Worst Leader Ever 2012

[Lewin]

[i]Lewin shook his head. He did not think it was necessary or funny to have threads like this.[/i]

Ah CN. Maybe you would attract more players (or returning players) if you had a nicer community.

[Ryuzaki]

[quote name='Lewin' timestamp='1328737354' post='2916867']
[i]Lewin shook his head. He did not think it was necessary or funny to have threads like this.[/i]

Ah CN. Maybe you would attract more players (or returning players) if you had a nicer community.
[/quote]

Or maybe all the old players would leave because being nice is boring as hell.

[Incitatus]

[quote name='Ryuzaki' timestamp='1328739572' post='2916890']
Or maybe all the old players would leave because being nice is boring as hell.
[/quote]

This is true. Endless congratulating and hailing of threads gets boring quick, it's hard to dispute that.

[jerdge]

[quote name='Ryuzaki' timestamp='1328739572' post='2916890']Or maybe all the old players would leave because being nice is boring as hell.[/quote]
You are saying that people like being treated like crap because otherwise they'd feel "bored", and you're implicitly making the (totally illogical) claim that players able to be nice with one another can't fight, insult, scheme and overthrow one another in the game [i]only[/i].
You're confusing players with characters and you are ignoring that fair play is entirely possible (and desirable, in fact).

I don't get why you think that we need to be mean and unfair for the game to be "entertaining", I doubt you'd say that players not ready to shoot down other players [i]for real[/i] can't enjoy doing it in a FPS game. Please stop being that silly.

[Banksy]

Nominations are closed. Seeding (and brackets) will be up asap (RL and Ryuzaki's Excel skills providing).

[quote name='Lewin' timestamp='1328737354' post='2916867']
[i]Lewin shook his head. He did not think it was necessary or funny to have threads like this.[/i]

Ah CN. Maybe you would attract more players (or returning players) if you had a nicer community.
[/quote]
hmmm doesn't this posting look familiar.

[Omniscient1]

Jerdge, I'll probably make the Worst Leader Ever field and I'm pretty interested in what people think of me compared to others. Just because you're labeled as a bad leader now, doesn't even mean you as a player/person are a bad leader. It's just a recap of the decisions you've made. In different circumstances, you could appear to be a great leader.

I agree it would be nice to see MK do a "best of" one time. I don't think this competitions are necessarily malicious though.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Omniscient1

[IYIyTh]

lol, Omni. You have to consider the crowd too. While it's usually objective sometimes objectivity isn't enough when you have a group of individuals who haven't ever participated in any (meaningful,) leadership capacity.

Johnny Apocalypse might be revered by some in his alliance for following through on a more consolidated direction in his term while employing rational balances of his alliances interest and allying nearly half of the entire game, while some outside might see him as a spineless puppet who occasionally payed lip service to those in his bloc while refusing to take a leading role with the best military machine in the game. This generally allowed for and assisted in its allies destruction, in some instances going out of his way to actually assist in helping them do so while stating the "mightiest," military in the game had its hands tied. Or generally being more concerned less with doing what was right and more what its other allies might think of not supporting its generally boneheaded, hostile actions with long-term future implications, positioning itself to be able to change whom it believes its friends are at a whim etc...Hoping that a growing number of force will offset its future threat to itself with numbers and the thought that they could never become the target of "friends," who if the opportunity was given likely wouldn't mind if they were taken down a peg or two.

But we wouldn't want these sort of conversations to happen.

Edited February 9, 2012 by IYIyTh

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1328748275' post='2916982']
lol, Omni. You have to consider the crowd too. While it's usually objective sometimes objectivity isn't enough when you have a group of individuals who haven't ever participated in any (meaningful,) leadership capacity.

Johnny Apocalypse might be revered by some in his alliance for following through on a more consolidated direction in his term while employing rational balances of his alliances interest and allying nearly half of the entire game, while some outside might see him as a spineless puppet who occasionally payed lip service to those in his bloc while refusing to take a leading role with the best military machine in the game. This generally allowed for and assisted in its allies destruction, in some instances going out of his way to actually assist in helping them do so while stating the "mightiest," military in the game had its hands tied. Or generally being more concerned less with doing what was right and more what its other allies might think of not supporting its generally boneheaded, hostile actions with long-term future implications, positioning itself to be able to change whom it believes its friends are at a whim etc...Hoping that a growing number of force will offset its future threat to itself with numbers and the thought that they could never become the target.

But we wouldn't want these sort of conversations to happen.
[/quote]

Instead of saying that is what 'some outside might see him as', why don't you say 'this is the asinine !@#$%^&* that I believe'?

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1328749074' post='2916986']
Instead of saying that is what 'some outside might see him as', why don't you say 'this is the asinine !@#$%^&* that I believe'?
[/quote]


Yeah, it's a good thing I have a history of being wrong about Umbrella.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1328748275' post='2916982']
lol, Omni. You have to consider the crowd too. While it's usually objective sometimes objectivity isn't enough when you have a group of individuals who haven't ever participated in any (meaningful,) leadership capacity.

Johnny Apocalypse might be revered by some in his alliance for following through on a more consolidated direction in his term while employing rational balances of his alliances interest and allying nearly half of the entire game, while some outside might see him as a spineless puppet who occasionally payed lip service to those in his bloc while refusing to take a leading role with the best military machine in the game. This generally allowed for and assisted in its allies destruction, in some instances going out of his way to actually assist in helping them do so while stating the "mightiest," military in the game had its hands tied. Or generally being more concerned less with doing what was right and more what its other allies might think of not supporting its generally boneheaded, hostile actions with long-term future implications, positioning itself to be able to change whom it believes its friends are at a whim etc...Hoping that a growing number of force will offset its future threat to itself with numbers and the thought that they could never become the target of "friends," who if the opportunity was given likely wouldn't mind if they were taken down a peg or two.

But we wouldn't want these sort of conversations to happen.
[/quote]
We've all known ever since Umbrella joined Doom House the rest of their allies would be set aside if needed, so not a big surprise what happened with Sparta. Does JA really deserve to be singled out for causing Umbrella to continue down the FA path Umbrella was already going down? I don't know, but I doubt whoever wins this will really deserve the title and this will mostly reflect who's been a horrible leader when considering things from the average MK members viewpoint, which probably mostly see JA as a great leader for allowing Umbrella to be controlled by MK.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Methrage

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1328748275' post='2916982']
lol, Omni. You have to consider the crowd too. While it's usually objective sometimes objectivity isn't enough when you have a group of individuals who haven't ever participated in any (meaningful,) leadership capacity.

Johnny Apocalypse might be revered by some in his alliance for following through on a more consolidated direction in his term while employing rational balances of his alliances interest and allying nearly half of the entire game, while some outside might see him as a spineless puppet who occasionally payed lip service to those in his bloc while refusing to take a leading role with the best military machine in the game. This generally allowed for and assisted in its allies destruction, in some instances going out of his way to actually assist in helping them do so while stating the "mightiest," military in the game had its hands tied. Or generally being more concerned less with doing what was right and more what its other allies might think of not supporting its generally boneheaded, hostile actions with long-term future implications, positioning itself to be able to change whom it believes its friends are at a whim etc...Hoping that a growing number of force will offset its future threat to itself with numbers and the thought that they could never become the target of "friends," who if the opportunity was given likely wouldn't mind if they were taken down a peg or two.

But we wouldn't want these sort of conversations to happen.
[/quote]

You do know they have a thread to discuss these things right?

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1328748275' post='2916982']
lol, Omni. You have to consider the crowd too. While it's usually objective sometimes objectivity isn't enough when you have a group of individuals who haven't ever participated in any (meaningful,) leadership capacity.

Johnny Apocalypse might be revered by some in his alliance for following through on a more consolidated direction in his term while employing rational balances of his alliances interest and allying nearly half of the entire game, while some outside might see him as a spineless puppet who occasionally payed lip service to those in his bloc while refusing to take a leading role with the best military machine in the game. This generally allowed for and assisted in its allies destruction, in some instances going out of his way to actually assist in helping them do so while stating the "mightiest," military in the game had its hands tied. Or generally being more concerned less with doing what was right and more what its other allies might think of not supporting its generally boneheaded, hostile actions with long-term future implications, positioning itself to be able to change whom it believes its friends are at a whim etc...Hoping that a growing number of force will offset its future threat to itself with numbers and the thought that they could never become the target of "friends," who if the opportunity was given likely wouldn't mind if they were taken down a peg or two.

But we wouldn't want these sort of conversations to happen.
[/quote]

I signed the treaties we have with IRON and Deinos, all the rest of our treaties were signed by those before me so I hardly allied half of the game and the reason I didn't want to cancel any of those treaties to make life easier for specific coalitions was because I actually like our allies. I downgraded our treaty with MHA because you were behaving like a total piece of crap and keeping everyone beneath you in the dark about just about anything that happened. You shared private logs of our conversations with your XX allies without my consent, you started spreading lies and bs about our intentions anonymously(or so you thought) so it was evident that I couldn't trust you as far as I could throw you. I wouldn't expect you to be able to work with me had I done the same to you.

I didn't act in the best interest of my allies, correct. I acted in the best interests of Umbrella. I had allies on one side attempting to drag me into the inevitable curbstomp that awaited them because their friends of friends had a beating coming which I don't really fault them for doing but don't expect us to be down with the idea of throwing ourselves under a bus for people like Polar. And then we had allies on another side attempting to goad us into fighting the big targets on behalf of alliances who couldn't give a damn about us beyond wanting our strength. I'm aware this probably wasn't the best policy to follow if I wanted to make lots of friends but to hell with that. Way I saw it was this was a war which tore the very fabric of the FA policy crafted by those before me and neither side ever really gave a damn about us so why should I have done the same for them.

I may be a selfish piece of !@#$ who with a bit of experience could've handled a lot of things better than I did(it's why I decided to step down earlier this year, I actually acknowledged I wasn't doing the job well enough for Umbrella) but you're a bitter failure of a leader who's all mad because I caught you red-handed trying to dick me and mine around.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Johnny Apocalypse

[Schattenmann]

Ochocinco for Umbrella Viceroy?

[Incitatus]

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1328745867' post='2916951']
You are saying that people like being treated like crap because otherwise they'd feel "bored", and you're implicitly making the (totally illogical) claim that players able to be nice with one another can't fight, insult, scheme and overthrow one another in the game [i]only[/i].
[/quote]

People need to be less personally attached to their characters - then maybe their feelings wouldn't get hurt, and it would provide for a more fun environment all around. We should keep in mind that this is a RP-based game.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Incitatus

[jerdge]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1328747499' post='2916973']Jerdge, I'll probably make the Worst Leader Ever field and I'm pretty interested in what people think of me compared to others. Just because you're labeled as a bad leader now, doesn't even mean you as a player/person are a bad leader. It's just a recap of the decisions you've made. In different circumstances, you could appear to be a great leader.

I agree it would be nice to see MK do a "best of" one time. I don't think this competitions are necessarily malicious though.[/quote]
I don't doubt that it [i]could[/i] be fun. Anyway my point was much simpler.
Ryuzaki was saying that nice players make for boring games, I was addressing just that mind-numbing statement, not really talking of this "competition" any more (I had already expressed my view and there's no reason to repeat it over and over).


[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1328750543' post='2917003']Way I saw it was this was a war which tore the very fabric of the FA policy crafted by those before me and neither side ever really gave a damn about us so why should I have done the same for them.[/quote]
That had to be a tough spot. Thanks for sharing your comments about that, I for one find them very interesting.
Although I am certainly not very much privy to anything, I think that Umbrella made the most out of a very ugly situation, and in the end most would have probably performed much worse than you. I think that you did a good job.

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1328751947' post='2917028']
I don't doubt that it [i]could[/i] be fun. Anyway my point was much simpler.
Ryuzaki was saying that nice players make for boring games, I was addressing just that mind-numbing statement, not really talking of this "competition" any more (I had already expressed my view and there's no reason to repeat it over and over).
[/quote]

Ok I got you.

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1328750543' post='2917003']
I signed the treaties we have with IRON and Deinos, all the rest of our treaties were signed by those before me so I hardly allied half of the game and the reason I didn't want to cancel any of those treaties to make life easier for specific coalitions was because I actually like our allies. I downgraded our treaty with MHA because you were behaving like a total piece of crap and keeping everyone beneath you in the dark about just about anything that happened. You shared private logs of our conversations with your XX allies without my consent, you started spreading lies and bs about our intentions anonymously(or so you thought) so it was evident that I couldn't trust you as far as I could throw you. I wouldn't expect you to be able to work with me had I done the same to you.

I didn't act in the best interest of my allies, correct. I acted in the best interests of Umbrella. I had allies on one side attempting to drag me into the inevitable curbstomp that awaited them because their friends of friends had a beating coming which I don't really fault them for doing but don't expect us to be down with the idea of throwing ourselves under a bus for people like Polar. And then we had allies on another side attempting to goad us into fighting the big targets on behalf of alliances who couldn't give a damn about us beyond wanting our strength. I'm aware this probably wasn't the best policy to follow if I wanted to make lots of friends but to hell with that. Way I saw it was this was a war which tore the very fabric of the FA policy crafted by those before me and neither side ever really gave a damn about us so why should I have done the same for them.

I may be a selfish piece of !@#$ who with a bit of experience could've handled a lot of things better than I did(it's why I decided to step down earlier this year, I actually acknowledged I wasn't doing the job well enough for Umbrella) but you're a bitter failure of a leader who's all mad because I caught you red-handed trying to dick me and mine around.
[/quote]

How was I dicking you and yours around?
And hiding things from anyone?! Hah! That's rich. Everyone in government and even the public was in on everything. What's funny is this new government thought throwing me under the bus would change your group from being selfish and two-faced and found out the hard way what reality is like. Or the fact that your group wanted MHA burned for its ties to Fark, not me.

You're damn right I'm bitter. The alliance I viewed as my closest ally suddenly became a puppet of another alliance and all of a sudden "Our treaty is under review," even asking for you to reconsider your positions with alliances who constantly asked not only for you to cancel our treaty (see, before I predicted that you would betray Sparta and MHA correctly incogneto on a third party website... Hell, I offered to resign and you said it was no big deal, in your own words...You must've missed the memo where I hoped you would let me down on that prediction...) and other multiple dick moves that were just fine by you. Hell, I viewed you as a closer ally than Fark before you all decided you wanted to start "re-evaluating your treaties," and p much told us straight to our face that because of actions 3-4 years ago despite the very close relationship the previous year we were mince meat.

That and even offering to help find solutions and work around things met with "Yeah no," your government openly castigating and ridiculing other MHA members (This pissed me off more than anything. idgaf what is said about me, you talk about any of mine, I'll cut your tongue off. Gon's one thing, the other's, just not cool.) who came over because you asked for more contact. Sorry for being skeptical of your intentions!!!! I blame Roq for giving up on Umbrella just as much as I do you for fulfilling the inevitable, so don't feel special. I'm a liar? That's rich. I have a pretty considerable log of our conversations and I was nothing but candid and forthright in them.

There was no tear in FA between us two prior to the frosty greeting and a now Umbrella member (Who made it known on multiple occasions thereafter he basically wanted XX destroyed,) leaking XX government logs that involved the first conversation we had on query (God forbid the strongest military leader in the game's brand new leader with heavy increasingly hostile MK ties conversation and seemingly cautious/somewhat lukewarm hello might be relevant to fledgling high gov bloc diplomacy,) only in your head. Despite (and you can not possibly deny this,) nearly constant effort you just weren't going to have any of it, from day one. You claim it was Polar but that's a pretty bold faced lie, because we made it clear we didn't give two !@#$% about Polar to you from day one. If you actually cared about your allies you would've leveraged that into something tangible rather than allowing what happen to unfold, let alone authorizing attacks on your allies' MDoAP partners and freeing up some others to gangpile on them. That's just low.

For the record did you do that because of Polar, Umbrella, MK/NG, yourself or me?

Hell, MK and company gave you !@#$ on all sorts of things, and all we asked is how we could help our relationship survive / work together to achieve our goals together and amiably. If I had known that we should've been asking you to betray your allies to get you motivated you should've let me or Luka know! I could've done that! I know you guys sacrificed [b]so[/b] much in not giving into foreign alliances demands to run your foreign policy, drop your allies and asking for you to do their dirty work for them that you had little effort to spend dealing with the alliances who weren't trying to use you, but come the $%&@ on.

I played the hand I was dealt and I did a damn well job with what I had, long-term. Hell, it's not like you gave us an option short-term. For you that remains to be seen.
We could write a book and it would sell, but you've got to be !@#$@#$ kidding me if you seriously think we or I were out to $%&@ you. I didn't give up until it became clear what you were doing, long after I was no longer in government.

I'm being facetious with you about a "WLE," candidate and am more or less making the point that there could be some room for objectivity improvement...But yeah...
For you to get a free pass might be a stretch.

In before idiots reply to this with a one or two sentence insult-laden post.

Also: [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=h7mZbAnvLcU"]http://www.youtube.c...d&v=h7mZbAnvLcU[/url]

Edited February 9, 2012 by IYIyTh

[enderland]

I'll be really surprised to see if anyone other than Ramirius wins.

I cannot think of any other individual who has single handedly destroyed an alliance from as much to as little as he did.

A lot of ex-MCXA people came close when they gutted it for TSO but still that was a group effort and nowhere near as bad.

[King Wally]

[quote name='enderland' timestamp='1328755719' post='2917079']
I'll be really surprised to see if anyone other than Ramirius wins.

I cannot think of any other individual who has single handedly destroyed an alliance from as much to as little as he did.

A lot of ex-MCXA people came close when they gutted it for TSO but still that was a group effort and nowhere near as bad.
[/quote]

I would say Grub left Polar in a far worse state. The fact years later Polar are still paying for the actions of a long retired leader probably swings that over Gremlins who seam to have been able to recently get back on their feet well without lasting fallout. Grub's fall from grace has by my memory resulted in Polar becoming the central hub of three massive global wars now, two of which were well after his time.

Makes you wonder if Polar had of Renamed themselves / pulled a merger after Grubs retirement etc where they would be sitting right now.

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='King Wally' timestamp='1328761296' post='2917122']
I would say Grub left Polar in a far worse state. The fact years later Polar are still paying for the actions of a long retired leader probably swings that over Gremlins who seam to have been able to recently get back on their feet well without lasting fallout. Grub's fall from grace has by my memory resulted in Polar becoming the central hub of three massive global wars now, two of which were well after his time.

Makes you wonder if Polar had of Renamed themselves / pulled a merger after Grubs retirement etc where they would be sitting right now.
[/quote]

To be fair it was a great move, just bad follow through and MK-Polar relation collapse thereafter sealed its fate.

There were very few other options that looked nearly as enticing at the time, at least for them.

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1328755389' post='2917076']
How was I dicking you and yours around?
And hiding things from anyone?! Hah! That's rich. Everyone in government and even the public was in on everything. What's funny is this new government thought throwing me under the bus would change your group from being selfish and two-faced and found out the hard way what reality is like. Or the fact that your group wanted MHA burned for its ties to Fark, not me.

You're damn right I'm bitter. The alliance I viewed as my closest ally suddenly became a puppet of another alliance and all of a sudden "Our treaty is under review," even asking for you to reconsider your positions with alliances who constantly asked not only for you to cancel our treaty (see, before I predicted that you would betray Sparta and MHA correctly incogneto on a third party website... Hell, I offered to resign and you said it was no big deal, in your own words...You must've missed the memo where I hoped you would let me down on that prediction...) and other multiple dick moves that were just fine by you. Hell, I viewed you as a closer ally than Fark before you all decided you wanted to start "re-evaluating your treaties," and p much told us straight to our face that because of actions 3-4 years ago despite the very close relationship the previous year we were mince meat.

That and even offering to help find solutions and work around things met with "Yeah no," your government openly castigating and ridiculing other MHA members (This pissed me off more than anything. idgaf what is said about me, you talk about any of mine, I'll cut your tongue off. Gon's one thing, the other's, just not cool.) who came over because you asked for more contact. Sorry for being skeptical of your intentions!!!! I blame Roq for giving up on Umbrella just as much as I do you for fulfilling the inevitable, so don't feel special. I'm a liar? That's rich. I have a pretty considerable log of our conversations and I was nothing but candid and forthright in them.

There was no tear in FA between us two prior to the frosty greeting and a now Umbrella member (Who made it known on multiple occasions thereafter he basically wanted XX destroyed,) leaking XX government logs that involved the first conversation we had on query (God forbid the strongest military leader in the game's brand new leader with heavy increasingly hostile MK ties conversation and seemingly cautious/somewhat lukewarm hello might be relevant to fledgling high gov bloc diplomacy,) only in your head. Despite (and you can not possibly deny this,) nearly constant effort you just weren't going to have any of it, from day one. You claim it was Polar but that's a pretty bold faced lie, because we made it clear we didn't give two !@#$% about Polar to you from day one. If you actually cared about your allies you would've leveraged that into something tangible rather than allowing what happen to unfold, let alone authorizing attacks on your allies' MDoAP partners and freeing up some others to gangpile on them. That's just low.

For the record did you do that because of Polar, Umbrella, MK/NG, yourself or me?

Hell, MK and company gave you !@#$ on all sorts of things, and all we asked is how we could help our relationship survive / work together to achieve our goals together and amiably. If I had known that we should've been asking you to betray your allies to get you motivated you should've let me or Luka know! I could've done that! I know you guys sacrificed [b]so[/b] much in not giving into foreign alliances demands to run your foreign policy, drop your allies and asking for you to do their dirty work for them that you had little effort to spend dealing with the alliances who weren't trying to use you, but come the $%&@ on.

I played the hand I was dealt and I did a damn well job with what I had, long-term. Hell, it's not like you gave us an option short-term. For you that remains to be seen.
We could write a book and it would sell, but you've got to be !@#$@#$ kidding me if you seriously think we or I were out to $%&@ you. I didn't give up until it became clear what you were doing, long after I was no longer in government.

I'm being facetious with you about a "WLE," candidate and am more or less making the point that there could be some room for objectivity improvement...But yeah...
For you to get a free pass might be a stretch.

In before idiots reply to this with a one or two sentence insult-laden post.

Also: [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=h7mZbAnvLcU"]http://www.youtube.c...d&v=h7mZbAnvLcU[/url]
[/quote]

A few things.

The attacks on MHA's MDoAP partner were done for purely internal reasons that have nothing to do with NG or MK or anybody else. That is all that I will say about it.

MK and NG's hate for MHA is one of the things that contributed to the treaty not being fully cancelled.

We didn't put Sparta and MHA in the firing line. Your dip!@#$ Fark buddies did that.

Our relationship with MHA has improved tremendously since your departure.

It is downright laughable that you admit to !@#$ting on the alliance you viewed as MHA's 'closest ally' on CNTel and then claim to have been forthright and honest with us in the same series of posts. You're a shifty sneaky untrustworthy sack of !@#$ and that is why you are on the outs.

[Ryuzaki]

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1328745867' post='2916951']
You are saying that people like being treated like crap because otherwise they'd feel "bored", and you're implicitly making the (totally illogical) claim that players able to be nice with one another can't fight, insult, scheme and overthrow one another in the game [i]only[/i].
[/quote]

I don't think you understood my comment or the context it was made in.

I was saying that having to be nice about other peoples characters makes for awful gameplay. That is what we are doing here, judging peoples characters and how well we think they did as gov. It was the same for WAE and WPE. It has nothing to do with treating the player crap. If I can't point out that X was awful at running his alliance and ended up getting it rolled because of his own incompetence without upsetting the player then that makes them way too emotionally involved in what people think about a fictional character.

Just because our forums aren't directly part of the CN website doesn't make it not part of the game.

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1328745867' post='2916951']
You're confusing players with characters
[/quote]

No, that's you.

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1328745867' post='2916951']
I don't get why you think that we need to be mean and unfair for the game to be "entertaining",
[/quote]

Conflict makes CN interesting. Part of conflict is fighting and insulting (you yourself said that). That is all this is.

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1328745867' post='2916951']
I doubt you'd say that players not ready to shoot down other players [i]for real[/i] can't enjoy doing it in a FPS game. Please stop being that silly.
[/quote]

That doesn't even make sense.

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1328762441' post='2917132']
A few things.

The attacks on MHA's MDoAP partner were done for purely internal reasons that have nothing to do with NG or MK or anybody else. That is all that I will say about it.

MK and NG's hate for MHA is one of the things that contributed to the treaty not being fully cancelled.

We didn't put Sparta and MHA in the firing line. Your dip!@#$ Fark buddies did that.

Our relationship with MHA has improved tremendously since your departure.

It is downright laughable that you admit to !@#$ting on the alliance you viewed as MHA's 'closest ally' on CNTel and then claim to have been forthright and honest with us in the same series of posts. You're a shifty sneaky untrustworthy sack of !@#$ and that is why you are on the outs.
[/quote]

How did I !@#$ on anyone? I told JA to his face and at the time that I was concerned about the direction and impression he had given me, especially after mentioning that there was reason to believe our relationship "wasn't at an MDoAP level," all of a sudden way before any of this even happened. That I went further in what was supposed to be incogneto isn't really a huge surprise but how guessing what you turned out were bent on doing isn't really "working against Umbrella," or "spreading lies." It's not like I didn't attempt to make ammends or that you actually found hard evidence of me doing anything other than defending my alliance from the kind of !@#$ that NG was doing ( Careful let's not hit on the other posts that were actually favorable towards Umbrella incogneto,) in regard to certain irc channel topics or MK asking every other day for our treaty to be cancelled. I suppose I should've spent my time like my counterparts in MK and NG asking for you to hit others for my own benefit instead of guessing what my formerly good friends and solid allies were doing when thinking about rehauling their FA and asking how we fit into it... Yeah, I was a real big jerk.


You also ignored the entirety of that paragraph where JA wasn't really bothered at all in his own words at the time and it only became an issue when MK and NG ratcheted their pressure up on y'all to cut out XX. As stated I had offered to resign but we both agreed that given the current relationship we both needed to work together. Also, as to not dropping MHA completely, by one vote...I'm sure MHA appreciated the help when MK attacked them.


You're dead wrong. Umbrella had the ability to do what was right and didn't. I don't care what your current interactions are, and that's all fine and dandy. You dicked MHA & Sparta over. Hell, I called it and watched it happen trying to change nearly everyone's mind in the meantime. If you want me to golf clap while you tell me they're not as unhappy as I was/am over what you did, that's fine...Hell, I was more disappointed than anything.

You also ignored much of the finer points. Too much MK influence, right CSM?


So reasons for me being a terrible leader: Making Umbrella upset because I knew what they were doing and asked the kind of questions they couldn't answer without feeling like piles of !@#$ for saying things that would equate to them being piles of !@#$. Then guessing they were going to be piles of !@#$ in private, and being right about it despite doing p much everything in my power (For all you fine gentleman who like to put the "revote," on me, that's not actually on me, I wouldn't have bothered at all,) possible. This is aside from you know, actually making MHA relevant (in before lolno,) and considerably increasing their military capacity and effeciency (which has plummeted since and without my leadership they basically decided to forego peace mode in a curbstomp I told them was coming from a mile away that as much as you all would like to pretend otherwise was unavoidable so long as they were allied to Fark.)

Clearly, in private thinking Umbrella was going to dump us (and as confirmed by current members of Umbrella, they were going to do "hands were tied," be damned,) I became the worlds worst leader ever. Also, apparently this is worse than using them for my own benefit and negates the !@#$ ton of bar-setting I did for MHA while I was there.

Real terrible guy. Or something.
Anyway, this isn't the time or place.

Edited February 9, 2012 by IYIyTh

[Gizmo]

I would think Ramirus over Grub but it's close. Ramirus was more direct in his treachery than Grub but only slightly. Grub on the other hand didn't give 2 cents for his allies and was happy to see them burn as he roasted marshmallows on their embers from the sidelines.

edit- clarification.

Edited February 9, 2012 by masterbake

[AlmightyGrub]

[quote name='masterbake' timestamp='1328765733' post='2917158']
I would think Ramirus over Grub but it's close. Ramirus was more direct in his treachery than Grub but only slightly. Grub on the other hand didn't give 2 cents for his allies and was happy to see them burn as he roasted marshmallows on their embers from the sidelines.

edit- clarification.
[/quote]

Which allies were they? I am interested. Someone else who knows abosultely nothing about anything speaking like their opinion should carry some weight. The arrogance of presumption I guess.

I screwed over a few alliances and only one was an ally at the time... and I must confess I didn't really intend to. The notion of an ally's ally being my ally is nonsense.