Chickenzilla Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 (edited) So, first TSO lied about how they split. heh, i do wonder how the former gov of MCXA would have handled this if the situations were reversed? Sam would have placed them on Q's EZI list and trolled them relentlessly on the OWF every time they posted. Edited February 23, 2009 by Chickenzilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Obama Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 You know, I have to agree with the other posters in this thread that this was handled incredibly poorly. I assume that it could also be seen as a traitorous action by certain members of the current TSO. Overall, a very messy situation indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyne Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 A big warm welcome to The Sweet Oblivion, best of luck to our friends. PS: We'll miss you in Q That could be remedied. And yes, we'll miss them. Sam and Celt It's a pity this had to happen, but I certainly understand. Good luck to MCXA who are still our allies. If you need anything, you know where to find me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zizka Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 Oh how happy I am I decided to stick with it and finish this thread. No TOP of course, this was nothing like CEN at all. The ONLY difference here was that Sam and his cronies got caught beforehand while Ski's group did not. Real classy on your part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Walz Pants Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 It's not wrong when they do it, I suppose. It's only right till someone steps up. No doubt have there been DoW built on far less substance, and I suspect this story is far from over. It might be wise for TSO gov to put a clamp on TSO posting ITT, though former MCXA gov was seldom accused of wisdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 No you dont. you know damn well how they would have handled it true, but i truly don't want an answer from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewatk432 Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 Does this remind you of inertia at all? Its not quite the same thing, Inertia if I recall, blackmailed Atlantis by supposedly giving NPO and TPF very damning information. Thus Atlantis felt like to preserve the safety of its members they had to disband. At least thats what we were told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 (edited) Out of context they sound worse than it is. There's actively going around telling loose allied people to join you. And there is letting your closest friends know you're leaving to start a new alliance. This is a case of the later. It hurt MCXA because people left. But that was inevitable. They knew they were leaving for a long time. They abused their position and the trust of the MXCA membership by using the time to cherry pick people they wanted to take with them and not to transfer power to others. Edited February 23, 2009 by Alterego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valashu Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 you recruited from inside an alliance in a way that hurt them but its ok cause of the degree of friendship that you held with who you recruited? I am starting to get dizzy from all this spin. You still haven't told us why it was a bad thing that someone let MCXA know that you were hurting their alliance by recruiting and planning a mass exodus? i want to know why the whistle blower here is the bad guy and you are the good guy who was just trying to hurt MCXA with their friends? As for the first, like I said, MCXA was having a internal drama fest. Some people were told, we're done with all of this, we're out. That is different from the Vox kind of recruiting. We did not INTEND to hurt MCXA, the intention was to leave MCXA and let the ones critizicing take over with those that wanted to stay. People agreed with statements and joined us. At that point it was clear to some people that a actual group was planning on leaving. So they spend time on it to make it into a workable idea and see how to procede with both the benefit of MCXA and the leaving members in mind. Now as for the whistleblowing. I totally agree with you that there's no fault in what those people did. If I'd heard about that then I'd have told. However the issue lies with the fact that they blame us for forcing the issue and jumping ship all at once instead of smoothing it over. That however was mostly done simply because of the position in MCXA was not realistic after it became known that the group wanted to leave. How many people would seriously be listening right after a trial drama and the message they would be leaving. So it was decided to speed up the founding, flags were made, the treaty was found and we left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinCox Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 (edited) When particular members decided to recruit from the New Polar Order to form a splinter alliance, that alliance was mercilously and rightly destroyed by the Emperor. It seems as though the same will not occur in MCXA's current situation; TOP stands as a pretty good deterrent to war. The real question lies with the motivations of both signatory parties of this protectorate treaty: what is the point of such an aggressive action at this point in time, leaving aside the reasons for which The Sweet Oblivion splintered from MCXA? With that out of the way, I must ask, which color sphere is The Sweet Oblivion calling their home? Edited February 23, 2009 by JustinCox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenzilla Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 well TSO is not Continuum. MCXA is. We'll see if the treaties follow the people or if the treaties follow the alliance, though I think it's pretty obvious what the answer to that is. That could be remedied. And yes, we'll miss them. Sam and Celt It's a pity this had to happen, but I certainly understand. Good luck to MCXA who are still our allies. If you need anything, you know where to find me. CBT, I think you have your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaBuc Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Yes it was recruiting from an alliance, yes it was done in a way that hurt MCXA. There goes what credibility TSO had left. Wow. I was sort of sitting here just making observations, trying to keep an open mind... but wow. I don't care what you say about context, that's straight up treason. -Bama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
logan1 Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 We did talk to Sam about you, in fact we talked to him about the three other applicants from MCXA. It's pretty standard protocol for our applicants. The reason you were rejected was because you seem unstable. People are very rarely rejected if they have a some differing view points about CN politics. In fact, most of us agree that as long as members don't cause drama, differing view points are a healthy aspect of our community. What we look for in an applicant is competence, intelligence, dependability, and activity. In these areas we found you lacking. i guess this whole thing is a non factor as i would have left the second you guys picked up TOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenzilla Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Its not quite the same thing, Inertia if I recall, blackmailed Atlantis by supposedly giving NPO and TPF very damning information. Thus Atlantis felt like to preserve the safety of its members they had to disband. At least thats what we were told. I meant that Inertia left, and attempted to recruit a large group of government members, deputies, and military officials. The blackmail just made them worse. The point is, Inertia was crucified on OWF, as is TSO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Hmm, the more I read of this the less good TSO looks. Valashu just pretty much admitted to recruiting from MCXA, something which if I remember right BLEU destroyed someone for with enthusiatic MCXA support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valashu Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 There goes what credibility TSO had left. Wow. I was sort of sitting here just making observations, trying to keep an open mind... but wow. I don't care what you say about context, that's straight up treason.-Bama Guess I'll have to take the fall for this. As I screwed up this debate by giving you this wonderfull quote. But anything I say now to remedy the term recruiting will look as back-tracking. If you want to throw away credibility, throw away mine as I interpreted the situation from the outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reason Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 (edited) It's only right till someone steps up. No doubt have there been DoW built on far less substance, and I suspect this story is far from over. It might be wise for TSO gov to put a clamp on TSO posting ITT, though former MCXA gov was seldom accused of wisdom. If this is true, then I believe this thread has been an excellent search for the truth. As I read on and on, I think the veil only seems to slip from this whole series of political manoeuvres. Will alliances of cybernations allow such an act like this to pass without full explanation and breaking the traditional standards of alliance sovereignty? If this move goes through, what kind of precedent would we set? These are questions we must be asking ourselves. Edited February 24, 2009 by Pedron Niall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 As for the first, like I said, MCXA was having a internal drama fest. Some people were told, we're done with all of this, we're out. That is different from the Vox kind of recruiting. We did not INTEND to hurt MCXA, the intention was to leave MCXA and let the ones critizicing take over with those that wanted to stay. People agreed with statements and joined us. At that point it was clear to some people that a actual group was planning on leaving. So they spend time on it to make it into a workable idea and see how to procede with both the benefit of MCXA and the leaving members in mind.Now as for the whistleblowing. I totally agree with you that there's no fault in what those people did. If I'd heard about that then I'd have told. However the issue lies with the fact that they blame us for forcing the issue and jumping ship all at once instead of smoothing it over. That however was mostly done simply because of the position in MCXA was not realistic after it became known that the group wanted to leave. How many people would seriously be listening right after a trial drama and the message they would be leaving. So it was decided to speed up the founding, flags were made, the treaty was found and we left. if those who stated that they were "done with all this, we're out" left i could see that. but from what has been stated, they instead stayed and secretly planned the creation of TSO and as you put it, planned to leave slowly so that MCXA would not get wind of this. then the whistle blew and ya'll ran. sorry but based on everything you are saying, you and Sam and the others committed treason and recruited from within MCXA. how long was TSO kept secret before the whistle blew? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 The plot, unsurprisingly, thickens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenzilla Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Guess I'll have to take the fall for this. As I screwed up this debate by giving you this wonderfull quote. But anything I say now to remedy the term recruiting will look as back-tracking. If you want to throw away credibility, throw away mine as I interpreted the situation from the outside. Nice cover up. You $%&@ed TSO's story up pretty bad. great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinatownbus Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 (edited) Guess I'll have to take the fall for this. As I screwed up this debate by giving you this wonderfull quote. But anything I say now to remedy the term recruiting will look as back-tracking. If you want to throw away credibility, throw away mine as I interpreted the situation from the outside. Trust me, some alliances look at recruiting very strictly. Even hinting at the idea of recruitment is CB for some - I am an authority on what is considered "recruiting" for a Continuum alliance's CB purposes...lol So if you can even classify what you did even remotely as "recruiting"...then you were recruiting Edited February 24, 2009 by Chinatownbus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Soviet Attack Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 No way I'm reading through all this so just ignore me if this has been asked already, but why does the government of an alliance need to leave that alliance? If things are bad, then the government's job is to make things better. If there's internal crises, the government is there to rectify them. Just leaving when the going gets tough is childish, and MCXA have definitely got a lucky break here; they've just rid themselves of the worst leadership imaginable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Guess I'll have to take the fall for this. As I screwed up this debate by giving you this wonderfull quote. But anything I say now to remedy the term recruiting will look as back-tracking. If you want to throw away credibility, throw away mine as I interpreted the situation from the outside. How do you explain the vetting argument that led to the leak? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commisar Gaunt Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Nothing will come of this. Just wait and see. TSO will do whatever it is they plan on doing, and MCXA will slowly recover their losses as people hound them to do something about the "injustice" that TSO committed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valashu Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Nice cover up. You $%&@ed TSO's story up pretty bad. great job. That much is obvious, at least I made it to a sig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts