Dazed and Confused

[Byron Orpheus]

You would know about that, I'm sure. In the meantime, it's very clear that you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to our goals and objectives. If you'd like some education, you're welcome to click on my sig. If not, then keep doing what you're doing.

An interesting read, although I think perhaps it should be printed on pulp and handed out by a bearded man in burlap.

[Nintenderek]

Nintenderek: Give us some time to complete our investigation. I promise you that your questions will be answered to the best of our ability, as soon as we possibly can. Mind you, this is a favor that we are doing just for you.... something that we don't have to do. Although, I strongly encourage you to review those logs yourself... perhaps a look at 16:30:21 might get you to do that. If I'm going to review them, you should definitely do so as well.

So, what your saying is either.

a. Double Agent in OV government

b. Double agent in BC (when your the only BC member with the logs)

Now, consider this. For it to be an OV double agent, it means that person would have to have access to the OV government section. How long would that person have to have been in OV to get such information, and why the heck have they waited so long? I would have already striked by now.

So, that leaves choice B, which I think is much more likely.

[Windsor]

An interesting read, although I think perhaps it should be printed on pulp and handed out by a bearded man in burlap.

And knowledge is half the battle.... or so it seems.

[Windsor]

So, what your saying is either.

a. Double Agent in OV government

b. Double agent in BC (when your the only BC member with the logs)

Now, consider this. For it to be an OV double agent, it means that person would have to have access to the OV government section. How long would that person have to have been in OV to get such information, and why the heck have they waited so long? I would have already striked by now.

So, that leaves choice B, which I think is much more likely.

Well, seeing as how I'm the only one in BC with the logs, and I've been away for 2 weeks, exploring option B any further would be a moot point. I have spoken with OV gov't, and they said that they didn't leak the logs. I believe them. We are exploring other possibilities at the moment. One of which has an OOC source.

As I've said, we're investigating this. But, we're not taking our eye off of the ball. How the logs were leaked doesn't carry nearly the significance of the results. I'm happy to see you taking so much interest in this - more so than the involved parties.

[Paradigm]

How the logs were leaked doesn't carry nearly the significance of the results.

It would greatly help restore faith in the blackstone operation versus being written off as at some level being in collusion with NPO/others. I realize you may just be the victim of someone else spying on you and honestlt hope thats the simple expanation.

[shahenshah]

Well, seeing as how I'm the only one in BC with the logs, and I've been away for 2 weeks, exploring option B any further would be a moot point. I have spoken with OV gov't, and they said that they didn't leak the logs. I believe them. We are exploring other possibilities at the moment. One of which has an OOC source.

As I've said, we're investigating this. But, we're not taking our eye off of the ball. How the logs were leaked doesn't carry nearly the significance of the results. I'm happy to see you taking so much interest in this - more so than the involved parties.

Bit confused there, maybe I lost track in between, Thank You.

Good luck with your investigations BC and OV.

Edited April 20, 2009 by shahenshah

[Windsor]

It would greatly help restore faith in the blackstone operation versus being written off as at some level being in collusion with NPO/others. I realize you may just be the victim of someone else spying on you and honestlt hope thats the simple expanation.

We already know this to be the case. We accepted this as a liability and a cost for operating the way we do. But the only way that information could have escaped BC would mean some very very dirty tactics.... things that even we don't/can't do.

[OOC] I've been without an internet connection throughout most of the duration of the unfolding of this drama. Once our time line is complete, we'll have narrowed down some possibilities. No use in launching a witch-hunt of our own. It would be..... pointless. [/OOC]

[Azaghul]

The blatant bullying and hypocrisy is pretty appalling. It wasn't an honest attempt at peaceful negotiations, it was pure attempts at intimidation. If it was honest, they would have presented their evidence and not pulled terms out of the blue with no proof after trying to force a confession without any.

[Haflinger]

So, what your saying is either.

a. Double Agent in OV government

b. Double agent in BC (when your the only BC member with the logs)

Now, consider this. For it to be an OV double agent, it means that person would have to have access to the OV government section. How long would that person have to have been in OV to get such information, and why the heck have they waited so long? I would have already striked by now.

So, that leaves choice B, which I think is much more likely.

There's also the obvious:

c. Either OV or BC government decided it was in their interest for the logs to get leaked, because they were looking for a war.

[Nintenderek]

Well, seeing as how I'm the only one in BC with the logs, and I've been away for 2 weeks, exploring option B any further would be a moot point. I have spoken with OV gov't, and they said that they didn't leak the logs. I believe them. We are exploring other possibilities at the moment. One of which has an OOC source.

As I've said, we're investigating this. But, we're not taking our eye off of the ball. How the logs were leaked doesn't carry nearly the significance of the results. I'm happy to see you taking so much interest in this - more so than the involved parties.

Of course I'm taking interesting in it. An alliance could have gotten rolled if their allies hadn't stood up for them. Thank Admin they have good allies. And I also don't like being lied to, which in my conversation with ftwman, I'm clearly being lied to.

It would greatly help restore faith in the blackstone operation versus being written off as at some level being in collusion with NPO/others. I realize you may just be the victim of someone else spying on you and honestlt hope thats the simple expanation.

They aren't victims of someone else spying. Windsor has repeatedly told me that he's the only one in Blackstone who's seen the logs.

Bit confused there, maybe I lost track in between, Thank You.

For once, I think you may be on to something.

There's also the obvious:

c. Either OV or BC government decided it was in their interest for the logs to get leaked, because they were looking for a war.

If BC did that, it goes back to one of my choices

What I don't get of this option though is why OV would want war? They are a very peaceful alliance from what I've seen.

[zzzptm]

There's also the obvious:

c. Either OV or BC government decided it was in their interest for the logs to get leaked, because they were looking for a war.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner.

[Syzygy]

If "accepting leaked stuff" is a reason for ZI, someone should already compile a list of the Governments of all major alliances in the last two years. Thats quite a lot people to ZI... really.

[erikz]

No one should ever think about pulling a TPF on my alliance...

If "accepting leaked stuff" is a reason for ZI, someone should already compile a list of the Governments of all major alliances in the last two years. Thats quite a lot people to ZI... really.

Well, honestly, I was wondering how Mhawk got the info on OV?

As long as it's TPF it isn't qualified as spying right?

Edited April 20, 2009 by erikz

[Blacky]

My opinion on the BC:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1317745

[Bob Janova]

c. Either OV or BC government decided it was in their interest for the logs to get leaked, because they were looking for a war.

Well since OV got hauled over the coals for it and had to suffer an unpleasant interrogation (despite the best efforts of Dan), I think it's fairly self-evident that they did not want the logs leaked. (Or made up – I think Demeanor stated that at least some of the conversations never happened?) BC have explicitly denied it in this very thread, and I don't think that this is the war they would want to set up.

OV is chosen as a target by the hegemony because of its position on the web – isolated enough to pick on without triggering the whole thing, connected enough to draw in their enemies. Blackstone would want to start a war directly between the main factions in order to make the odds as good as possible. Your devotion to the cause of making the OV side look aggressive is admirable but it really doesn't fit with the facts.

[ChairmanHal]

I get the picture of one army running in circles and the other sitting on a hill with folding chairs and popcorn.

.

The only question is who are the Hekawi and who are the U.S. Cavalry.

[Haflinger]

Well since OV got hauled over the coals for it and had to suffer an unpleasant interrogation (despite the best efforts of Dan), I think it's fairly self-evident that they did not want the logs leaked. (Or made up – I think Demeanor stated that at least some of the conversations never happened?) BC have explicitly denied it in this very thread, and I don't think that this is the war they would want to set up.

OV is chosen as a target by the hegemony because of its position on the web – isolated enough to pick on without triggering the whole thing, connected enough to draw in their enemies. Blackstone would want to start a war directly between the main factions in order to make the odds as good as possible. Your devotion to the cause of making the OV side look aggressive is admirable but it really doesn't fit with the facts.

Actually, my inclination was towards BC when I made that suggestion. I just threw in OV for consistency's sake, as they had opportunity.

For what reason do you suggest that this is not the war that Blackstone would want to set up, however? They've already stated their purpose is to get revenge on Pacifica. This war strikes me as a fairly effective means to that goal; Pacifica is likely to come out of it, in the best-case scenario, having suffered significant damage.

[ChairmanHal]

Well since OV got hauled over the coals for it and had to suffer an unpleasant interrogation (despite the best efforts of Dan), I think it's fairly self-evident that they did not want the logs leaked. (Or made up – I think Demeanor stated that at least some of the conversations never happened?) BC have explicitly denied it in this very thread, and I don't think that this is the war they would want to set up.

OV is chosen as a target by the hegemony because of its position on the web – isolated enough to pick on without triggering the whole thing, connected enough to draw in their enemies. Blackstone would want to start a war directly between the main factions in order to make the odds as good as possible. Your devotion to the cause of making the OV side look aggressive is admirable but it really doesn't fit with the facts.

Interesting but...

OV has more than enough connections to the treaty web that any attack against it would very likely trigger off a Great War. GOD, VE and Vanguard do not back down from fights and an attack on OV would be a direct challenge. Their entry into any conflict brings in Superfriends and a host of others, similarly activating treaties on the other side. This is exactly the scenario Blackstone would want.

Let's be honest here. It is very much in the interest of those who would challenge the "hegemony" to see a major, disruptive war take place, since it might well be that thing that finally causes a major paradigm shift. Those who are a part of the "hegemony" would therefore want to limit the scale of conflict or keep it from happening all together. If the "hegemony" is making a major issue of the situation regarding OV, it isn't because they are looking to pick off some ripe fruit--as I discussed above it involves real danger of a Great War, which is exactly what its enemies want. No, there are very real, legitimate concerns where OV is concerned.

[Branimir]

OV is chosen as a target by the hegemony because of its position on the web

You would have a point here in painting the big bad hegemony as ruthless and calculated, if actually this point upon which your arguments stands wasn't moot.

I am quite sure that at this point some political forces would tend to support certain alliances in a war against certain forces even without any treaty obligations to do so. The tensions, as I managed to perceived them, are at a point where certain people would jump at other people with ease.

So while I can not claim to be an expert in this situation, the analysis you presented of it does though have certain obvious weaknesses. Of course, IMO.

[Windsor]

You would have a point here in painting the big bad hegemony as ruthless and calculated, if actually this point upon which your arguments stands wasn't moot.

I am quite sure that at this point some political forces would tend to support certain alliances in a war against certain forces even without any treaty obligations to do so. The tensions, as I managed to perceived them, are at a point where certain people would jump at other people with ease.

So while I can not claim to be an expert in this situation, the analysis you presented of it does though have certain obvious weaknesses. Of course, IMO.

That is an understatement. The analysis makes absolutely zero sense - this was even pointed out by the author of the OP. It's almost as if someone's trying to paint a portrait of BC being the only group of people in the community that desire war. Entirely ridiculous.

I think it's very easy to see that none of this benefits either BC or OV. This is not a war that we wish to see - as was outlined - none of this material is good enough for a respectable CB. I do have plenty of great CB-causing material, however. If it was our intention to create a war, we would have released that material long ago.

[Col John S Mosby]

Having looked at a bit of history here, it is not unknown for a larger, more dominant alliance to have their long-installed moles discover that their quarry is spying on them. If they cannot find said espionage, then the moles will take screencaps from sections of the quarry's forums that are only visible to members, Photoshop a message or two to make them inflammatory, then post them in public, sobbing. Then the quarry is designated for obliteration to much hailing.

The Light Brigade is happily small, stays out of alliance politics and is resolved to stay out of this.

[uaciaut]

I love all the "objective" speculation in this thread.

Like it or not people have repeteadly accepted leaked or spied info in CN. And it never constituted a CB ever.

I'm not prone to restricting myself from clicking anything that's passed along to me through an irc query and if anyone would be trying to say otherwise they'd be downright lying tbh.

[Paradigm]

Windsor,

If I read the latest replies correctly:

1) You admit you were the only one with access to these logs.

2) You have said you didnt share these right?

3) Where does the Cntl V excuse come into play here again?

The answers just dont line up at this point unless I'm mistaken.

[D34th]

I love all the "objective" speculation in this thread.

Like it or not people have repeteadly accepted leaked or spied info in CN. And it never constituted a CB ever.

I'm not prone to restricting myself from clicking anything that's passed along to me through an irc query and if anyone would be trying to say otherwise they'd be downright lying tbh.

So are you saying that accept spied screenshots of an alliance forum and keep it in secret isn't a proper CB?

[ochocinco]

[OOC]Today, when NPO catches ONE BC agent, they pull out tequila and fire pistols in the air like they're partying in Tijuana.[/OOC]

Can you clarify who, particularly, you mean by this? What was the identity of the agent?