Pastoralis Praeeminentiae

[Sir Kiloist]

3 minutes ago, James Spanier said:

 

I can confirm.

 

I am amazed you found this place.

[James Spanier]

Just now, Sir Kiloist said:

 

I am amazed you found this place.

 

I can't not find that which I have never left.

[Silvaienia]

10 minutes ago, Blackatron said:

Official announcement; per consensus on voice chat on CN radio this is to be known as the Gh0s7busting War, or similar.

I totally support this name suggestion. 

[Sir Kiloist]

Just now, James Spanier said:

 

I can't not find that which I have never left.

 

Are you implying you are like the rest of us and can't leave?

[James Spanier]

Just now, Sir Kiloist said:

 

Are you implying you are like the rest of us and can't leave?

 

You are correct.

[Sir Kiloist]

Just now, James Spanier said:

 

You are correct.

 

Currently rethinking my opinion of Argent.

[The Big Bad]

19 minutes ago, Blackatron said:

You know it is the attacked alliance that activates a defensive treaty, and not their ally defending them right?

 

I for one am very happy with my correspondence with all of TTK's allies currently, so no complaints from me. 

 

That depend entirely on the wording of the treaty.   

[Mandystalin]

I prefer "They interrupted my holiday and my sled for no good reason... war"

 

 

But seriously. TTK is accused of plotting "a future Crusade against the Church of Oculus" and of "dispatching agents to other alliances to intercede on their behalf"

 

I actually started typing out a big reply logically explaining why this would be an illogical course of action for TTK, but then I wondered why I was a) insulting the OWF's collective intelligence and b) wasting my breath/pixels. We all know that the CB is irrelevant and made up. Tellingly, despite an impressive sticking to the party line of 'U iz plotterz' by the Oculus member nations, the story behind it wobbles about with every argument - here and elsewhere. Was it because Gh0s7 was a member? Was it because we (supposedly) knew what he was (supposedly) doing and didn't stop it? Was it because we (supposedly) knew what he was (supposedly) doing and (supposedly) supported/encouraged it? Was it because we (supposedly) instigated whatever it was he was (supposedly) doing? Was it because TTK itself is (supposedly) plotting some anti-Oc nastiness? There is no clear party line on the CB, there is no clarity offered when requested, evidence is claimed but not forthcoming... need I even point out that TTK was never approached by anybody to explain itself. The inescapable conclusion? They were looking for a fight. The only worthwhile question IMO is why. Maybe they were trying to restart the war that just finished. Maybe they were trying to punish TTK for its part in that war. maybe they are making a point about what happens when somebody stands up to the Oc-bloc. Maybe they were worried that we had attained some sort of figurehead prominence after the last war and wanted to stamp on that. Only Oculus' leaders know, and they aren't telling. 

[Noctis Lucis Caelum]

59 minutes ago, Blackatron said:

You know it is the attacked alliance that activates a defensive treaty, and not their ally defending them right?

 

I for one am very happy with my correspondence with all of TTK's allies currently, so no complaints from me. 

In a mutual defense pact, I think who's activating it would matter more. In the case of a treaty like the one you have with them, the asking part & providing military assistance part are both completely optional. So if they really wanted to help out, I think they could even if they wouldn't be obligated to whether you were to ask them for assistance or not.

 

*If one signatory comes under assault from a hostile alliance, they may ask the other for military aid. The other signatory has the option of giving military aid and assistance."

 

If you don't want them to get involved regardless (Maybe you already know your alliance is guilty), his desire to see evidence is pretty pointless.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Noctis Lucis Caelum

[darkfox]

57 minutes ago, Mandystalin said:

I prefer "They interrupted my holiday and my sled for no good reason... war"

 

 

But seriously. TTK is accused of plotting "a future Crusade against the Church of Oculus" and of "dispatching agents to other alliances to intercede on their behalf"

 

I actually started typing out a big reply logically explaining why this would be an illogical course of action for TTK, but then I wondered why I was a) insulting the OWF's collective intelligence and b) wasting my breath/pixels. We all know that the CB is irrelevant and made up. Tellingly, despite an impressive sticking to the party line of 'U iz plotterz' by the Oculus member nations, the story behind it wobbles about with every argument - here and elsewhere. Was it because Gh0s7 was a member? Was it because we (supposedly) knew what he was (supposedly) doing and didn't stop it? Was it because we (supposedly) knew what he was (supposedly) doing and (supposedly) supported/encouraged it? Was it because we (supposedly) instigated whatever it was he was (supposedly) doing? Was it because TTK itself is (supposedly) plotting some anti-Oc nastiness? There is no clear party line on the CB, there is no clarity offered when requested, evidence is claimed but not forthcoming... need I even point out that TTK was never approached by anybody to explain itself. The inescapable conclusion? They were looking for a fight. The only worthwhile question IMO is why. Maybe they were trying to restart the war that just finished. Maybe they were trying to punish TTK for its part in that war. maybe they are making a point about what happens when somebody stands up to the Oc-bloc. Maybe they were worried that we had attained some sort of figurehead prominence after the last war and wanted to stamp on that. Only Oculus' leaders know, and they aren't telling. 

 

Alliances have been rolled for less. If people think our CB isn't strong enough then feel free to do something about it.

[Blackatron]

1 hour ago, Mandystalin said:

I prefer "They interrupted my holiday and my sled for no good reason... war"

 

 

But seriously. TTK is accused of plotting "a future Crusade against the Church of Oculus" and of "dispatching agents to other alliances to intercede on their behalf"

 

I actually started typing out a big reply logically explaining why this would be an illogical course of action for TTK, but then I wondered why I was a) insulting the OWF's collective intelligence and b) wasting my breath/pixels. We all know that the CB is irrelevant and made up. Tellingly, despite an impressive sticking to the party line of 'U iz plotterz' by the Oculus member nations, the story behind it wobbles about with every argument - here and elsewhere. Was it because Gh0s7 was a member? Was it because we (supposedly) knew what he was (supposedly) doing and didn't stop it? Was it because we (supposedly) knew what he was (supposedly) doing and (supposedly) supported/encouraged it? Was it because we (supposedly) instigated whatever it was he was (supposedly) doing? Was it because TTK itself is (supposedly) plotting some anti-Oc nastiness? There is no clear party line on the CB, there is no clarity offered when requested, evidence is claimed but not forthcoming... need I even point out that TTK was never approached by anybody to explain itself. The inescapable conclusion? They were looking for a fight. The only worthwhile question IMO is why. Maybe they were trying to restart the war that just finished. Maybe they were trying to punish TTK for its part in that war. maybe they are making a point about what happens when somebody stands up to the Oc-bloc. Maybe they were worried that we had attained some sort of figurehead prominence after the last war and wanted to stamp on that. Only Oculus' leaders know, and they aren't telling. 

Holy Wall of Text Mandy! I'm not reading that! 

[Mandystalin]

17 minutes ago, darkfox said:

If people think our CB isn't strong enough then feel free to do something about it.

I am. I'm highlighting the problem and I'm fighting back against my attackers. What more can I do? Plot? 

[Caladin]

19 hours ago, MrGed said:

Oculus ya'll need to split up, have a good civil war and stop picking on random alliances for the crime of not being utterly subservient just because you're bored, m'kay?

 

o/ The Templar Knights

 

Hear hear

[Auctor]

The utter senselessness of the action does nothing to negate it having occurred. Not sure why anyone would have considered that a clever point.

[Thrash]

19 hours ago, Terminator said:

 

 

LOL. That's me asking if they want help rolling NG again after finding out about the war. Let's see some more "plotting" evidence, cause this ain't it.

[Noctis Lucis Caelum]

5 hours ago, Mandystalin said:

I actually started typing out a big reply logically explaining why this would be an illogical course of action for TTK

Why your leader would knowingly harbor someone as he would plot against Oculus & their allies doesn't make sense to me at all, so the most logical explanation is your leadership lacks logic. I think those who portrayed him as a duel member so he could represent himself as part of their alliances while scheming are also guilty, but your leadership knowingly harboring him on the AA as he was doing this stuff made your alliance's guilt the most obvious. Perhaps Gh0s7 considered your alliance more expendable than the others & realized your leaders lacked any common sense. Or maybe your leader wanted another round with Oculus, so they didn't care that his actions would make you guys a target.

 

Blackatron replied with "infra>friends it seems" in response to me declaring on 2 nuclear nations within my range instead of selling all my infrastructure to fight only non-nuclear nations when defending a lower tier member who got attacked. My method secured a surrender within a few days, since I did not care about losing infrastructure from nukes in defense of my alliance & was much more effective than pointlessly selling my infra. So even public comments like that by Blackatron I think clearly shows he lacks any common sense. So you can explain how illogical your alliance leadership is all you want, but that doesn't make a difference in what occurred.

[The Big Bad]

Let us just use a little common sense here.  TTK knows it has enemies, TTK knows it wants renege.  If TTK was not plotting they are complete and total morons. Is TTK claiming they are morons?  You, plotted as most competent alliances would.  This time you just got caught. So stop playing the victim and acting like you are just to stupid to have been plotting.  Man up, own it and do a better job next time.  

Edited July 30, 2017 by The Big Bad

[Lord Hitchcock]

The problem is that if TTK doesn't take responsibility for their actions, then there is a glimmer of hope of people coming to their defense.

 

If TTK were to own up to their actions then all of a sudden they are completely destroyed.

 

Deny till death I guess, either ways it's going that route. How will people remember TTK? The alliance who took responsibility for their actions, or the alliance that played the victim card?

 

For shame, TTK. Die with some honor.

 

[Thrash]

I'd defend them either way, the problem is they won't let us.

[OldSelf]

1. Pay reps for Ghost (agree and obtain eternally the right to wipe out all his shelters, starting with AM).

2. Accept from NPO a vice-royalty visit to prove the heresy is, was, and has been out-rooted in full.

3. Apologize properly for claims of assaulting NG's pixels by promising "I will only hit Umbrella" until peace is signed.

 

Total Victory.

[EaTeMuP]

11 minutes ago, Thrash said:

I'd defend them either way, the problem is they won't let us.

 

It is ok, I'm sure you will have other opportunities as the co-conspirators are routed.  Some have already come forward seeking asylum.

[Mandystalin]

1 hour ago, Noctis Lucis Caelum said:

Why your leader would knowingly harbor someone as he would plot against Oculus & their allies doesn't make sense to me at all, so the most logical explanation is your leadership lacks logic. I think those who portrayed him as a duel member so he could represent himself as part of their alliances while scheming are also guilty, but your leadership knowingly harboring him on the AA as he was doing this stuff made your alliance's guilt the most obvious. Perhaps Gh0s7 considered your alliance more expendable than the others & realized your leaders lacked any common sense. Or maybe your leader wanted another round with Oculus, so they didn't care that his actions would make you guys a target.

 

Blackatron replied with "infra>friends it seems" in response to me declaring on 2 nuclear nations within my range instead of selling all my infrastructure to fight only non-nuclear nations when defending a lower tier member who got attacked. My method secured a surrender within a few days, since I did not care about losing infrastructure from nukes in defense of my alliance & was much more effective than pointlessly selling my infra. So even public comments like that by Blackatron I think clearly shows he lacks any common sense. So you can explain how illogical your alliance leadership is all you want, but that doesn't make a difference in what occurred.

 

1 hour ago, The Big Bad said:

Let us just use a little common sense here.  TTK knows it has enemies, TTK knows it wants renege.  If TTK was not plotting they are complete and total morons. Is TTK claiming they are morons?  You, plotted as most competent alliances would.  This time you just got caught. So stop playing the victim and acting like you are just to stupid to have been plotting.  Man up, own it and do a better job next time.  

 

And here we return to my post - are we being rolled for simply harbouring somebody who was (supposedly) plotting, or are we being rolled for (supposedly) plotting ourselves? It is a bad sign when you can't even state categorically what false reason you are using to attack us

[CrinkledStraw]

3 hours ago, Auctor said:

The utter senselessness of the action does nothing to negate it having occurred. Not sure why anyone would have considered that a clever point.

 

What. action?

[CrinkledStraw]

2 hours ago, Noctis Lucis Caelum said:

...leadership knowingly harboring him on the AA as he was doing this stuff... 

 

What. stuff.

 

"CB isn't clear." "YES IT IS." "Okay, what is it?" "Actions and stuff."

[The Big Bad]

24 minutes ago, Mandystalin said:

 

 

And here we return to my post - are we being rolled for simply harbouring somebody who was (supposedly) plotting, or are we being rolled for (supposedly) plotting ourselves? It is a bad sign when you can't even state categorically what false reason you are using to attack us

 

So you are going with the, we are to stupid to have done this defense?  Gotcha.  Not the way I would have played it but, you all do you. Out of curiosity what CB were you going to use if we sat around and did nothing and let you come knocking first?  Spying? Plotting?  Past actions?  Or none at all as is so common now?