Equilibrium Coalition & Umbrella Coalition Agree on Peace

[Ardus]

Again wrong.

Argent didn't join Duckroll? That's a surprise to me!

It is easily verifiable at the direction most non-TOP ex-PFers wished to go in. They are now mostly allied to us and AI. TOP chose to stand with you over their older allies, us and IRON, that is fine. Our course was ever steady though.

So you were always on board with "Roll DH"? No, I don't think so. That flies in the face of the tenuous cooperation that did exist between DH, PF, and DR for the Grudge War. Surely you and yours aren't that two-faced.

In any event, you chose to stand with AI, newly minted ally of last November, over TOP. That sword swings both ways.

Further, you've only confirmed my other statement: but for TOP's treaties with DH, you wouldn't have ditched TOP. You can sugar it up with language about "direction", but your direction was precisely what I said before: to join IRON and DR in its mission to try and topple DoomHouse, TOP's other allies. That is an admirable political goal and in that light not something to be ashamed of, especially since that bloc you jumped to managed to secure a surrender. But it is not grounds to slander TOP because Paradoxia wouldn't chuck some allies under the bus to follow others and satisfy their demands. TOP wouldn't do that, so you cut ties and got well out of the way when it came time for us to face the dogpile.

I mean, hell, I've insisted people cut ties before, but I never canceled on somebody for it. That's below even me. That's GOD-tier laughable.

Again, there is easily varifiable proof with Sengoku and IRON. Feel free to shout your delusions at the top of your lungs though.

I mean, you already verified my own statements in your own response. Well except for Argent joining DuckRoll. I'm really putting my faith in the wiki there.

I won't dig into your personal life just because of your ridiculously incorrect political opinions.

My personal life? Didn't we just finish a war that was supposedly aimed to put an end to digging into personal lives? I recall that being how your movement won so many followers.

These arguments have already been hashed and re-hashed by those who personally took part in those conversations.

This argument is over whether you, Argent, and others, ditched TOP. TOP didn't cancel Hearts of IRON. IRON did. And given a choice, you chose to follow IRON to AI. Argent canceled with Umbrella and demanded an end to the TOP MDP, mere days after signing with Anarchy. Less than two months later you declared war on us. That's about as plain as it gets.

[trimm]

We didn't "ditch" anyone.  We picked a side, and so did TOP.  That we weren't going to pick the same side as TOP should have come as no surprise to anyone in Paradoxia, especially given the sheer amount of bad blood that PF created on both sides of the equation.  Had Argent wanted to drop TOP, or Umbrella for that matter, just over DH we would have done so anywhere between DH/NPO and Dave.  But we didn't. Instead we spent years telling both of them "We aren't asking you to drop anyone, just to understand that we your other allies don't particularly care for them, so please at least try a little to rein them in."

 

There were many reasons we chose to drop TOP and choose the side we chose, and TOP had plenty to do with those reasons.

[Schattenmann]

My point is that, for the most part, the only alliance in PF with a clear "passion" or "agenda" (as eyriq alluded to) is TOP, and that is "revenge" on Polaris . . . this is a global ambition. The rest of you seem content to be good at what you do: building strong nations and strong, cohesive alliances--introspective ambitions. With that situation, it will be very easy for TOP's passions and agendas to become PF's. A bloc is a world-stage entity, and TOP is the only PF AA with a clear world-stage agenda.
. . .

However, it cannot be ignored that PF must either leave TOP high and dry if TOP goes to war alongside MK, divide itself with some support followed by the rest being dragged in given sufficient counters, or simply go all out from day one. Or, TOP must subjugate its pre-PF treaties to its new PF foreign policy.

And here we are.

 

 

Argent didn't join Duckroll? That's a surprise to me!So you were always on board with "Roll DH"? No, I don't think so. That flies in the face of the tenuous cooperation that did exist between DH, PF, and DR for the Grudge War. Surely you and yours aren't that two-faced.

In any event, you chose to stand with AI, newly minted ally of last November, over TOP. That sword swings both ways.

Further, you've only confirmed my other statement: but for TOP's treaties with DH, you wouldn't have ditched TOP. You can sugar it up with language about "direction", but your direction was precisely what I said before: to join IRON and DR in its mission to try and topple DoomHouse, TOP's other allies. That is an admirable political goal and in that light not something to be ashamed of, especially since that bloc you jumped to managed to secure a surrender. But it is not grounds to slander TOP because Paradoxia wouldn't chuck some allies under the bus to follow others and satisfy their demands. TOP wouldn't do that, so you cut ties and got well out of the way when it came time for us to face the dogpile.

I mean, hell, I've insisted people cut ties before, but I never canceled on somebody for it. That's below even me. That's GOD-tier laughable.I mean, you already verified my own statements in your own response. This argument is over whether you, Argent, and others, ditched TOP. TOP didn't cancel Hearts of IRON. IRON did. And given a choice, you chose to follow IRON to AI. Argent canceled with Umbrella and demanded an end to the TOP MDP, mere days after signing with Anarchy. Less than two months later you declared war on us. That's about as plain as it gets.

 

What a wacky post.  Is it actually your contention that PF's constituent AAs were wrong to cancel treaties with TOP which meant acting contrary to their own ideals or wishes?  That once a treaty is signed it's cemented and only the most wretched alliances would cancel a treaty based on politics?  You do understand that treaties are political instruments, not just Valentines cards. 

Of course, MK's entire agenda for the past 3 years has depended on just that: Impossibly stupid treaty knots which lead everywhere and nowhere, but it's one thing to depend on and manipulate lazy FP and another to advocate a treaties-for-treaties'-sake model of operation (especially as somehow morally superior).

 

This bloc serves no direct purpose at this time other than to bring some like minded alliances together and give us all an FA focus. There is no 'great evil' to set up against, and no direct threats to our security (although obviously this bloc gives us all a more secure footing for that, particularly those of us who were formerly outside the web).

 

PF had no reason to exist to begin with, and as time wore on it became clear even to the members of PF that TOP's mind was not in line with that "like mind" PF hoped would carry them.  PF had no reason to stick with TOP, most AAs ignore that and keep a treaty to keep it (and indeed PF did so for longer than they should have) but TOP's direction was not aligned with anyone else's in PF from day one.

 

It's obvious why you believe that TOP was aggrieved.  It's also patently silly.  The idea that 5 other alliances should have just done whatever TOP wanted, elsewise be traitors, is silly.  The mere suggestion is arrogant and laughable.

 

It's just as trimm put it: TOP was going one way, no one else in PF wanted to go that way.  The right and good thing to do was to cancel the treaty.

Edited April 10, 2013 by Schattenmann

[Ardus]

What a wacky post.  Is it actually your contention that PF's constituent AAs were wrong to cancel treaties with TOP which meant acting contrary to their own ideals or wishes?

My only real contention was my first one, the offhand remark in an unrelated post that was itself only thinly related to this thread to begin with: TOP got ditched. I already said it was a great political move for Argent.

If I give an air of offense, it might be due to some mild amazement at Omni's unwillingness to admit that they all left TOP, in large part, to shack up with the "roll DH" group. And that was done, in large part, because they didn't like MK. And that, in large part, circles back around to that damned Biodad affair. I could keep boiling down but I'm not interested in really talking about the salt that would remain at the bottom of that pot right now. Anyway, if it's all political, then it's all political. That gets people burned, but hey, I play the game, as you may have mentioned in that lengthy post I only glossed over. When you play, you can lose. I'll tip a glass of whiskey to somebody who pulls a quick one and benefits at my expense. But Omni won't admit it was an act of self-interest to the detriment of TOP. He'll admit all the component elements, but not the resultant whole, and that's a little bewildering.

I will admit that I find it audacious that Argent personally made war on TOP so soon after the end of their relationship. That's simply delicious.

[Master Holton]

There were many reasons we chose to drop TOP and choose the side we chose, and TOP had plenty to do with those reasons.

 

Honestly, it was a very mutual thing for us to end Pillowfort. I'm not sure why you're trying to play it off that TOP's ties to Doomhouse weren't the reason you disliked being tied to TOP though. For the most part our members got along with each other, save some heated debates on the PF forums.

[Omniscient1]

Argent didn't join Duckroll? That's a surprise to me!So you were always on board with "Roll DH"? No, I don't think so.

Too bad thinking has never been your strong suit.

That flies in the face of the tenuous cooperation that did exist between DH, PF, and DR for the Grudge War. Surely you and yours aren't that two-faced.

You, MK, were plotting against Duckroll while "cooperation" was on going. This is a fact as private statements made public prove. Any animosity grew from that. If TOP wanted to take your side over their older allies (and ours) that's fine.

In any event, you chose to stand with AI, newly minted ally of last November, over TOP. That sword swings both ways.

Point already made by me. There was no betrayal. Only a breakdown of unified Foreign affairs.

I mean, hell, I've insisted people cut ties before, but I never canceled on somebody for it. That's below even me. That's GOD-tier laughable.I mean, you already verified my own statements in your own response.

Sorry next time we'll cancel all our treaties in order to get away from One ally :rolleyes:

My personal life? Didn't we just finish a war that was supposedly aimed to put an end to digging into personal lives?

Yes, I will not dig into your personal life over your idiotic posts as you,DH, done to so many others.

This argument is over whether you, Argent, and others, ditched TOP. TOP didn't cancel Hearts of IRON. IRON did. And given a choice, you chose to follow IRON to AI. Argent canceled with Umbrella and demanded an end to the TOP MDP, mere days after signing with Anarchy. Less than two months later you declared war on us about as plain as it gets.

Wow! So many errors here. Since you are speaking of something you know nothing about then it's to be expected. You should know though that Umbrella (at least according to them) cancelled on us. Did you not read the topic? Did they not talk tp you guys? Also, as far as I know Argent never declared war on MK. Are you speaking of some future war? Edited April 10, 2013 by Omniscient1

[Ardus]

Also, as far as I know Argent never declared war on MK. Are you speaking of some future war?

Since you can't be assed to notice the big TOP banner to the left, I'll not take the time pointing out all your other miscellaneous flaws tonight. Maybe if I get bored tomorrow.

[Omniscient1]

Since you can't be assed to notice the big TOP banner to the left, I'll not take the time pointing out all your other miscellaneous flaws tonight. Maybe if I get bored tomorrow.

I'm giddy with joy! From my phone I get no "banners to the left".

Remember there is no need for you to get hostile. Edited April 10, 2013 by Omniscient1

[Kim Jaym Il]

ardus is the only person in top

[trimm]

My only real contention was my first one, the offhand remark in an unrelated post that was itself only thinly related to this thread to begin with: TOP got ditched. I already said it was a great political move for Argent.

If I give an air of offense, it might be due to some mild amazement at Omni's unwillingness to admit that they all left TOP, in large part, to shack up with the "roll DH" group. And that was done, in large part, because they didn't like MK. And that, in large part, circles back around to that damned Biodad affair. I could keep boiling down but I'm not interested in really talking about the salt that would remain at the bottom of that pot right now. Anyway, if it's all political, then it's all political. That gets people burned, but hey, I play the game, as you may have mentioned in that lengthy post I only glossed over. When you play, you can lose. I'll tip a glass of whiskey to somebody who pulls a quick one and benefits at my expense. But Omni won't admit it was an act of self-interest to the detriment of TOP. He'll admit all the component elements, but not the resultant whole, and that's a little bewildering.

I will admit that I find it audacious that Argent personally made war on TOP so soon after the end of their relationship. That's simply delicious.

 

As has been previously stated, REPEATEDLY, there was far more to the TOP/Argent breakup than the issue of DH.  That we ended up at war was a sad conclusion to a conflict that had long since been going on,

 

Let me also again be clear, if anyone in PF had wanted to drop TOP even mostly over DH or to roll DH, it would have happened LONG before it ended up happening.  Many of us in PF who held serious grudges against DH (like myself) went out of our way for the longest time to tell TOP and Umbrella that we were not asking them to drop or even move away from DH, even at the height of DH's many shenanigans.  

 

You are attempting to oversimplify a complex and long brewing history that you were not a direct witness to in order to paint us as having made a snap choice to drop one of our oldest allies merely for a sort term political gain.  While politics was certainly a major factor there, it was certainly not the only one or the overwhelming one.

[white majik]

I blame rusty and janax personally. 

[dem61s]

I blame rusty and janax personally. 

 

I miss Janax. ;_;

[trimm]

I miss Janax. ;_;

 

Not nearly as badly as we do.

[Schattenmann]

Sorry next time we'll cancel all our treaties in order to get away from One ally :rolleyes:

 

Hoho!  Well played. :v:

[Omniscient1]

 
Hoho!  Well played. :v:

I am no you, but I have my moments.

[Ardus]

I'm giddy with joy! From my phone I get no "banners to the left".

Remember there is no need for you to get hostile.

You should never let arguing with me get in the way of social drinking, or whatever it was you were out and about doing.

If it wasn't drinking it probably should have been drinking.

[trimm]

You should never let arguing with me get in the way of social drinking, or whatever it was you were out and about doing.

If it wasn't drinking it probably should have been drinking.

 

I'm glad we can all agree on something around here.

[Azaghul]

honestly the fact that people on the other side were using the competence label at all was hilarious enough on its own

Reminds me of my convo with Brehon on the subject...

 

<Brehon[NPO]> You know what kills me.. the [censored] sheep that just start repeating it.

 

I don't think anyone seriously expected the other side to let us use it.

[Brehon]

What amazes me more is people continue to bleat it without being aware of what they are actually saying (and this is people on the EQ side)

[Joe Kremlin]

I thought IQ was better than Competence anyways