll find you [/quote] I'm ZI, look me up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MitchellBade Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1326855633' post='2901924'] I'm ZI, look me up. [/quote] ZI and +2k tech, sorry but you gotta go a bit lower. Some of us have actually been fighting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Doomee Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='CheeKy' timestamp='1326854867' post='2901910'] I hope you aren't talking about the first terms proposed. What I don't understand is the following: According to those logs Fark pretty much "agreed" to the initial terms offered(they thought the terms were lenient and acceptable), however as soon as FAN got involved they decided to change their views entirely and the terms weren't as acceptable anymore. Later on in the logs, Brehon asks FAN a question, redirects the answer to Fark and Fark decides to start bickering about the word "surrender" as well. Honestly, as far as I can tell, Fark is just trying to make NPO look like a fool. I don't even understand why Brehon decided to move the deadline towards Thursday. [/quote] I am talking about Brehon's terms. Not NPO's. Not that that post has anything to do with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Doomee Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='MitchellBade' timestamp='1326855727' post='2901925'] ZI and +2k tech, sorry but you gotta go a bit lower. Some of us have actually been fighting. [/quote] I'm working on it tough guy. Climb aboard and help me out. Who are you btw? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MitchellBade Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1326855926' post='2901928'] I'm working on it tough guy. Climb aboard and help me out. Who are you btw? [/quote] I am me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 It's amazing that all of this arguing and negotiating is over mere semantics in the peace terms. FAN and FARK should be grateful that they don't have to deal with any reps or other material repercussions and call it a day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Doomee Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 But all the arguing is being done by people not involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1326839774' post='2901742'] I really do enjoy the continued spin, trying to make NPO look evil for the incredibly easy peace offered, even if one marginally easier deal did fall through. Clearly people are trying to set NPO up for Karma... 4.0 would it be? [/quote] And which people would that be? The only people who have set NPO up for Karma re-runs are now happy owners of a brand new Pacifican treaty web link. [quote name='Charles Stuart' timestamp='1326842393' post='2901774'] To these who claim NPO haven't changed...can you even imagine a topic of this sort being created by NPO's leadership during NPO's heyday? [/quote] Also brilliant. The only people who have spent the past two years whining about the tricky not-changed NPO are allied to them now. Edited January 18, 2012 by Schattenmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanB Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 bring on the crushing reps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1326857343' post='2901944'] But all the arguing is being done by people not involved. [/quote] This is how this works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 In defense of Brehon, the only people at fault in this situation are those who expected him to perform his part of the negotiations competently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrin Xies Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='CheeKy' timestamp='1326854867' post='2901910'] <snip>I don't even understand why Brehon decided to move the deadline towards Thursday. [/quote] There was an [ooc]RL[/ooc] thing that came up with one of the parties, and we pushed it back to Thursday when we were politely asked to. I would hope this is yet another example of how reasonable we're trying to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 I am utterly unsurprised that negotiating with Fark has been a headache. I recall them being one of the most annoying alliances to communicate with during the TOP-C&G conflict (one of the Fark reps tried, but the other two were complete tools). I generally like FAN, and I understand their pride, but you guys are getting pretty lenient terms. You've lost the war. You guys have nothing to prove, so I'm not sure what the big deal is. @Brehon: You apologise too much. Owning up to mistakes is great, but the fact that you made a mistake doesn't mean you shouldn't tighten things up in negotiations if Fark and FAN won't play ball. Hopefully that's what the Thursday ultimatum refers to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Doomee Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 I am the party with the RL issue and while I did not ask to have the meeting moved I do appreciate it being moved. I really didn't want to miss it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Doomee Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Style #386' timestamp='1326859772' post='2901969'] I am utterly unsurprised that negotiating with Fark has been a headache. I recall them being one of the most annoying alliances to communicate with during the TOP-C&G conflict (one of the Fark reps tried, but the other two were complete tools). I generally like FAN, and I understand their pride, but you guys are getting pretty lenient terms. You've lost the war. You guys have nothing to prove, so I'm not sure what the big deal is. @Brehon: You apologise too much. Owning up to mistakes is great, but the fact that you made a mistake doesn't mean you shouldn't tighten things up in negotiations if Fark and FAN won't play ball. Hopefully that's what the Thursday ultimatum refers to. [/quote] [img]http://fangamers.net/images/smilies/wallbash.gif[/img] Why can't you people understand? Why is it so hard? I am really hurt that we were not included as being a headache. That was very unkind of you. As for nothing to prove, we had nothing to prove when we started it so why would we have anything to prove now. Oh and I regret having been lax posting gun porn so here: [img]http://fangamers.net/imagehosting/854a8095a7eef17.jpg[/img] Edited January 18, 2012 by Princess Doomee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schmoo Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 FARK started this crap in Karma. Peace with IRON was held up over beer reviews and NSO peace was stalled because FARK insisted on an admission of defeat and a review. Now they are on the losing side and pulling the same !@#$. NPO should require a complete and total admission of defeat and a no re-entry. Put it on the table and burn them until they comply. FARK above all should never be allowed peace without an admission of defeat. They want to continue to act like kids, make them pay with more damage. FAN, you guys got your revenge already, give up. FARK, you tried and failed, better luck next time. You are both very much defeated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 [quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1326860126' post='2901975'] I am really hurt that we were not included as being a headache. That was very unkind of you. [/quote] My dealings with you guys have always been pleasant. [quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1326860126' post='2901975'] As for nothing to prove, we had nothing to prove when we started it so why would we have anything to prove now. [/quote] That's what I'm saying. By sticking around, it looks like you do. We all know that you're a tough alliance and that you'll fight a guerilla war for two years if you have to. But unlike the last time, in two years I don't think the public is going to decry the NPO for keeping you guys at war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.