kingzog Posted June 3, 2016 Report Share Posted June 3, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Nemhauser said: Puli has a very distorted and deluded view on what loyalty is. Oh hey, the one guy (EDIT: in NoR) who agrees with me. Hope all's well. Edited June 3, 2016 by kingzog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fermion Posted June 3, 2016 Report Share Posted June 3, 2016 On 5/10/2016 at 11:26 AM, Lord Hitchcock said: M Inc didn't like Hartw and then he made us a war flag based on our rich love for war- and he's now an honorary m inc member. Hartw has to research kashmir's heritage and make a flag that suits them. Something that preserves the beauty of the dove, with the power of the paperless treaty. On 5/10/2016 at 11:27 AM, Auctor said: Joke's on you. hartfw didn't make that comic. On 5/10/2016 at 11:28 AM, Lord Hitchcock said: mother $%&@er Favourite.Convo.Ever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted June 6, 2016 Report Share Posted June 6, 2016 On 5/10/2016 at 10:46 AM, Lord Hitchcock said: So seeing him beg to lobby for FAN, summon Sparta when they just established talks, have no faith in NSO behind the scenes yet champion them in public- as well as his thoughts on caustic and the conversation was just prior to doom disbanding is an interesting perception from his point of view. And this was also mentioned on M Inc news and denied by the great sir Williams himself- of course m inc new has always been based on solid evidence. My apologies for the tardiness and I realize it's irrelevant at this point but I'm afraid I must split hairs. What you mentioned on MInc News - and what I contested - was that Kashmir did this and did that when in both instances it was merely discussed by Margrave but not actually acted on. Sparta confirmed they were never approached and FAN would do the same if you could raise them. If Margrave had done more than speculate and talk in hypotheticals I would've known about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemhauser Posted June 6, 2016 Report Share Posted June 6, 2016 On 03/06/2016 at 4:12 AM, kingzog said: Oh hey, the one guy (EDIT: in NoR) who agrees with me. You'd be surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 On Thursday, June 02, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Nemhauser said: Puli has a very distorted and deluded view on what loyalty is. Hey Nem. Long time no see, hope you're well. I don't want to seem partial but I only really have gotten to hear his view, and that of those who agree with him quietly, and that of kingzog. The latter gentleman has been so erratic and so unpleasant to deal with since his return that I, sadly but in earnest, must simply discard it as unreliable. Pulisher has in my experience and to my knowledge with only a single exception always been the absolute epitome of a loyal officer - he's served to the best of his ability and he's always obeyed orders. That exception would be his time in CA, when he was ever so slightly less than perfectly loyal to CA - because he was STILL being perfectly loyal to NoR EVEN AFTER he was forced out the door! He is still loyal to NoR today as far as I can see, sitting on the AA with a title perhaps equivalent to a dunce cap, showing the rest of y'all what slot efficiency looks like. You may disagree with him on any number of subjects, you may question his competency at certain jobs. You may sometimes find him annoying. But to call him disloyal? It truly beggars my mind that the word can be uttered in the same sentence as his handle. Blood is blood and honor is honor and if you want to clarify yourself either in public or in private please feel free to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemhauser Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 Never said he was disloyal. I said he had a distored view on loyalty. His only loyalty lies with the 'brand' of Nordreich, not the alliance itself. Oh, and Thor ofcourse. He doesn't recognize any authority if it's not Thor. You should see our government quarters, if only I could count the number of insults towards our current (and past) government officials, and the Kaiser. He'll maybe court martial me for 'leaking information' or something like that (he's fond of court martialling), but I couldn't care less. The court martials he brought forth against his fellow Nordreich citizens are nothing but a farce. But I doubt he'll have the guts to do so. All his cases so far were against people he knew he could chase away. But I'm here to stay. And one day, I will have his head on my office wall as an ornament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 11, 2016 Report Share Posted June 11, 2016 6 hours ago, Nemhauser said: Never said he was disloyal. I said he had a distored view on loyalty. His only loyalty lies with the 'brand' of Nordreich, not the alliance itself. Oh, and Thor ofcourse. He doesn't recognize any authority if it's not Thor. You should see our government quarters, if only I could count the number of insults towards our current (and past) government officials, and the Kaiser. He's insulted me many times, I just insult him back, it's never been a problem. I've always thought that communication worked better when people feel free to be blunt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) Back to the drama...presenting the above from the perspective of yours truly... Edited June 15, 2016 by White Chocolate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted June 15, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) I do appreciated the good story line White Chocolate. However, I'd have to say, there is certainly some discrepancy to the events. "How Lord Hitchcock Saved White Chocolate from the Evil Margrave beast": Stay tuned! Edited June 15, 2016 by Lord Hitchcock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 On 6/10/2016 at 3:18 AM, Sigrun Vapneir said: Hey Nem. Long time no see, hope you're well. I don't want to seem partial but I only really have gotten to hear his view, and that of those who agree with him quietly, and that of kingzog. The latter gentleman has been so erratic and so unpleasant to deal with since his return that I, sadly but in earnest, must simply discard it as unreliable. Pulisher has in my experience and to my knowledge with only a single exception always been the absolute epitome of a loyal officer - he's served to the best of his ability and he's always obeyed orders. That exception would be his time in CA, when he was ever so slightly less than perfectly loyal to CA - because he was STILL being perfectly loyal to NoR EVEN AFTER he was forced out the door! He is still loyal to NoR today as far as I can see, sitting on the AA with a title perhaps equivalent to a dunce cap, showing the rest of y'all what slot efficiency looks like. You may disagree with him on any number of subjects, you may question his competency at certain jobs. You may sometimes find him annoying. But to call him disloyal? It truly beggars my mind that the word can be uttered in the same sentence as his handle. Blood is blood and honor is honor and if you want to clarify yourself either in public or in private please feel free to do so. He made literal, overt, RL death threats against people in the FCO. (That was the first thing I had to deal with as Kaiser. Yay. It's also the reason the FCO never had even the slightest interest in talking to NoR 2.0.) He is responsible for more splits from NoR than any other individual. And his behavior has never changed despite having been told repeatedly by his superiors to cut it the hell out. He has publicly and belligerently disobeyed direct orders over the years on multiple occasions. All of the above either is or was public knowledge among government people in NoR. Pretty much the opposite of loyalty right there. But I do understand why you can't see it, even when multiple people point it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lysergide Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 I think this would be a good idea for a book. "The Prince of Kashmir". It can be an engaging fairy tale, about the rise and fall of the fabled Prince Margrave of Kashmir. We can include all the characters of the tale. The members of Kashmir and their enemies, can all take part in the riveting tale of intrigue and mystery. Probably would only get 3 stars out of five on the Amazon Review, but we will all be able to enjoy this for the rest of our lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted June 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 23 hours ago, Lysergide said: I think this would be a good idea for a book. "The Prince of Kashmir". It can be an engaging fairy tale, about the rise and fall of the fabled Prince Margrave of Kashmir. We can include all the characters of the tale. The members of Kashmir and their enemies, can all take part in the riveting tale of intrigue and mystery. Probably would only get 3 stars out of five on the Amazon Review, but we will all be able to enjoy this for the rest of our lives. Sounds good to me. How would we deceive margrave? Some little midget running around thinking only about himself? im so glad he's gone... He took the cowards way out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gowfanatic Posted June 25, 2016 Report Share Posted June 25, 2016 4 minutes ago, Lord Hitchcock said: Sounds good to me. How would we deceive margrave? Some little midget running around thinking only about himself? im so glad he's gone... He took the cowards way out. Do you mean depict? Though, I'm sure little midgets are quite deceiving also... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 26, 2016 Report Share Posted June 26, 2016 On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Lord Hitchcock said: I do appreciated the good story line White Chocolate. However, I'd have to say, there is certainly some discrepancy to the events. "How Lord Hitchcock Saved White Chocolate from the Evil Margrave beast": Stay tuned! In reality you are Captain Hook raging off somewhere on the back cover of the book. 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.