hizzy Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Believe what you will, I suppose. The reason a separate white peace was being discussed in the first place was due to an unknown time frame given by the other participants in this war. Hopefully that clears it up for you. You honestly have me a little confused here. From what I understood in the OP, TOP and TSO were shown terms that were going to be presented to Echelon by the rest of the alliances on that front and asked for input. According to you, TOP and TSO's input was more or less along the lines of "no reps for us". Then, last night (the night before the OP was written), the other alliances informed TOP that the terms were going to be presented. TOP/TSO did not like that the terms were not white peace, so they made this thread to announce their own white peace. Do I have the correct timeline so far? If this is the case, it's still not honourable or proper to actually make this thread even if you were planning on giving them white peace. As is most practical and logical, each front would get 1 mass surrender thread where the reps (or lack thereof) would be addressed towards each alliance. Thus, this thread serves no purpose other than to smear another alliance. If I'm wrong, by all means feel free to explain it further. Are you saying they should do the same thing they did with Polaris or are you suggesting they move away from what they did with Polaris? I think what he and everyone else has been saying is stop trying to mask a lack of demand for reps as a gesture of goodwill and honour, and acknowledge it for what it is; a chance to smear someone they don't like and gain some PR. If TOP truly did want to give them white peace, o/ to that, but this thread does not come off as simply a gesture of goodwill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxNation Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 In my opinion the majority of Citadel have always been class acts. You don't need to look far to see my praise of the Citadel as a whole and I think that is reflected also in the community at large.We know for certain the FCC, Umbrella and the Gramlins all fought honourably and should be commended. OG wasn't even our side in this war. Whose side was TOP on? I mean really they've been taking the side of the defeated, hostile, parties which have been the biggest supporters of the hegemony over the alliances in our coalition. The whole while claiming to not be apart of Karma. Was their contribution absolutely neccessary? If you have such respect for Citadel alliances, perhaps taking our word on TOP and their intentions as well as just respecting us by not attacking our allies? Beyond that TOP is not the only alliance who fought on the side of Karma who was in the hegemony. It's absolute spin to call them "the biggest supporters of hegemony" Also I appreciate your words about Umbrella, FCC and GRE, except those are just your words my point is those on the Karma side have trolled us in each of the announcements I mentioned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altheus Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 So RoK/GOD vs. TOP in the next war then with all the usual PR b*****ks in between. Got it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kill Joy Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Its nice to see you stick to your beliefs and values TOP & TSO, honorable alliances make the world go round. Congrats to Echelon on achieving peace from these folks, i'm sure they dealt enough pain to make reps overkill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death666Angel Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 I would like to offer my thanks and congratulations to TOP and TSO. I have not met TSO on the battlefield this war, but if they are even just a little bit like TOP it would have been a pleasure fighting and chatting with them. To those who asked of the impact of TOPs DoW on us: 6 of my 15 wars (of which 6 are still happening) were with TOP and they reduced me from roughly 12k infra to 1k infra. TOP fighting conventional > anyone on the other side using nukes. The only other alliances who are any good at fighting are RIA and GOD. They even had enough balls to declare on me as the first non-TOPers and already suffered some big damages but didn't complain. I salute you! Also, this needs more Echelon bashing, of is Matt's thread keeping you all too busy there . CN is really the biggest mental institution on the webz (maybe after 4chan). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander III Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 It's good to see more peace... o/ TSO o/ TOP o/ Echelon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Keshav IV Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Congrats on peace guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Brutus Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Nice to see Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vespassianus Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Good move TOP and TSO you gained some respect from me at least Also good luck to Echelon for further fighting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailForge Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 (edited) As already pointed out its good to see you got your fill of Polaris reps last year. But no, TOP is honorable and has always given white peace to the honorable opponents they face. Are you saying they should do the same thing they did with Polaris or are you suggesting they move away from what they did with Polaris? Perhaps he's suggesting that TOP should stop being hypocrites. Edited May 31, 2009 by RailForge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJPenguin Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Question for you RailForge, if you don't mind. Would you rather have us sent Echelon the same terms Polar got, and not be labeled a hypocrite by some random members, or given Echelon light terms and done the right thing, and labeled hypocrites? Put yourself in our position, if you "screw up" once, are you allowed to learn from it without being hypocritical? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yubyubsan Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 TOP fighting conventional > anyone on the other side using nukes. This is the most legitimate issue TOP's detractors have. Careful, Echelon, wouldn't want you getting worse terms for hurting Karma's ego. I'd like to try to recap here. Karma War kicks off, TOP comes in on Karma's side but not officially as part of Karma. Official/unofficial definitions and points of lawyering aside, TOP has not endeared themselves to NPO or the rest of Hegemony by their actions. Anyone who believes Hegemony is just going to forget this perceived betrayal, and therefore TOP would be wise to endear themselves to as many Karma members as possible, given their great deal of affection for their precious stats. But they didn't do that. TOP disagreed with the way things were being handled, and addressed this in a no-****-taking manner, effectively pissing off several Karma members. You know, the people that they might want on their side to help protect those precious stats. Claims of opportunism are completely baseless here, unless the opportunity referred to is one that involves having a long line of people making shifty glances at you. Given that Hell freezes over, some of these people might actually make a move against them. In short, you're all accusing TOP of trying to play both sides when the only end they've played both sides against is themselves. But instead of recognizing their willingness to expose themselves to a degree of danger in order to follow their principles, you all throw a tantrum because they refuse to be anyone's tool. I've heard some express concerns that certain members of Karma will establish themselves as a new hegemony, changing nothing on Planet Bob other than the names calling the shots. I dare say that those same members have proven in this thread alone, and in many others, that they lack the foresight and intellect necessary to maintain such a dominant position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buller Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 We aren't hypocrites, we don't want to be a part of the terms the other alliances are offering, we never forced any alliance to be part of the terms we have offered in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nc1701 Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Hardly a surprising PR move, after the IRON reps/surrender thing as well it's clear TOP has been working to shield Hegemony alliances from surrender terms. TOP and TSO were both former members and benefactors of the Hegemony and jumped ship to protect their infrastructure, it's only logical that today they would protect their old brothers who they have more in common with than those in our new world. TOP and TSO were never really part of Karma and had no business claiming participation in this war for the very minor skirmishing they did. I don't think they will be missed by those who continue to bring war to Echelon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some-Guy Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 This is the most legitimate issue TOP's detractors have. Careful, Echelon, wouldn't want you getting worse terms for hurting Karma's ego. I'd like to try to recap here. Karma War kicks off, TOP comes in on Karma's side but not officially as part of Karma. Official/unofficial definitions and points of lawyering aside, TOP has not endeared themselves to NPO or the rest of Hegemony by their actions. Anyone who believes Hegemony is just going to forget this perceived betrayal, and therefore TOP would be wise to endear themselves to as many Karma members as possible, given their great deal of affection for their precious stats. But they didn't do that. TOP disagreed with the way things were being handled, and addressed this in a no-****-taking manner, effectively pissing off several Karma members. You know, the people that they might want on their side to help protect those precious stats. Claims of opportunism are completely baseless here, unless the opportunity referred to is one that involves having a long line of people making shifty glances at you. Given that Hell freezes over, some of these people might actually make a move against them. In short, you're all accusing TOP of trying to play both sides when the only end they've played both sides against is themselves. But instead of recognizing their willingness to expose themselves to a degree of danger in order to follow their principles, you all throw a tantrum because they refuse to be anyone's tool. I've heard some express concerns that certain members of Karma will establish themselves as a new hegemony, changing nothing on Planet Bob other than the names calling the shots. I dare say that those same members have proven in this thread alone, and in many others, that they lack the foresight and intellect necessary to maintain such a dominant position. You are TOP's new PR manager. We'll pay you 5,000 tech annually on February the 30th. Welcome aboard! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coven Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Very honorable TSO and TOP. o/ To our friends within Echelon, I hope the rest of your wars may come to an end very soon, and you can reign in peace and prosperity as you rebuild. - Airikr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Hardly a surprising PR move, after the IRON reps/surrender thing as well it's clear TOP has been working to shield Hegemony alliances from surrender terms. TOP and TSO were both former members and benefactors of the Hegemony and jumped ship to protect their infrastructure, it's only logical that today they would protect their old brothers who they have more in common with than those in our new world. TOP and TSO were never really part of Karma and had no business claiming participation in this war for the very minor skirmishing they did. I don't think they will be missed by those who continue to bring war to Echelon. The hilarity of this statement coming from you is extreme. Also, I've yet to see any evidence that anyone other than Chill was involved in the IRON business. Forgive me for stating the obvious, but I don't think he was in TOP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailForge Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Question for you RailForge, if you don't mind.Would you rather have us sent Echelon the same terms Polar got, and not be labeled a hypocrite by some random members, or given Echelon light terms and done the right thing, and labeled hypocrites? Put yourself in our position, if you "screw up" once, are you allowed to learn from it without being hypocritical? No one is arguing that it's inappropriate for TOP to come to a white peace with Echelon. The disgruntlement is with how TOP has handled it, how they've treated their own side behind-the-scenes, and trying to assume a morally superior and judgmental position that they're demonstrably not qualified to take. If they simply wanted to come to a no-terms solution to the war, then why create a big stink with the OP, tell tales in the public forum, and act like drama queens in the surrender discussion hours before creating this thread? There are numerous precedents for white-peacing an opponent while your allies want reps. It's a shame that TOP decided to go this route instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Craig Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 I'm not privvy to any of the facts in this situation, so all I can say is that it is disappointing to see that this lack of unity had to be aired in public. Someone failed. -Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some-Guy Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Someone failed.-Craig It was probably me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 if you "screw up" once, are you allowed to learn from it without being hypocritical? You have a very unconventional definition of "once" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freezer Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Nicely done TOP and TSO. Congratulations Echelon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJPenguin Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 No one is arguing that it's inappropriate for TOP to come to a white peace with Echelon. The disgruntlement is with how TOP has handled it, how they've treated their own side behind-the-scenes, and trying to assume a morally superior and judgmental position that they're demonstrably not qualified to take. If they simply wanted to come to a no-terms solution to the war, then why create a big stink with the OP, tell tales in the public forum, and act like drama queens in the surrender discussion hours before creating this thread?There are numerous precedents for white-peacing an opponent while your allies want reps. It's a shame that TOP decided to go this route instead. How have we treated our own side behind the scenes? I'd like to see proof because I see most of the "treating their own side" comments as coming from the "other side". If you can't overcome past transgressions, then there is no honor in this game and their never can be ever again, because no one in this game can say they've always been honorable. Not NPO, not GOD, not MK, not Gramlins, not TOP, not Kevin...ok maybe Kevin . Were you in on the surrender discussion btw, or did you just read logs that your gov gave you, out of curiosity? I'm not familiar with you so idk if you're GOD gov or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 I wonder how many times people will rhetorically ask if TOP should have given Echelon the same reps they gave Polaris. THAT'S NOT THE POINT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCRABT Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 TOP I love 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.