Stonewall14 Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 Lol seriously Stone? Ermmm which part? :unsure: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 Any half respectable alliance would have shown him the door, and maybe taken the liberty of leveling his nation themselves. Instead, you protect him and give him a slap on the wrist. At this point, you fully deserve what you get. That's not true, we have locked him up in a cell and forced him to read King Zogs literature for 30 days. Which is much worse than any ZI punishment we could put together Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tehmina Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 The beating everyone to get to the top part? If that's true (and I highly doubt it is :p ), then ITS FUCKING AWESOME. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 (edited) That's not true, we have locked him up in a cell and forced him to read King Zogs literature for 30 days. Which is much worse than any ZI punishment we could put together Well, some people don't enjoy non-fiction, which is rather different from the fantasy your compatriots and apologists have been spewing. At this point, the only question of any importance is whether you knew you were lying with all you said or whether you were merely misinformed about the actions of your alliance members ('raids' on treatied alliances, attempted extortion, etc.) and the 'intricacies' of your own incredibly complex Charter. I suppose it's possible that you could just be incredibly obtuse. However, given the tone you and your pals have used thus far, I'm going to go with 'lying'. Edited April 14, 2015 by kingzog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 It's pretty clear the swf handled the raids stupidly- they had every right to act and so did we. You calling me a liar and reciting endless mambo Jambo of article 2 section 9 third sentence revision 7 doesn't reflect why we are at war with swf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringMeTheHorizon Posted April 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 (edited) MI violated its own Charter and continues to defend that violation, even in the face of fairly decent evidence that they did so. Was it an inadvertent violation? Yes, it definitely seems so. That doesn't make it defensible. Actually please show me where we violated our charter? You couldn't see that? Really? Where are you getting that from? Because I do not see that in our charter, if you'd like the most current version of our charter you can go to our forums. Where it actually says nothing about what you are talking about. For your information http://montersincorporated.proboards.com/thread/56/monstrous-charter?page=1&scrollTo=465 posted before the wars with the last edits before the raids, have fun admitting you had no idea what you were talking about in regards to our charter. Thank you in advanced. I see your point and I concur...I am the worst at diplomacy ever and always resort to violence which solves everything eventually... :awesome: I am however disappointed as I'm sure you are at the lack of activity on the war screens last update and hope that an update blitz of commies is forthcoming... :war: :popcorn: If I posted one third of what people have wanted me to post from our alliance i'd have been banned forum wise. Also, if anyone wants to know the latest peace talks, SWF demands that we change our charter for peace to write in something that specifically guarantees that we change our policy of "picking on" smaller alliances. Because as of right now there is nothing in our charter about tech raiding, but if you listened to King Zog we have broken our chrater. So it's weird that SWF wants something in our charter for peace that actually limits our ability to declare raids. Golly Jee, King Zog, why do you think that is? At this point, the only question of any importance is whether you knew you were lying with all you said or whether you were merely misinformed about the actions of your alliance members ('raids' on treatied alliances, attempted extortion, etc.) and the 'intricacies' of your own incredibly complex Charter. I suppose it's possible that you could just be incredibly obtuse. Misinformed about the attempted extortion is the only thing you've been right about so far. As soon as I found out, I apologized for them, and unilaterally banned that person from raiding. Now some people may think that's not enough. I say, simply, you have your way you'd like to do things, we have ours. Edited April 14, 2015 by BringMeTheHorizon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurnipCruncher Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 It's pretty clear the swf handled the raids stupidly- they had every right to act and so did we. You calling me a liar and reciting endless mambo Jambo of article 2 section 9 third sentence revision 7 doesn't reflect why we are at war with swf I beg to differ. Your complete misunderstanding of Die Linke and its provisions reflects precisely why this has blown up in MI's face. Strangely enough, they are quite rational filthy commies and that is also your path to getting out of this before the escalation that you fear gets out of hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringMeTheHorizon Posted April 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 I beg to differ. Your complete misunderstanding of Die Linke and its provisions reflects precisely why this has blown up in MI's face. Strangely enough, they are quite rational filthy commies and that is also your path to getting out of this before the escalation that you fear gets out of hand. Rational is saying for peace to be achieved we need to edit our charter; in addition to other things? Now The other things aren't bad, and we can handle, but is it rational of them to force us to change our charter for peace? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonewall14 Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 The beating everyone to get to the top part? If that's true (and I highly doubt it is :P ), then ITS !@#$@#$ AWESOME. Yup that is true but wouldn't work in this game obviously.. :awesome: It was all naval combat... :war: I did something similiar in a Space Combat game but we were #1 and fought the top 40 AAs for 40 days and 40 nights until I finally agreed to give them peace... :psyduck: Actually it would work in this game if you could isolate the AAs one by one in 1 vs 1s until you surpassed and wrecked them and then move on to next one...It would require years of fighting and the war chests to fund it so that is why it wouldn't work here also because you wouldn't be able to isolate them 1 vs 1 for long before everyone jumped you...in the other one the game mechanics made it possible to accomplish it... :war: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 I beg to differ. Your complete misunderstanding of Die Linke and its provisions reflects precisely why this has blown up in MI's face. Strangely enough, they are quite rational filthy commies and that is also your path to getting out of this before the escalation that you fear gets out of hand. I wouldn't say blowing up in our face. LSF just put another one of their nations around 20k in peace mode and a half ass- one nation war declaration in attempt to bait us to hit LSF to trigger MDPs isn't exactly blowing up in our face Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tehmina Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 BMTH, you pretty well know SWF is flexible on that demand, and it certainly is not the ice breaker. The nice breaker is something else, which has been mentioned in the negotiations thread.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tehmina Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 BTW, Which game that is Stone? sounds interesting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 and a half ass- one nation war declaration in attempt to bait us to hit LSF to trigger MDPs isn't exactly blowing up in our face You're at war with LSF, you were the moment you posted this DoW. All of our treaties are DL treaties, LSF does not hold a single treaty that SWF do not. We don't need to bait you into anything and don't have any desire to. Most of us had no clue who you are until you kicked your ball into our yard and smashed the green house window. The only reason that we're not fighting an all out war now is because for reasons I don't personally understand, CPCN like you and we like CPCN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonewall14 Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 I wouldn't say blowing up in our face. LSF just put another one of their nations around 20k in peace mode and a half ass- one nation war declaration in attempt to bait us to hit LSF to trigger MDPs isn't exactly blowing up in our face Actually unless I read it wrong it is the MDoAPs and ODoAPs you have to worry about as they require no additional attacks to be actiivated, amirite? :popcorn: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/LSF And then you have to consider people like us for ex who have ODoAPs with some of them also and so forth and so on...So your not in the clear by any means brochacho unless I'm looking at this wrong which is very possible as like I said I don't do diplomacy very well... :v: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Oskar Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 I see your point and I concur...I am the worst at diplomacy ever and always resort to violence which solves everything eventually... :awesome: I am however disappointed as I'm sure you are at the lack of activity on the war screens last update and hope that an update blitz of commies is forthcoming... :war: :popcorn: If I was you I would just war every AA ranked higher than you until you pass them and eventually you may reach #1 alliance in the whole game brah! It works trust me, I did it in another game with my AA and we were like ranked #10 and warred the AAs that outranked us one by one until we knocked them all down and we were #1! :awesome: :war: True Story Brah, I ain't even foolin' neither! :smug: I'm waiting come at us broski! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Solomon I Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 (edited) Actually please show me where we violated our charter? Where are you getting that from? Because I do not see that in our charter, if you'd like the most current version of our charter you can go to our forums. Where it actually says nothing about what you are talking about. For your information http://montersincorporated.proboards.com/thread/56/monstrous-charter?page=1&scrollTo=465 posted before the wars with the last edits before the raids, have fun admitting you had no idea what you were talking about in regards to our charter. Thank you in advanced. Preamble Okay, first of all, it's "cretin." If you're gonna threaten me, do it properly. Monstership All nations that have gained Monstership shall be referred to as “Monsters.” Nations will be granted Monstership by the Internal Councillor on a case by case basis. Any nation may gain Monstership by meeting the following criteria: You are not any form of an internally masked member of another alliance. You are not at war for any out of character offenses. You have a forum account, and are in the alliance affiliation in-game. Any nation in Monsters Inc. may have their Monstership revoked if they are found guilty of theft, espionage, aiding of an enemy, harassment, or any other dreadful crime. Monster Elections Elections shall be held twice per year for the positions of Defense Councillor, Foreign Councillor, Finance Councillor, Internal Councillor, and Speaker of Congress. Elections shall be held in accordance with an election timetable set by the Monster’s Congress. The biannual terms must be of equal length in time. Monster’s Council The four Monster Councillors and the Speaker of Congress shall form the Monster’s Council. The Monster’s Council shall hold the power to implement and enforce Monster laws, and shall conduct the affairs of their department in accordance with the law. The Monster’s Council shall exclusively hold the power to declare war on a nation or alliance, via vote. Defense Councillor The Defense Councillor shall conduct military drills and readiness assessments. During wartime the Defense Councillor shall hold total control of the alliance. Foreign Councillor The Foreign Councillor shall act as the public face of the alliance, and shall conduct day-to-day diplomatic work. Finance Councillor The Finance Councillor shall organize trade circles and facilitate tech deals, and will seek monstrous trade opportunities both foreign and abroad. Internal Councillor The Internal Councillor shall conduct recruiting operations, applicant screening, and education programs. Deputy Councillors Each Monster Councillor may appoint deputy Councillors in their department as is necessary. Speaker of Congress The Speaker of Congress shall function as a tiebreaker in the Monster’s Council, and as the moderator of the Monster’s Congress. Monster’s Congress All Monsters are members of the Monster’s Congress. Submitting Bills Any Monster may submit a bill. For the Monster’s Congress to vote on the bill, the bill must be endorsed by either the Speaker of Congress or four Monsters. Voting Once sufficiently endorsed, a bill may be voted on by the Monster’s Congress, and if it passes by majority vote, the bill will become Monster law. Impeachment The Monster’s Congress shall hold the power to impeach any member of the Monster’s Council by majority vote, if that Councillor is found guilty of a crime, or is found to be inactive without notice for a period greater than 10 days. Impeached councillors will be immediately replaced by one of their deputies. If no deputy can serve as a replacement, the Councillor shall be replaced via emergency election. Two of our members attacked SWF on 4/11 . Now our charter says "if a raid goes bad you forfeit your right to be defended, or you must deal with the consequences." Where in this Charter does it even say that raiders attack at their own risk, never mind that members are restricted in who they're allowed to attack. In fact, the Charter doesn't even talk about raids at all. It just says that membership status can be revoked for several offenses "or any other dreadful crime". Attacking a sovereign alliance and getting other members of your alliance attacked as a consequence, and extorting for peace, all sound like dreadful crimes to me. It seems not even MI knows what MI's Charter says. Edited April 14, 2015 by HM Solomon I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 Rational is saying for peace to be achieved we need to edit our charter; in addition to other things? Now The other things aren't bad, and we can handle, but is it rational of them to force us to change our charter for peace?It is incredibly rational, given that your charter is poorly-written enough that you feel the need to defend those who dragged your alliance into a war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 We added a raid at your own risk policy- haven't updated it yet because we are switching over to better forums soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 It is incredibly rational, given that your charter is poorly-written enough that you feel the need to defend those who dragged your alliance into a war. Because LPH had an amazing charter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 (edited) Two of our members attacked SWF on 4/11 . Now our charter says "if a raid goes bad you forfeit your right to be defended, or you must deal with the consequences." Where are you getting that from? Because I do not see that in our charter, if you'd like the most current version of our charter you can go to our forums. Where it actually says nothing about what you are talking about. For your information http://montersincorporated.proboards.com/thread/56/monstrous-charter?page=1&scrollTo=465 posted before the wars with the last edits before the raids, have fun admitting you had no idea what you were talking about in regards to our charter.This just won the thread! You can all go home. Edited April 14, 2015 by Cress Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Solomon I Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 We added a raid at your own risk policy- haven't updated it yet because we are switching over to better forums soon Because I do not see that in our charter, if you'd like the most current version of our charter you can go to our forums. Where it actually says nothing about what you are talking about. For your information [url=http://montersincorporated.proboards.com/thread/56/monstrous-charter?page=1&scrollTo=465]http://montersincorporated.proboards.com/thread/56/monstrous-charter?page=1&scrollTo=465[/url] posted before the wars with the last edits before the raids, have fun admitting you had no idea what you were talking about in regards to our charter. Your spokesperson doesn't share this opinion. Maybe you added it in, and maybe you didn't, but is it any wonder your members have done stupid stuff like attack other alliance without regard for the consequences or extort for peace when even your leaders don't seem to know what your laws actually say. Get your own house in order before you criticize others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Oskar Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 Why don't you guys let us settle it? Just give 6 mill and 100 Tech to RUKUNU per alliance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonewall14 Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 (edited) BTW, Which game that is Stone? sounds interesting... PM with videos and links sent... :war: I'm waiting come at us broski! LOL actually I think I'm suppossed to post a DoW on your AA but have been too busy atm and I would say be careful what you ask for but it is too late for small talk such as that for your AA and I suppose I will have to walk down the road to the Jewish Nursing Home my Grandma was at and recruit some day 1 players to reach you and most of you AA mates...but make no mistake Doom is coming for you...enjoy! :war: EDIT:I was obviously joking and would if serious I would talk to my good friend Sir Kindle 1st before doing any such thing and was merely messing with Emperor Oskar the comedian! :ehm: :lol1: It is incredibly rational, given that your charter is poorly-written enough that you feel the need to defend those who dragged your alliance into a war. Dammit mayne don't make me agree with ReyRey... :gag: Edited April 15, 2015 by Stonewall14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 Because LPH had an amazing charterYou keep bringing up LPH like it's some kind of abject failure. I did exactly what I set out to do, with minimal bumps in the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted April 14, 2015 Report Share Posted April 14, 2015 Gotta love the owf, even charters aren't safe 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.