Haflinger Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 And how would you feel if you treated as such? Insulted. But I didn't go airing it out. I've always felt it's better to be the bigger man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vend3tta Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 "You can't fire me, I quit!"Also, I'm curious: what sparked the apology since a week ago you were pretty adamant that it wasn't called for? I believe that is addressed in the apology itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joracy Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Insulted.But I didn't go airing it out. I've always felt it's better to be the bigger man. Big men in CN seem to be a rarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 (edited) Insulted.But I didn't go airing it out. I've always felt it's better to be the bigger man. They shouldn't have to be the "bigger men", their allies should treat them with respect and dignity. Edited March 24, 2009 by Vilien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 "You can't fire me, I quit!" They made it perfectly clear that IRON cancelled which means your analogy falls flat on its face. Also, I'm curious: what sparked the apology since a week ago you were pretty adamant that it wasn't called for? Some people aren't above re-evaluating their position and swallowing their pride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 They shouldn't have to be the "bigger men", their allies should treat them with respect and dignity. Thank you. Worded better than I was going to put it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 They shouldn't have to be the "bigger men", their allies should treat them with respect and dignity. That would be nice. I could go rambling on about other principles that would be nice to see as well, but this thread isn't really the place for an exposition of principles. It's about three treaty cancellations, one of which seems to have triggered the other two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 They made it perfectly clear that IRON cancelled which means your analogy falls flat on its face. Well hey, one out of three ain't bad. Fake edit: Yes it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vend3tta Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 That would be nice. I could go rambling on about other principles that would be nice to see as well, but this thread isn't really the place for an exposition of principles.It's about three treaty cancellations, one of which seems to have triggered the other two. Actually, that's exactly what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der_ko Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Mighty big balls you've got there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Well hey, one out of three ain't bad.Fake edit: Yes it is. Are you claiming that NPO and GGA also canceled, because you are wrong if that is what you are trying to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 That would be nice. I could go rambling on about other principles that would be nice to see as well, but this thread isn't really the place for an exposition of principles.It's about three treaty cancellations, one of which seems to have triggered the other two. Yes it is. That's exactly what this is about. It's what the whole damn thing is about. This is fundamentally a conflict between those who adhere to a set of honorable, morally sound principles, and those who sacrifice those principles for personal gain. It's the result of years of the same process, whereby alliances with any desire to change the established order get stomped into the ground. VE is taking a stand. They want to see this damnable process end. We are taking a stand. It's time to end this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Mao Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 In any case, good luck VE, your noble streak has shown itself again. Let's hope it ends better this time for you, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homura Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Are we referring to Electron Sponge before the Pacifica-Polaris dispute? I'm just curious? Yes we are referring to Electron Sponge. You get +2 Kat points for figuring out my not-so-veiled references. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coursca Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 VE is taking a stand. They want to see this damnable process end. We are taking a stand. It's time to end this. Really now? This should be interesting to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jtkode Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 I hope this all ends well :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnCapistan Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Yes! BOO YAA! For someone who didn't even play during that time...draw your own conclusions... o/ CN-Wiki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyman Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Yes it is. That's exactly what this is about. It's what the whole damn thing is about. This is fundamentally a conflict between those who adhere to a set of honorable, morally sound principles, and those who sacrifice those principles for personal gain. It's the result of years of the same process, whereby alliances with any desire to change the established order get stomped into the ground. VE is taking a stand. They want to see this damnable process end. We are taking a stand. It's time to end this. My, I think you've got this one figured out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Really now? This should be interesting to watch. I thought you would have realized that when you failed in bullying them into dropping their allies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCRABT Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Yes it did. Cancellations for no reason are bad. Justification are good.I think most would agree it wasn't an insult. It was simply, the truth. The reasons could have been adequately conveyed in private as well as a notice of cancellation, that would have been honorable. Instead VE have publicly bashed on there former allies in an attempt to glorify their cancellations. That is reality. Maybe I am old school but I am of the opinion that no soap opera is needed when it comes to treaty cancellations unless there are alternative motives at play, such as making your own balls look larger than they are in reality. Best of luck with that I guess. They made it perfectly clear that IRON cancelled which means your analogy falls flat on its face.Some people aren't above re-evaluating their position and swallowing their pride. How convenient they should choose this moment to announce their apology, personally I feel it deserved it's own thread but I'll digress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Are you claiming that NPO and GGA also canceled, because you are wrong if that is what you are trying to say. I missed the part where I said/tried to say that. Some people view VE as pre-emptively cancelling treaties which would have been cancelled anyways. This opinion is made ridiculously obvious through the various "You can't fire me, I quit!" analogies, which the majority of us seem to have picked up on. They cancelled pre-emptively on NPO and GGA (maybe, maybe not, though some people seem to think so), however IRON beat them to the punch. You pointed out that IRON (one of the three alliances in question) cancelled first. So they did. Hence, one out of three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix von Agnu Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 As for the rest of you. If someone accused me of treating them as a second-tier ally, I'd feel insulted.Wouldn't you? I would feel a tad insulted. In fact I recall TPF canceling a treaty for this reason in the past, and getting called out on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 I missed the part where I said/tried to say that. Some people view VE as pre-emptively cancelling treaties which would have been cancelled anyways. This opinion is made ridiculously obvious through the various "You can't fire me, I quit!" analogies, which the majority of us seem to have picked up on. They cancelled pre-emptively on NPO and GGA (maybe, maybe not, though some people seem to think so), however IRON beat them to the punch. You pointed out that IRON (one of the three alliances in question) cancelled first. So they did. Hence, one out of three. Ah, I thought you meant that the admitted 1 out of 3 which is where I saw the implication that GGA and NPO canceled first. Now that we have that out of teh way, I have reason to believe that this was not a preemptive cancellation but I am not one to debate what would hav ehappened I just go by what actually did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 The reasons could have been adequately conveyed in private as well as a notice of cancellation, that would have been honorable. Instead VE have publicly bashed on there former allies in an attempt to glorify their cancellations. That is reality. Maybe I am old school but I am of the opinion that no soap opera is needed when it comes to treaty cancellations unless there are alternative motives at play, such as making your own balls look larger than they are in reality. Best of luck with that I guess. So because they made a public announcement about their treaty cancellations, they're flaunting their balls? Shall I go through the archives and see how many times IRON and others have publically announced treaty cancellations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCRABT Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 (edited) So because they made a public announcement about their treaty cancellations, they're flaunting their balls?Shall I go through the archives and see how many times IRON and others have publically announced treaty cancellations? Please do go and check I think you will find all our cancellations have been amicable and respectful bar maybe Jarheads. I think you will also find that we have never posted an alliances cancellation for them. Edited March 24, 2009 by MCRABT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts