Arcadian Empire Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Now only a few more episodes and we'll enter history that I can actually recognise... =P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the damned Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 SG was rude and abusive to Legionnaires that disagreed with him while he was a cabinet member.SG's cronies encouraged and engaged in a similar behavior. SG posted Xavier's logs which started GW III and nearly destroyed the Legion. SG (as you mentioned) left the Legion during a war (that he started) while he was a member of the cabinet. If SG was on fire I wouldn't pee on him to put out the flames. edit: But I understand that you are a nicer person than me Swampy and try to see the best in people. There were several great Legionnaires in their teens. SG was not only immature he was a person of low character. The only thing i would disagree with here is that Sir Galahad should not be blamed for releasing those logs. I never understood how a democratic gov that tried to tell its members to cancel a long standing treaty and an ally that viewed the legion as a hired goon would be absolved of any guilt in the matter. Everyone blames him for leaking the logs but he was really the only person that gave legions membership any clue as to what was going on. Hindsight shows that it was a poor decision but it wasnt the worst one made at the time. PS Hi Simon and all former legion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon De Montfort Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) The only thing i would disagree with here is that Sir Galahad should not be blamed for releasing those logs. I never understood how a democratic gov that tried to tell its members to cancel a long standing treaty and an ally that viewed the legion as a hired goon would be absolved of any guilt in the matter. Everyone blames him for leaking the logs but he was really the only person that gave legions membership any clue as to what was going on. Hindsight shows that it was a poor decision but it wasnt the worst one made at the time.PS Hi Simon and all former legion I wouldn't be surprised if SG actually posted them on the OWF under a false account. But he did post them in the Legion member's forum which he knew was insecure. So either through malice or stupidity he started GW III. The idea that the Legion could avoid a reckoning with the NPO by ending the treaty with GATO was just silly. The NPO was coming for the Legion and it didn't matter what treaties the Legion canceled. The Legion was in the NPO sights and no matter how much the Legion tried or how much it wished for peace it was a marked alliance. Edited January 28, 2009 by Simon De Montfort Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 To be honest...I do blame SG for ruining VX. Conversations like those contained in those logs happened between gov leaders all the time. Hell I had them all the time...with people on both sides of the web. VincentXander was a good man, a good leader, who did many GOOD things for GATO and SG basically RUINED him with those logs. VX didn't deserve what he got IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virillus Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 SG was rude and abusive to Legionnaires that disagreed with him while he was a cabinet member.SG's cronies encouraged and engaged in a similar behavior. SG posted Xavier's logs which started GW III and nearly destroyed the Legion. SG (as you mentioned) left the Legion during a war (that he started) while he was a member of the cabinet. If SG was on fire I wouldn't pee on him to put out the flames. edit: But I understand that you are a nicer person than me Swampy and try to see the best in people. There were several great Legionnaires in their teens. SG was not only immature he was a person of low character. Yet beyond all that. He was a nice guy that always meant the best. Personally, I prefer to focus on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad JuJu Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Swampy, It's cool to read all this and remember what happened. My main memories up to this point was so overwhelmed by my psychotic hatred at us (Legion) for not joining into GW2 that I quit right after it and joined FAN because "they weren't afraid to fight". It is my opinion that NPO won the game the minute that GW2 ended without Legion getting involved. We had 1500 nations and were the largest alliance in the game and GW2 was almost a fair fight without us. Had we entered the war at that point NPO would still be paying off reps to us. BTW, GW3, where you guys attacked us? we had a NAP!!! Can't wait till the next installment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Swampy Posted January 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 BTW, GW3, where you guys attacked us? we had a NAP!!! Patently false, actually. Allow me, once and for all, to dispel that long-standing myth. As I mentioned in the OP, the treaty held by FAN and Legion at the time was not an NAP. It was termed the GLOCK treaty, an acronym for Great Leaders Offer Cake and Kisses. The actual text of the document made no claims to anything substantial whatsoever, was comic in tone, and at most an official recognition of the other alliance as nifty. The text makes no mention of abstinence from combat (or anything really even connected to CN politics at all). It talks about guns, drugs, hookers, food, parties, and thumb wrestling for the extra piece of delicious cake. It was described by FAN as a, and I quote directly, "Treaty that doesn't mean much, but fun to sign." At one point, the Legion and FAN had an NAP in the works. It was halted before completion by FAN when FAN decided they were done signing NAPs. This policy of FANs was clearly-established before the GLOCK was signed. FAN certainly wasn't about to break that policy just to toss in an NAP with the Legion, and the treaty was definitely not higher than an NAP. Some might try to argue that the GLOCK was a FAN equivalent of an NAP, but this comparison breaks down very quickly if you actually read the GLOCK treaty. It's impossible to be taken remotely seriously and the treaty itself knows that fact. What ended up happening was the Initiative propaganda machine used that GLOCK treaty to accessorize their smear campaign against the Legion by claiming we 'broke' a non-aggression pact. Plain and simple, that was a load of crap and the treaty itself was just for fun to begin with. I'm sick and tired of hearing that bull for two years, and I swear by the sweet breath of Almighty Admin's holy two-year-old daughter, I will electronically !@#$%*-smack the next person to tout that lie to me. Now if anyone claims Legion broke their NAP with FAN during GW3, someone can link them to this post, and berate them for lying. :jihad: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virillus Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 What ended up happening was the Initiative propaganda machine used that GLOCK treaty to accessorize their smear campaign against the Legion by claiming we 'broke' a non-aggression pact. Plain and simple, that was a load of crap and the treaty itself was just for fun to begin with. I'm sick and tired of hearing that bull for two years, and I swear by the sweet breath of Almighty Admin's holy two-year-old daughter, I will electronically !@#$%*-smack the next person to tout that lie to me. Now if anyone claims Legion broke their NAP with FAN during GW3, someone can link them to this post, and berate them for lying. :jihad: Uuuuuuh.... ..... .... Legion broke a NAP in GWIII *Virillus sprints off into the distance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Heh. I remember being a lowly grunt in the NPO at this time... I thought it was odd that SG would leak such a log because I thought they were in an arms race with us, the NPO. I thought they were building up for a later fight, but didn't want to fight at that time and weren't ready (didn't have the allies and the setup just in their own alliance). Then this thing gets leaked, and I wonder why they give us the perfect opportunity to go in now and hit them before they are actually the force to be reckoned with. Man, it's so odd to think how permanent the damage on my 1k NS nation (or whatever it was then) seemed at the time. Though since I never dealt tech nor got substantial aid, in reality those wars really did put me back. Just the other guys at MFO outside of the conflict were gaining so much strength on me. I like these topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon De Montfort Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 When are going to get episode 3? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hymenbreach Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Now, Simon, there is a bit of difference between writing an historical account and a work of creative writing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryievla Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) Not trying to be disagreeable, but I have thought for the longest time that it was a NAP. I read it after the war, when folks were saying we broke treaties, wondered if that was true. It was one of the events that made me decide to be a more active player, in fact, and actually learn about the alliance I had signed on with. I would love to see a copy of that GLOCK treaty again. Maybe I misremember, it's been a long time & I was pretty new then, but my recollection is that it was indeed a NAP, albeit cutesy-worded. Don't suppose anyone still has the document around? Edited January 28, 2009 by Kryievla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newhotness Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Whens episode 3 coming? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Swampy Posted January 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Episode 3 is in the works. Coming out likely in the next day or so. We're getting into a time where lots of things happen very quickly and I'm trying to make sure I've got things right and making sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 The GLOCK was like a whole load of treaties (then and now) that have such 'lulzy' wording they don't actually mean anything. The TOP one was more questionable and I believe there was a good discussion on that earlier in the thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 For reference: Mpol announces the GLOCK treaty was broken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Swampy Posted January 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 For reference: Mpol announces the GLOCK treaty was broken. Yup. Those are some pretty srs bsns offenses there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Episode 3 is in the works. Coming out likely in the next day or so. We're getting into a time where lots of things happen very quickly and I'm trying to make sure I've got things right and making sense. I can't wait Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Yup. Those are some pretty srs bsns offenses there! So Swampy what exactly did you put in the punch bowl? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Swampy Posted January 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 So Swampy what exactly did you put in the punch bowl? I'd say, but I think it'd get me warned. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolution XYZ Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 The naivity of former Legion leaders, even to this day, continues to astonish me. The NPO was gunning for us (the Legion at the time) from day one. And there was nothing you, or I, or anyone for that matter could have done to avoid the conflict. There existed no diplomatic solution, no political solution, and no legal maneuvers to be had to get out of the conflict. Whether we wanted it or not, there would be war, and it only takes one to start a war. Why this wasn't recognized and prepared for when the Legion had an entire years notice is beyond what I could understand. You speak of democracy, which is nice, but democracy is only any good if people are willing to defend it. If one alliance has a mission to destroy my alliance, I will do whatever it takes to neutralize the aggressive alliance. Idealism should go to the wayside, if you need to sign a few treaties with people you don't like, and get your hands a little bit dirty, then so be it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Why this wasn't recognized and prepared for when the Legion had an entire years notice is beyond what I could understand. You speak of democracy, which is nice, but democracy is only any good if people are willing to defend it. If one alliance has a mission to destroy my alliance, I will do whatever it takes to neutralize the aggressive alliance. Idealism should go to the wayside, if you need to sign a few treaties with people you don't like, and get your hands a little bit dirty, then so be it. And this is why CN sucks nowadays, players like these born of the seeds of slayer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hymenbreach Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 (edited) Episode 3 is in the works. Coming out likely in the next day or so. We're getting into a time where lots of things happen very quickly and I'm trying to make sure I've got things right and making sense. You make sure you do. Many a fine tooth comb will correct you should you stray from the exactly truthful. EDIT: Editted To raise the ph level a point or two. Edited January 29, 2009 by Hymenbreach Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slayer99 Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 And this is why CN sucks nowadays, players like these born of the seeds of slayer. Oh, as opposed to your brilliant diplomacy...let's ask for a treaty with anyone on the first meeting just to see if they do. I KILLED CN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Oh, as opposed to your brilliant diplomacy...let's ask for a treaty with anyone on the first meeting just to see if they do. I KILLED CN! Well, if this is how you like CN, the last year and however many months it was, than all the power to you. I think the rest of the players liked the fun and drama, but of course you were in the big rooms so that doesn't affect you. 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.