Mongrel Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 I don't see how you forgetting the terms you handed down to a neutral alliance makes it better. They held to the terms forced upon them, ya'll forgot. I guess I can hail forgetfulness though o/. Sorry I can't, saying "We forgot" makes you seem less like a leader and more a lap-dog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prodigal Moon Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Really guys? Go back and read the OP. It specifically states that the term remained in place for so long mainly because of forgetfulness. Christ almighty. Maybe we'd rather think the terms were in place out of cruelty or strategy than believe that tC is so comfortable subjugating alliances that they could just "forget" something like this. We're talking about the former top alliance here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UberSpion Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Keeping nuclear restraints on an alliance for 11 months may not be civil behavior but it certainly doesn't equate to genocide. But it certainly screams incompetence and repression. It might not be genocide in the physical sense. But it's leading up to that socially if things like this continue. There is honor in losing. There is honor in winning. About time those "in power" show a bit of it. This looks as if RoK were the ones they attacked and forgot. I'm not speaking for them. But maybe they have a voice, contrary to popular belief.... that all is well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Evidently, those that are attacking the victors today "forgot" to remind them of the GPA in some earlier moment... Jokes aside, I believe that the OP, with «largely due to most of us forgetting about it», intended to mean something along the lines: "nobody really cared about that for a long time because there wasn't any problem on either side, and now some circumstances had us reconsider that last Term, thus realizing that it has long been unneeded". The new UJA may have something to do with this being "rectified". Of course, I may be wrong. I however seriously doubt that the victor coalition (that was able to notice that Lord Swampy had been masked for less than 24 hours as "GPA applicant" at the GPA headquarters) actually "forgot" about this term. Let's be serious, OK?... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graves Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 It's good to see the memory of this cowardly and unjust attack on such a wonderful alliance can finally rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Wilson Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 This looks as if RoK were the ones they attacked and forgot. So, you are to assume that ex members wouldn't be annoyed that their old home was kept under terms for 11 months? I mean come on, that is a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamDean Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 (edited) Really guys? Go back and read the OP. It specifically states that the term remained in place for so long mainly because of forgetfulness. Christ almighty. Oh come on. Are you really telling me that out of 8 of the largest alliances in the game, nobody realised that GPA were still under surrender terms? Nobody looked at their stats, saw they only had 13 nukes and found it a little curious? Edited February 3, 2009 by WilliamDean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Oh come on.Are you really telling me that out of 8 of the largest alliances in the game, nobody realised that GPA were still under surrender terms? Nobody looked at their stats, saw they only had 13 nukes and found it a little curious? This summed up my feelings pretty nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 I don't see how forgetting the terms the victors handed down to a neutral alliance makes it better. A correction is needed, on your word play. We did not attacked a neutral alliance, nor handed down terms to one, we attacked a incompetent big green blob constantly transgressing over the borders of their self proclaimed neutrality into the realm of agitating the big bad bear. No alliance in history got so many free passes as GPA before getting rolled. Over the passed time since then, it seems that GPA reverted back to its neutrality, shame they needed a crude awakening. Its hilarious that people still argue the contrary but at other hand its good as it creates artificial controversy which is good. Also, it does not make it better, it makes it funnier :lol: Well at least for me that is, I have a special type of humor,... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongrel Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 A correction is needed, on your word play. We did not attacked a neutral alliance, nor handed down terms to one, we attacked a incompetent big green blob constantly transgressing over the borders of their self proclaimed neutrality into the realm of agitating the big bad bear. No alliance in history got so many free passes as GPA before getting rolled. Over the passed time since then, it seems that GPA reverted back to its neutrality, shame they needed a crude awakening. Its hilarious that people still argue the contrary but at other hand its good as it creates artificial controversy which is good. Also, it does not make it better, it makes it funnier :lol: Well at least for me that is, I have a special type of humor,... .... Yeah "Special" we'll let you call it that. Regardless, the only joke I would see here is if you seriously believe half of what you just attempted to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree hugger Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 (edited) /me is always late... Congratz GPA Edited February 3, 2009 by the tree hugger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balder Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 A correction is needed, on your word play. We did not attacked a neutral alliance, nor handed down terms to one, we attacked a incompetent big green blob constantly transgressing over the borders of their self proclaimed neutrality into the realm of agitating the big bad bear. No alliance in history got so many free passes as GPA before getting rolled. Over the passed time since then, it seems that GPA reverted back to its neutrality, shame they needed a crude awakening. Its hilarious that people still argue the contrary but at other hand its good as it creates artificial controversy which is good. Also, it does not make it better, it makes it funnier :lol: Well at least for me that is, I have a special type of humor,... You didn't attack an alliance that's constitutionally neutral? Nor hand down terms to them? Was it the fact that they had accepted Swampy as an "affiliate" (which offered no protection from ZI lists, and he was removed from that rather quickly). Or was it accepting Valid back into GPA despite the fact that he wasn't officially put on a ZI list? I'd venture to say there were some alliances that got quite a few more free passes than they have, as a matter of fact. Plus, I've been told I've got a great sense of humor, and I didn't find that funny... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar833 Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 No alliance in history got so many free passes as GPA before getting rolled. I disagree. NPO has done many of the things that have forced them to create a CB against another alliance. Its just that no one that should has actually called them on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 You didn't attack an alliance that's constitutionally neutral? I can declare I am constitutionally a lollipop but if I don't act like it nor am by substance of my actions it, then it really doesn't mean much of anything then a funny way do wrongly describe myself. Plus, I've been told I've got a great sense of humor, and I didn't find that funny... I am sure you do, my point was not that you did not have it (or anybody else) but that probably most of you do not have the necessary type to find this amusing. In your case I was correct, my brand of humor is not that common. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Wilson Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 A correction is needed, on your word play. We did not attacked a neutral alliance, nor handed down terms to one, we attacked a incompetent big green blob constantly transgressing over the borders of their self proclaimed neutrality into the realm of agitating the big bad bear. No alliance in history got so many free passes as GPA before getting rolled. Over the passed time since then, it seems that GPA reverted back to its neutrality, shame they needed a crude awakening. Its hilarious that people still argue the contrary but at other hand its good as it creates artificial controversy which is good. Also, it does not make it better, it makes it funnier :lol: Well at least for me that is, I have a special type of humor,... I for one, fail to see how that is funny, sir. Please. Keeping an alliance under any surrender terms for 11 months is just completely outrageous. Alas, people raise their voices of protest when it's over, but at least it is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 (edited) I disagree. NPO has done many of the things that have forced them to create a CB against another alliance. Its just that no one that should has actually called them on it. :lol: Well I am sure some view it that way, I do not personally, but I can appreciate the disagreement in an amusing way. Your post made me smile Edited February 3, 2009 by Branimir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Archer Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 I for one, fail to see how that is funny, sir.Please. Keeping an alliance under any surrender terms for 11 months is just completely outrageous. Alas, people raise their voices of protest when it's over, but at least it is over. He beat me to a good post so I'll reuse it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balder Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 I can declare I am constitutionally a lollipop but if I don't act like it nor am by substance of my actions it, then it really doesn't mean much of anything then a funny way do wrongly describe myself. Mhm... so, where in the rest of my post, where I citied perceived grievances were my facts wrong? Instead of misdirecting the conversation to hard candy, let's debate the points instead of giving another dose of your humor. I am sure you do, my point was not that you did not have it (or anybody else) but that probably most of you do not have the necessary type to find this amusing. In your case I was correct, my brand of humor is not that common. Thank Odin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongrel Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 I can declare I am constitutionally a lollipop but if I don't act like it nor am by substance of my actions it, then it really doesn't mean much of anything then a funny way do wrongly describe myself. I am sure you do, my point was not that you did not have it (or anybody else) but that probably most of you do not have the necessary type to find this amusing. In your case I was correct, my brand of humor is not that common. You can call it humor all you want it doesn't make it so. It seems you really are pretty ignorant to the facts anyway, and would rather us all just hail your alliance instead. Then again I long ago realized the average Pacifican is not much different than the Average GPA'er of a year ago, you'd just like to keep on farming your tech and blindly glorifying the actions of your alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 About time...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 11 months? wow. that is a long time O.O it's about time o/ GPA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadshot Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 So, you are to assume that ex members wouldn't be annoyed that their old home was kept under terms for 11 months? I mean come on, that is a long time. I assume you were a member during that time? If so, why aren't you now? Oh come on.Are you really telling me that out of 8 of the largest alliances in the game, nobody realised that GPA were still under surrender terms? Nobody looked at their stats, saw they only had 13 nukes and found it a little curious? No, maybe being the neutral alliance they are, they wouldn't need the nukes Keep it coming guys. The big bad Q holding down all those opposed to us, they never let anyone have fun, they are mean, blah, blah, blah. Everything continually goes around in circles. We understand that all of you butthurt in this thread will always believe everything we do is evil and every alliance that does something to Q should walk away unpunished. We get it. Where is the outcry from actual current members of GPA? All I see are people no longer in GPA, or those neveer in GPA who have to denounce Q at all costs. It's flattering really. oh, and Spider Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Mhm... so, where in the rest of my post, where I citied perceived grievances were my facts wrong? Instead of misdirecting the conversation to hard candy, let's debate the points instead of giving another dose of your humor. I had this conversation before. Many months before actually. I consider the matter firmly closed and wish the renewed GPA all the best. Those that were around I am sure can remember all the grievances put forth by the attacking coalition and the debates surrounding them. There were many grievances accumulated in a long period of time culminating with a particular series which broke the camels back, so to say. I am sorry, but I don't wish to beat a dead horse. I do not share the enthusiasm as some about this particular one its a closed story for me. Thank Odin. Well while I do not kneel to your pagan God, I thank my God as well for my humor. Its always good to have one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catronos Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Former neutral here. Congrats on release from terms GPA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamDean Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 (edited) No, maybe being the neutral alliance they are, they wouldn't need the nukes They had them before the war. Anyway, you still do not convince me that thousands of people simultaneously forgot that they went to war with GPA and put them under surrender terms. Where is the outcry from actual current members of GPA? All I see are people no longer in GPA, or those neveer in GPA who have to denounce Q at all costs. It's flattering really. Maybe that could be because the last time GPA offended the Continuum by not hailing the ground they walk on, they got crushed and were forced into surrender terms for almost a year? Edited February 3, 2009 by WilliamDean 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.