Quick Note from MK

[HeroofTime55]

If we hadn't posted an apology, you -- but mostly Schattenmann, I think -- would have criticized us for not posting an apology. In any event, it doesn't particularly matter if you forgive us, and to be honest, we don't at all care. We admitted wrongdoing, we always would have if asked, and that is the crux of the matter.

 

My criticism is not dependent on the existence of an apology, it is because, forced apology or not, you are not sorry.  There would not have been a peep, and indeed, until our side responded in kind, there was open mocking of my situation.  It is blatantly clear that you are only apologizing because you got burned and are now trying to run damage control.  As such, I reject your apology on the grounds that it is not sincere.

 

In this case, I do in fact believe it is better to not post a fake apology, and own up to the fact that you did it because you thought you'd get away with it.  It's not a matter of being right or wrong, it's a matter of how wrong you want to be.  You chose to backpedal at the most hilarious and damaging moment possible.

 

I wouldn't criticize you for not posting an apology.  I would, and am criticizing you, for simply not being sorry.

Edited March 7, 2013 by HeroofTime55

[Saladjoe]

It's true, GOD becomes more and more reminiscent of GGA everyday.

And here I was thinking TPF was earning that fabulous distinction.. 

[HeroofTime55]

The majority of people aren't sorry for anything that happens to you either, they just appearing to support because they jumping on the MK bandwagon. Wait till after the war and you go back into irrelevancy, not that you're relevant now.

 

What's this "go back to irrelevancy" I thought the party line was that I'm irrelevant now?

 

Not irrelevant enough to politically damage you guys over and over it seems.

 

Seriously, I've been doing this since the Woodstock Massacre, you would think that people would catch on and simply avoid me. But I know how you dumbasses operate, you take it as a challenge.

[Diogenes]

You're a pretty good PR man but let's be honest, there is no fucking way MK would have ever been nice to HoT - let alone issued an apology - if your feet weren't to the fire. This is the same MK that enforces reps it realizes were unjustifiably asked for because it allows you/them to save face. Moreover, this thread is way too long.

 

Being one of the architects of this announcement, I can tell you forthright that putting our feet "to the fire" had the potential to yield a number of outcomes much less mild than this one -- outcomes that would have been wholly detrimental to every party involved in these events. HoT, or even Schattenmann, coming to us in private, as opposed to airing dirty laundry in public, would have been a much more rational and much less risky approach, and the end results would have been much more pleasant. On an official level, we opted to take this avenue because it was the right one to take: regardless of what anyone in my alliance thinks of HoT, myself included, he did not deserve to be sanctioned for participating in the overarching global war. We chose to apologize to him of our own accord -- and I can say this because I was the one to originally propose doing so. Certainly, the Mushroom Kingdom harbors members that do not support apologizing to HoT, as well as members that are upset we responded to sanctions against us with anything short of a full-fledged sanction war. So be it. This is our official response, and ultimately that's what's important.

[Samus]

Oh, just as a clarification Shahenshah, I'm retired and I haven't been an MK member for quite some time. I've been sitting on an AA as a neutral, although I have no protector and I'm not in peace mode. I speak for myself, not others.

RIP Ryan

[Amossio]

What's this "go back to irrelevancy" I thought the party line was that I'm irrelevant now?

 

Not irrelevant enough to politically damage you guys over and over it seems.

 

Seriously, I've been doing this since the Woodstock Massacre, you would think that people would catch on and simply avoid me. But I know how you dumbasses operate, you take it as a challenge.

There's a party line?Where, where's the party? What's the line?

Yes, please spare the immoral umbrella from the political havoc you are creating, mighty sir!I've been doing this since the birth of kronos, people still avoid me, when it comes to yourself honourable hero, people think of your honourable words as toilet paper. Don't you worry son, you'll still be the centre of attention, I know you need it, but enjoy being thought as digiterra's diarrhea bag, I know you crave any kind of attention, even if it's bad.

[Diogenes]

 
My criticism is not dependent on the existence of an apology, it is because, forced apology or not, you are not sorry.  There would not have been a peep, and indeed, until our side responded in kind, there was open mocking of my situation.  It is blatantly clear that you are only apologizing because you got burned and are now trying to run damage control.  As such, I reject your apology on the grounds that it is not sincere.
 
In this case, I do in fact believe it is better to not post a fake apology, and own up to the fact that you did it because you thought you'd get away with it.  It's not a matter of being right or wrong, it's a matter of how wrong you want to be.  You chose to backpedal at the most hilarious and damaging moment possible.
 
I wouldn't criticize you for not posting an apology.  I would, and am criticizing you, for simply not being sorry.

Again, we don't care if you accept our apology, and we don't care that you are critical of us. We apologized to you not because you suffered, but as a matter of principle -- you should not have been sanctioned. Whether you want to accept it or not, this is the apology you get.

[HeroofTime55]

Again, we don't care if you accept our apology, and we don't care that you are critical of us. We apologized to you not because you suffered, but as a matter of principle -- you should not have been sanctioned. Whether you want to accept it or not, this is the apology you get.

 

The principle being "we couldn't get away with it."  You can bet your ass there would be no apology and more mocking if you did get away with it.

 

Do you ever get dizzy from spinning so hard?

[Diogenes]

 
The principle being "we couldn't get away with it."  You can bet your ass there would be no apology and more mocking if you did get away with it.
 
Do you ever get dizzy from spinning so hard?

 

The principle being, as has been mentioned countless times, that neither you nor anyone else should be sanctioned purely for fighting in a war.

As far as spin goes, I have done nothing but reiterate the same information -- factual information, derived of firsthand knowledge -- since I first entered the discussion. I have made no effort to portray this announcement as anything more, or less, than how it was intended and presented. I'm sorry that this has caused your smear-campaign to fall flat on its face.

Edited March 8, 2013 by Diogenes

[Hereno]

Being one of the architects of this announcement, I can tell you forthright that putting our feet "to the fire" had the potential to yield a number of outcomes much less mild than this one -- outcomes that would have been wholly detrimental to every party involved in these events. HoT, or even Schattenmann, coming to us in private, as opposed to airing dirty laundry in public, would have been a much more rational and much less risky approach, and the end results would have been much more pleasant. On an official level, we opted to take this avenue because it was the right one to take: regardless of what anyone in my alliance thinks of HoT, myself included, he did not deserve to be sanctioned for participating in the overarching global war. We chose to apologize to him of our own accord -- and I can say this because I was the one to originally propose doing so. Certainly, the Mushroom Kingdom harbors members that do not support apologizing to HoT, as well as members that are upset we responded to sanctions against us with anything short of a full-fledged sanction war. So be it. This is our official response, and ultimately that's what's important.

 

I more meant "feet to the fire" as in MK (& friends) are no longer in a position to screw around without consequences - both in the sense of politics, and also because sanctions can be done both ways and ~competence~ has a lot more to lose, that can be lost easier. Your leaders aren't stupid and not even you believe they actually give a shit about wronging HoT.

[Vhalen]

They briefly left MK to join the alliance Doombird Doomcave, They rejoined us ~2 weeks ago. We are not at war with DT, NEW, or Sparta. 

So they deserted during wartime? Tsk tsk.

 

No. They're members of MK.

But they were rogues at the time. Gotcha.

 

The technical structure is that DBDC is launching undeclared wars on the Equilibrium coalition. For players to join DBDC in order to declare on Equilibrium nations is not technically roguery. With regards to Mushroom Kingdom and Non Grata's offshoots, on the other hand, these have not been declared to be under the protection of either Mushroom Kingdom or Non Grata and may be considered as rogues, although this is strictly an element of legalese; I would not be surprised if either MK or NG continued to claim these nations as their members.

Mushqaeda, on the other hand, I believe was declared under the protection of MK perhaps a year or so ago. Other AAs might not fall under the same protection.

What's roguery if not undeclared wars? Or are you running the DBDC "point" below, in which case is sounds like they're deserters. I don't see how you can have it both ways.

 

Then say what you mean instead of using terms that usually have different connotations. AFAIK our off AA nations are hitting people MK are at war with.

And people MK isn't at war with (see above.)

 

FYI, DBDC is an alliance:

 

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/114848-dbdc-doetreatydow/

So its members are (I'll say pretty much, because I'm disinclined to backcheck them all) wartime deserters from other alliances? Is Umbrella gonna attack those guys as per BIBO?

 

According to their DOE, they protect us. And as to any claims of roguery from DBDC, they also issued a blanket DoW against anyone who is anti-BIBO.

That declaration doesn't fly. How can you tell someone's opinion on something like that if it hasn't been stated? Or are they just assuming anyone who hasn't declared "pro" is "anti?" Because it seems to me anyone in Umbrella who didn't sign BIBO is "anti-BIBO" by that standard. Hey, I've found DBDC some more targets! You're welcome, guys!

[Amossio]

So they deserted during wartime? Tsk tsk.

 

But they were rogues at the time. Gotcha.

 

What's roguery if not undeclared wars? Or are you running the DBDC "point" below, in which case is sounds like they're deserters. I don't see how you can have it both ways.

 

And people MK isn't at war with (see above.)

 

So its members are (I'll say pretty much, because I'm disinclined to backcheck them all) wartime deserters from other alliances? Is Umbrella gonna attack those guys as per BIBO?

 

That declaration doesn't fly. How can you tell someone's opinion on something like that if it hasn't been stated? Or are they just assuming anyone who hasn't declared "pro" is "anti?" Because it seems to me anyone in Umbrella who didn't sign BIBO is "anti-BIBO" by that standard. Hey, I've found DBDC some more targets! You're welcome, guys!

You will never understand umbrella pal, I will fight till I'm pzied for bibo, perhaps if I insult someones ego I could get pzied again, that could be fun.

[Vhalen]

You will never understand umbrella pal, I will fight till I'm pzied for bibo, perhaps if I insult someones ego I could get pzied again, that could be fun.

I'm not trying to understand Umbrella. I'm just trying to help you guys out. I found you some deserters (by DBDC's own admission they're a separate alliance now, so any who were BIBO signatories are subject to attacks by Umbrella, as per your posted doc on BIBO.) No need to thank me for my assistance in finding you some targets with whom to get started on your quest for self-ZI. You're quite welcome.

[Amossio]

I'm not trying to understand Umbrella. I'm just trying to help you guys out. I found you some deserters (by DBDC's own admission they're a separate alliance now, so any who were BIBO signatories are subject to attacks by Umbrella, as per your posted doc on BIBO.) No need to thank me for my assistance in finding you some targets with whom to get started on your quest for self-ZI. You're quite welcome.

thanks and please carry on assisting me, your help is greatly appreciated, seems like you know DBDC better than me, so please carry on. Clearly you're providing some clear valid points, you are bringing something to the eq war effort by far with these pointers. I'm already set on my quest for self zi, NPO is helping me achieve that, I have Brehon the honourable to thank for that though!

Edited March 7, 2013 by Amossio

[Vhalen]

Oh, I'm providing some valid points, but not the imagined ones you've set your mind on. If you can't tell when you're being mocked, then far be it for me to shatter your illusions. In your own words, "please carry on" with...well, whatever you think you're doing.

[Ernesto Che Guevara]

The principle being "we couldn't get away with it."  You can bet your ass there would be no apology and more mocking if you did get away with it.

 

Do you ever get dizzy from spinning so hard?

Keep it up, you're making us look fantastic. 

[Diogenes]

I more meant "feet to the fire" as in MK (& friends) are no longer in a position to screw around without consequences - both in the sense of politics, and also because sanctions can be done both ways and ~competence~ has a lot more to lose, that can be lost easier. Your leaders aren't stupid and not even you believe they actually give a shit about wronging HoT.

 

Being, as I am, one such leader, I can attest that while we broadly do not care about HoT being troubled by this experience, we do recognize that he was unjustly sanctioned, and apologize for this. There is a distinction to be made between caring about someone being hurt and caring about the way in which they were hurt, with this apology being made because of the latter distinction, not the former. The government of the Mushroom Kingdom does not support the use of sanctions as a weapon in wartime, regardless of who they are being used against. We do not like HoT, but we do not support him being sanctioned merely for participating in the ongoing global war. 

 

As far as a sanction war goes, it would be damaging for both sides involved. Perhaps more damaging, with membership numbers considered, to our side than yours, but damaging to both sides nonetheless. It is something that neither side should want, and it is something that the Mushroom Kingdom, at least, is trying to avoid. We, again, will not resist a sanction war if it is brought to our doorstep, but it is not our aim to provoke one. 

[Hereno]

Being, as I am, one such leader, I can attest that while we broadly do not care about HoT being troubled by this experience, we do recognize that he was unjustly sanctioned, and apologize for this. There is a distinction to be made between caring about someone being hurt and caring about the way in which they were hurt, with this apology being made because of the latter distinction, not the former. The government of the Mushroom Kingdom does not support the use of sanctions as a weapon in wartime, regardless of who they are being used against. We do not like HoT, but we do not support him being sanctioned merely for participating in the ongoing global war. 

 

As far as a sanction war goes, it would be damaging for both sides involved. Perhaps more damaging, with membership numbers considered, to our side than yours, but damaging to both sides nonetheless. It is something that neither side should want, and it is something that the Mushroom Kingdom, at least, is trying to avoid. We, again, will not resist a sanction war if it is brought to our doorstep, but it is not our aim to provoke one. 

 

I am not on either "side", I just find your bull shitting to be kind of annoying and pretentious.

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

So its members are (I'll say pretty much, because I'm disinclined to backcheck them all) wartime deserters from other alliances? Is Umbrella gonna attack those guys as per BIBO?

 

I don't know quite what you mean about wartime desertion. I joined DBDC with the full blessing of my comrades in GOONS.

 

As to your question about Umbrella BIBO'ing their former members, I would assume that's up to them as to whether they wish to pursue their policy now or at some point in the future - it's not something that's really worth worrying about it this point however.

[HeroofTime55]

The principle being, as has been mentioned countless times, that neither you nor anyone else should be sanctioned purely for fighting in a war.

As far as spin goes, I have done nothing but reiterate the same information -- factual information, derived of firsthand knowledge -- since I first entered the discussion. I have made no effort to portray this announcement as anything more, or less, than how it was intended and presented. I'm sorry that this has caused your smear-campaign to fall flat on its face.

 

Well, I'm glad you had a sudden change of conscience after you got bit in the ass, and I'm sure that the timeline of events is purely coincidental.

 

:rolleyes:

[Vhalen]

I don't know quite what you mean about wartime desertion. I joined DBDC with the full blessing of my comrades in GOONS.

 

As to your question about Umbrella BIBO'ing their former members, I would assume that's up to them as to whether they wish to pursue their policy now or at some point in the future - it's not something that's really worth worrying about it this point however.

Well, I'm nothing if not helpful, and I'm pretty sure I can explain that first part easily enough. You see, the act of leaving your own alliance and joining another sovereign entity during wartime is referred to as as wartime desertion. I don't claim to know GOONS' policy regarding this. You'd know better than I, so if you say they support desertion, then I'll take your word for it.

 

As for the latter, I was just helping them out (nothing if not helpful, after all!) I've heard comments about running low on targets at the high end, so I figured I'd give them a lead on some new ones. And you guys, as well, as per the last bit of my previous comments. You can check with your ex-Umbrella comrades to see if they remember who didn't sign that BIBO agreement.

 

Again, you're welcome. Glad to be of assistance. ;)

[BloodFury]

I hear a lot of sheep bellowing in this thread against the very glorious Kingdom of Fungus. Just proves the point that they are all sheep.

[YOLO SWAG]

Personally, I never understood why senators never used sanctions in the past. I'm of the mind that all's fair in love and war.

 

So if my blessing counts for anything (and it should since this is my first post) i'd like to invite all sides of the war to sanction whoever and whenever you see fit.

[Diogenes]

Well, I'm glad you had a sudden change of conscience after you got bit in the ass, and I'm sure that the timeline of events is purely coincidental.

 

:rolleyes:

 

Sarcasm and inaccuracies aside, I suppose you could say that your accidental sanctioning resulted in us being "bit in the ass," but if nothing else, this announcement should serve as a reminder that we can -- and if pressed, we will -- bite back. In any case, this changes nothing regarding your situation: the sanction against you was misplaced, and we would readily have admitted as much at any point. If you had made any attempt to contact us in private before throwing a tantrum in public, perhaps you would have discovered this sooner. 

[HeroofTime55]

Sarcasm and inaccuracies aside, I suppose you could say that your accidental sanctioning resulted in us being "bit in the ass," but if nothing else, this announcement should serve as a reminder that we can -- and if pressed, we will -- bite back. In any case, this changes nothing regarding your situation: the sanction against you was misplaced, and we would readily have admitted as much at any point. If you had made any attempt to contact us in private before throwing a tantrum in public, perhaps you would have discovered this sooner. 

 

Like the efforts oyababy made to contact RIA and do his homework instead of taking a micro alliance at its word?

Also please stop calling it an "accident."  What, did he sneeze and "accidentally" hit the sanction button?  You aren't even admitting an error in judgement, you are claiming it as "accidental."

Edited March 8, 2013 by HeroofTime55