Jump to content

sra ln !@#$%* fest


Xanth

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

See, and here's the thing:  Sigrun and Meth were pretty active in here, but once their positions are refuted by fact, all we get is this.

 

Could be coincidence -- for all I know they live in Sweden and are asleep right now.  It just seems convenient.

 

I believe it's roughly supper time for each of them.

 

On the menu tonight: their words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how you trot out these 'facts' as proving something. On closer examination each dissolves or backfires. For instance I see you are back to talking about the supposed late hits from Minc nations on the ceasefire. Now, aside from the fact that that is something that occurs in virtually every ceasefire and does not justify the reaction, it's also a fact that you learned of those attacks AFTER rejecting the peace so it really had nothing to do with the decision at all. It's just something you came up with later to make your latrine smell like roses.

 

Pointed that out ~2weeks ago and the claim was dropped... for a few days. Now I see after I tuned the forum out for a couple days you are repeating it again.

 

It's all like that. Some things are true - and irrelevant. Some arent even true at all. Keep repeating them loudly and often enough, try to keep your folk on side, I know. I've debunked most of them several times already and I only regret trying to reason with you, clearly that was a waste of time. 

Edited by Sigrun Vapneir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how you trot out these 'facts' as proving something. On closer examination each dissolves or backfires. For instance I see you are back to talking about the supposed late hits from Minc nations on the ceasefire. Now, aside from the fact that that is something that occurs in virtually every ceasefire and does not justify the reaction, it's also a fact that you learned of those attacks AFTER rejecting the peace so it really had nothing to do with the decision at all. It's just something you came up with later to make your latrine smell like roses.

 

Pointed that out ~2weeks ago and the claim was dropped... for a few days. Now I see after I tuned the forum out for a couple days you are repeating it again.

 

It's all like that. Some things are true - and irrelevant. Some arent even true at all. Keep repeating them loudly and often enough, try to keep your folk on side, I know. I've debunked most of them several times already and I only regret trying to reason with you, clearly that was a waste of time. 

 

I'll tell you what.  Why don't you first start refuting my post POINT BY POINT instead of focusing on the ONE thing you think you can hang your hat on.  Start with the eternal war thing.  A reasonable person can concede when she is wrong -- I will be the first to do so once you refute me.

 

While you are doing that, I will be taking screenshots of the PM's I sent/forum posts I can find that refute the one fact you cared (dared) to address here.

 

Facts are our friends, Sigrun -- can you really deny that?  The fact that you have none should not make you deny this.

 

I'm off for screen shots.

Edited by Walshington
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes by all means go create some more screenshots lol.

 

By "create" do you mean "fabricate"?  I'm not that good. Again, I'll make the offer:  find any fact or link I've posted that is fabricated.  Grab a screenie of "the real" post.

 

Did I fabricate Meth's OWF post in which he declared that "SRA would never know peace"?  Did I fabricate the CN screenshot in which the LN member says the same?

Did I erase all of the calls you said I made for "eternal war"?  Or can you just not find any?

 

Anyway, shouldn't you be off refuting my post point by point to finally, FINALLY demonstrate without a doubt that I am the abominable, lying cheat you know  I am?

 

Maybe I control the OWF content.  Maybe I'm telling the truth, as always.  Which do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes by all means go create some more screenshots lol.

 1. Start by stating your own [i]"facts"[/i] before trying to refute the [B]FACTS [/B] that are already present.

 

2. I think you grossly over estimate walshs abilities with graphic software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how you trot out these 'facts' as proving something. On closer examination each dissolves or backfires. For instance I see you are back to talking about the supposed late hits from Minc nations on the ceasefire. Now, aside from the fact that that is something that occurs in virtually every ceasefire and does not justify the reaction, it's also a fact that you learned of those attacks AFTER rejecting the peace so it really had nothing to do with the decision at all. It's just something you came up with later to make your latrine smell like roses.

 

Pointed that out ~2weeks ago and the claim was dropped... for a few days. Now I see after I tuned the forum out for a couple days you are repeating it again.

 

It's all like that. Some things are true - and irrelevant. Some arent even true at all. Keep repeating them loudly and often enough, try to keep your folk on side, I know. I've debunked most of them several times already and I only regret trying to reason with you, clearly that was a waste of time. 

 

Actually what you said was that I turned up 45 minutes after the fact.  Your words, not mine.  I know, I know -- another fabricated link.

 

And I'm not going to screenshot the messages and forum posts.  There are dozens, and the work required to cut and paste from sent folders, incoming folders and forum posts would be too much to waste on someone who regards facts, dates, times and her own words as traps, and relies solely upon invective to prove her point.

 

I know -- abominable.

 

abominable-smowman.jpg

Edited by Walshington
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the CN awards come out, can there be a new listing for most abominable leader? 

 

 

Walsh for most abominable 2015! starting campaigning right now. 

 

 

Walsh, use some more facts, we need you to appear more abominable if you are ever to win this award.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't often agree with Sigrun, but when I do, it's that Walsh is the most abominable.

 

 

 

 

Remember, a vote for Walsh, is a vote for abominability... abominableness? Abominable-esque? 

 

Erm... Vote Walsh 2015.

 

 

 

**this post paid for by the Walsh_The_Abominable Co. Inc. LLLP. (R) (TM) FDA Approved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. I think you grossly over estimate walshs abilities with graphic software.

 

It's not exactly difficult to pirate photoshop.

 

Also, *I* think I grossly underestimated what you lot were willing and able to do propaganda-wise to my sorrow once already, and do not intend to make that mistake twice.

 

Oh, one last thought. You grossly overestimated your military competence, as well as our own war-weariness, when you decided you preferred to go to war with the three of us instead of take peace with Brown.

 

And Walsh, I am not saying it is bad to call allies. You are right, LN called allies. When an alliance 10 times the size of LN attacked them, and diplomacy had been given some time (a week right? I think I said a couple once. It was a long week I guess) yet been thrown back in all of our faces.

 

You've bloated your alliance to twice its original size, and brought in an entire AA superior to your own as well, all to try to finish off your easy kill. Oh, and looky looky, we are far from finished.

 

And I am not 'angry' at your allies for coming in - I've had courteous interactions with all of the ones that have shown up on my doorstep, and quite a bit of fun talking with some of them.

 

But of course I would prefer they quit serving as human shields for you sooner rather than later. And given just how badly you outnumbered us to start with, just how much help you have summoned, and just how poorly you are nonetheless managing to perform on the battlefield, no one in my position could resist pointing it out occasionally.

Edited by Sigrun Vapneir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigrun: the guy rp'ing as a girl to justify acting like a bitch.

 

Your camp has nothing, nothing at all new to say. You have nothing to show. No proof of anything you say. You shout and insult and attempt to intimidate, that's all you have. 

 

You will sit back and watch your ally burn to the ground. You watch as minc's nations flee in surrender and the rest that stay drop to zi daily. You sit there and watch this happen, for what. I'll tell you what, pride. You're too proud to admit you're wrong. Too proud to admit you've been defeated. 

 

It's no secret that your nation will bounce back. You are only down to $14.9 billion. You can come back from any of this. Good to know you are purely serving yourself at the cost of your ally. The destruction of minc is on your hands. Their blood and pixels are on your hands. 

 

This should be kept in mind to anyone that would look to treaty or befriend CA and LN. Your pride overrides your responsibility to keep your ally from literally burning to the ground.

 

In case you haven't gotten it already, no one in sra takes a thing you say seirously at this point. Each of your posts reads the exact same. You would serve yourself well to just quote your own posts over and over at this point because honestly that how they read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Your camp has nothing, nothing at all new to say. You have nothing to show. No proof of anything you say. You shout and insult and attempt to intimidate, that's all you have.

[...]

In case you haven't gotten it already, no one in sra takes a thing you say seirously at this point. Each of your posts reads the exact same. You would serve yourself well to just quote your own posts over and over at this point because honestly that how they read.

 

All of that would definitely be mutual.

 

Also

 

 

You will sit back and watch your ally burn to the ground.

 

 

You act like I force them to fight? How absurd.

 

As long as we have been associated I have been holding them back, I have been the peaceful influence on them, not the other way around. They have made generous offers of peace here and had those thrown in their face, ridiculous insulting and unconscionable proposals thrown back at them. They know the score here, your fluffery may have an audience but surely you are not delusional enough to think we believe it?

 

You've done all you can to them, and they are still standing. Whether you realize yet or not, you have lost this one. You will not exterminate the monsters, though you wreck your entire alliance trying. And no one is going to apologize for defending ourselves either.

 

 

 

You sit there and watch this happen, for what. I'll tell you what, pride. You're too proud to admit you're wrong. Too proud to admit you've been defeated. 

 

 

You sit there and watch this happen, for what? (Punctuation is important.) I'll tell you what, pride. You're too proud to admit you're wrong. Too proud to admit you bit off more than you can chew.

 

Oh this was actually fun, and if I had any respect for you at all I'd certainly continue it. But I don't think I shall.

Edited by Sigrun Vapneir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's not exactly difficult to pirate photoshop.

 

Probably, for those who are computer savvy.  I use a program called "PhotoStudio", which is likely inferior in every way.

 

Also, *I* think I grossly underestimated what you lot were willing and able to do propaganda-wise to my sorrow once already, and do not intend to make that mistake twice.

 

I can't really see what we've done propaganda-wise that is so revolutionary that you underestimated it.  Is it volume or one particular example that you find objectionable?   What you really should be doing is thanking me for the things I'm NOT doing propaganda-wise.

 

Oh, one last thought. You grossly overestimated your military competence, as well as our own war-weariness, when you decided you preferred to go to war with the three of us instead of take peace with Brown.

 

I hate to niggle here, but where I can appreciate that you feel you are fighting a defensive war, in no way did I decide that I "preferred to war with the three of you instead of peace with Brown," any more than Monsters "preferred to war with Kashmir rather than..." etc. etc.

 

 

And Walsh, I am not saying it is bad to call allies. You are right, LN called allies. When an alliance 10 times the size of LN attacked them, and diplomacy had been given some time (a week right? I think I said a couple once. It was a long week I guess) yet been thrown back in all of our faces.

 

I assume when you say "thrown in your faces" you refer to me not deciding to sign on to the III% peace thing? Why not avoid the loaded language, and just call things what they are?  If I was truly throwing things in your faces, everybody will recognize it who sees it.

 

You've bloated your alliance to twice its original size, and brought in an entire AA superior to your own as well, all to try to finish off your easy kill. Oh, and looky looky, we are far from finished.

 

I've said this before -- I never asked anyone to come in.  Ghosts have come to SRA (and alliances have entered) for two reasons: 1.  They like us  or 2. They didn't like Monsters, Inc.

 

I never thought  or stated that LN, CA or Monsters, Inc. would be "an easy kill".  (Although Hitchcock apparently believed we would be...) 

 

And I am not 'angry' at your allies for coming in - I've had courteous interactions with all of the ones that have shown up on my doorstep, and quite a bit of fun talking with some of them.

 

That is actually how it is supposed to work. 

 

But of course I would prefer they quit serving as human shields for you sooner rather than later. And given just how badly you outnumbered us to start with, just how much help you have summoned, and just how poorly you are nonetheless managing to perform on the battlefield, no one in my position could resist pointing it out occasionally.

 

Not certain who's performing badly on the battlefield.  Here are the most recent stats, which show things being mostly even.  Mechanics are mechanics, and the tools of war are the tools of war.  And you have been in this game too long to not get how wars work in terms of nukes per day -- it gets hashed out every war we have.

 

The key stat, I think, is that Monsters Inc. is at a quarter of their starting NS and at 50% of their nations.  That is not mechanics, but people not willing to take part in (yet another) Methrage crusade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair to SRA, the ghosting is probably more about standard summer boredom. Nations have too much money and not enough targets.

 

I'm honestly shocked that the MethRaid hasn't blown up bigger than it has.

To be honest, we've had to turn people down.  I kind of felt bad doing it, but there are only so many slots available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, and here's the thing:  Sigrun and Meth were pretty active in here, but once their positions are refuted by fact, all we get is this.
 
Could be coincidence -- for all I know they live in Sweden and are asleep right now.  It just seems convenient.

I don't think I've ever fought an alliance which craves as much attention as you do. Responding to all your BS gets tedious.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I've ever fought an alliance which craves as much attention as you do. Responding to all your BS gets tedious.

 

 

By BS, I assume you mean "facts".

 

How can it be tiring when you never actually respond?  Go back and read the thread.  It is a continuing pattern:

 

Sigrun or Meth posts.

 

Walsh responds to their posts point by point, dismantling their arguments through data and logic.

 

Walsh adds new points.

 

Sigrun or Meth responds by hurling insults ("you're abominable!  You spat in our faces") and never actually acknowledging the information refuted/presented by Walsh.

 

Really, it's all you can do.

 

Let me ask you a simple question, Meth or Sigrun:

 

Who brought up eternal war, you or me?  Answer and cite sources.

 

(You won't answer because you KNOW the answer, it's been proven here. You asked for proof and you got it.  Then you ignored it.  Direct questions are the enemy of the guilty.)

 

I have to hand it to you -- you are undefeated in the art of debate, in the same way I am undefeated at Olympic pole vault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Debating Walsh is like debating this,

 

Horses-ass.jpg

 

I never knew how fitting their name was until I was forced to deal with them. However the 3 basic facts to this war are,

1. SRA attacked first.
2. Walsh voided the agreed upon peace deal made with his lower gov.
3. SRA has refused peace ever since.

Edited by Methrage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. SRA has refused peace ever since.

 

I totally disagree with your first premise, but let's look at this last one.  This a downright lie.  The lie is painful.  I have given you every opportunity to come to the table to discuss peace.  You have refused to do so.  We have had this conversation both through PMs and on the OWF.  There is a condition for talks and you refuse to meet the condition.  Do not blame SRA because you choose not to talk to us in a civilized manner.

 

 

To: Methrage From: Smurthwaite Date: 6/27/2015 12:54:17 PM

Subject: You should read this.
Message: redass.boards.net/thread/601/regarding-war?page=1&scrollTo=6581

It is probably in the best interest of your allies that you take care of this quickly. Otherwise, we'll have to fill the 2nd and 3rd slots of those poor MI nations who are crumbling.

I don't say that to be contentious, because I honestly don't feel that way. This was has been a nice distraction, but I do so hate to watch the manipulated burn for somebody who claims to care about them, but whose actions speak otherwise.

Good day, sir.

 

 

To: Smurthwaite From: Methrage Date: 6/27/2015 1:15:17 PM



Subject: RE: You should read this.

Message: It doesn't sound like an admission of defeat is what you guys are looking for by how you worded that.

 

 

To: Methrage From: Smurthwaite Date: 6/27/2015 1:17:54 PM



Subject: RE: You should read this.

Message: Look man. You are on the OWF talking about peace quite a bit. You allies in MI are about done. I fought one of them and have seen their WCs. They aren't going to get out of this war without some cooperation on your part. If you care about them, as you have said on the OWF several times, it would behoove you to come to the table. If you don't, you can let them burn. We are still having quite a bit of fun. The choice is yours man. But remember, there are two conditions to coming to the table: Honesty and Civility.



When you are ready, let me know.

 

 

 

I tried to post the whole conversation, but got this

You have posted more than the allowed number of quoted blocks of text

 

I'll leave it with one more, the last I heard from you.

 

 

To: Smurthwaite From: Methrage Date: 6/27/2015 10:12:53 PM

Subject: RE: You should read this.
Message: I've notified our allies of your proposition and we're discussing it. I'll let you know if an agreement is reached regarding your suggestion.

 

So, back to honesty and civility.  I'm tired of the lies you spread.  I'm tired of the 1/2-truths.  I'm tired of the anger your sides consistently shows.  I'm tired of you.  Unless you come to the table, I will have to deal with you longer, and the longer it takes, the more...insistent...I will be about conditions that will get your friends peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Debating Walsh is like debating this,

 

Horses-ass.jpg

 

I never knew how fitting their name was until I was forced to deal with them. However the 3 basic facts to this war are,

1. SRA attacked first.
2. Walsh voided the agreed upon peace deal made with his lower gov.
3. SRA has refused peace ever since.

 

That would only be a valid statement if you were actually debating me. But you didn't answer the question, you changed the subject.  That is EXACTLY what I said you'd do here!  Your showing yourself to be exactly what I said you are -- someone who refuses to debate.

 

I bet you forgot the question, didn't you?

 

Here it is so you don't have to scroll up:

 

Let me ask you a simple question, Meth or Sigrun:

 

Who brought up eternal war, you or me?  Answer and cite sources.

 

 

By the way, I am available to honestly answer any direct question you may wish to pose.  Just answer mine and pose one!

Edited by Walshington
Link to comment
Share on other sites


1. SRA attacked first.
2. Walsh voided the agreed upon peace deal made with his lower gov.
3. SRA has refused peace ever since.

 

1. Other 'alliances' attacked as well, but you have continued to focus solely on SRA, which disavowed the one attack by someone still flying their AA. You were within your rights to fight back, but Walsh's acknowledgment that it was one member acting alone is pretty much unprecedented in terms of its clarity.

 

2 ....after your buddies conducted another round of attacks and then sent peace offers. Refusing a disingenuous surrender hardly shows a lack of nobility. Your anger would be more properly directed at whatever is left of Monsters Inc.

 

3. Your idea of peace is "Everybody stop and walk away." That's not going to happen, and you know it. Peace will actually have to be negotiated.

 

 

Fact is, you and your apologists don't have a leg to stand on. Speaking personally, though, I hope you continue to be intransigent. I think it's important that everyone close to you truly learn the price that is to be paid by associating with someone as unhinged as yourself.

 

If it were up to me, I'd be pushing for incredibly harsh terms for you and several of your allies. The lot of you deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The great irony here is that the abominable one is pushing the coalition for the most lenient terms* of all.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
*also the laziest



You saw it here first folks! The Abominable Walsh pushing for viceroys and forced disbandment. I heard he was even contemplating RL terms. A case of beer for every soldier and a lady to drink it with! There were talks of having meth water my plants while I'm on vacation!

Walsh 2015
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I totally disagree with your first premise, but let's look at this last one.  This a downright lie.  The lie is painful.  I have given you every opportunity to come to the table to discuss peace.

Offering to discuss peace isn't the same as offering peace, I see no reason to agree to anything other than the original peace deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...