Jens of the desert Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Not as harsh as these. Try again. Ratios and proportions are wonderful things. Try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Your point would have been better if it didn't include the profanity. It doesn't help your moral high ground. If you manage to actually address my argument in your next post, then I will give you the fabled Vilien Gold Star for Excellence in Posting. Edited June 13, 2009 by Vilien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Who's crying? I'm laughing like hell and spitting in your face while you lie broken and beaten.My alliance is not at war with yours. However, your alliance has stated that it is at war with me. And look at me, so terrified of mighty Pacifica that I've (justifiably) called your precious Emperor a bald-faced liar and have twice called for your alliance to 'put up or shut up' with regard to my EZI status. Crying, indeed. Again stop crying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristospherein Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Way to respond to the main argument of the post. The main argument of the post is that you supported the Karma Coalition in their stand against us. I called their stand hypocritical based on some of their members previous support of our actions and their attempt to take the moral high ground in doing to us exactly what we did to other alliances. And then you responded with a post about how you were not a part of the Karma Coalition (which I already know) and that you can indeed claim the moral high ground because you are not and that is where we are left. You bringing up a point completely irrelevant to the argument I was making. Is that a good enough response? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deth2munkies Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Again, another former NPOer attacking it's former residence when all of these "harsh" terms were given out. You accepted them then, how can you act so hypocritical now? So if a guy left his alliance because he knew his alliance was going to do something stupid and he couldn't stop it, you would hold him accountable for the stupid thing the alliance does? You make no sense. stop bawwwing. Again stop crying. Editing to include the delicious irony of an NPO member telling people to stop crying when the NPO has been endlessly...how do you say..."bawwwing" ever since war was brought on them. Edited June 13, 2009 by deth2munkies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Ratios and proportions are wonderful things. Try again. Yes because us paying over 200% in tech for reps is great ration compared to what they got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) stop bawwwing. Maybe your own emperor should take this advice. Clearly the OP is one big bawwww. Yes because us paying over 200% in tech for reps is great ration compared to what they got. I am actually pretty sure they got worse. Edited June 13, 2009 by Nintenderek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 The main argument of the post is that you supported the Karma Coalition in their stand against us. I called their stand hypocritical based on some of their members previous support of our actions and their attempt to take the moral high ground in doing to us exactly what we did to other alliances. And then you responded with a post about how you were not a part of the Karma Coalition (which I already know) and that you can indeed claim the moral high ground because you are not and that is where we are left. You bringing up a point completely irrelevant to the argument I was making.Is that a good enough response? No. I, unlike the members of the Karma Coalition who you accuse of hypocrisy, have never participated in a roll, never chased players through EZI, and have never enjoyed the benefits of being allied to your greedy and destructive alliance. So yes, I'll take the goddamn moral high ground. I am a part of the Karma Coalition, and I argued that your argument about the "moral high ground" was invalid. My point was that I've never been on the winning side until now, and I've never profited from your alliance's actions. I am not a hypocrite. The moral high ground is clearly with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 So if a guy left his alliance because he knew his alliance was going to do something stupid and he couldn't stop it, you would hold him accountable for the stupid thing the alliance does?You make no sense. Thats not the case here. Apparently he was kicked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Black and white world. Makes things easier for many people. Haters keep on hating. Also fear, cancer of the soul. Cheerio. I, too, like black and white worlds and as such will continue on hating as you recommend. You attacked our allies. Through that you attacked us. You should consider yourselves lucky that we're giving you terms at all. I won't claim to stand on any moral high ground, I don't think I ever have. The fact is that GOD has always stood by a very simple code; you come after us or ours and we'll fight 'till one of us is dead. Unfortunately some of our allies, de facto allies, and comrades at arms are inclided to be more lenient toward you. Fortunately you decided not to take advantage of it. Bravo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Again stop crying. Put up or shut, oh slave to the lying COWard. You're in my range. Come on....one click. Just one.... Do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristospherein Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 So if a guy left his alliance because he knew his alliance was going to do something stupid and he couldn't stop it, you would hold him accountable for the stupid thing the alliance does?You make no sense. I do. We are being attacked now, not for our attack on OV, but rather on our previous transgressions on Planet Bob (see the previous 70 some odd pages for reference). These ex-NPOers were a part of these transgressions. I believe they are accountable for supporting the NPO while they were here. Just my personal opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Maybe your own emperor should take this advice. Clearly the OP is one big bawwww. Coming from a man who was in Vox who made dozens of thread that you bawwwed in. Oh the NPO is EBIL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NinjaPirate Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I'll tell you what is. 9,000,000,000. Why didn't I think of that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deth2munkies Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Thats not the case here. Apparently he was kicked out. Doesn't matter. Goes to the fact you're making an absolute statement about former alliance members held accountable for their former alliance's actions after they've left. The manner they left is completely irrelevant. I do. We are being attacked now, not for our attack on OV, but rather on our previous transgressions on Planet Bob (see the previous 70 some odd pages for reference). These ex-NPOers were a part of these transgressions. I believe they are accountable for supporting the NPO while they were here. Just my personal opinion. At some point or another, they left. All the former NPOers I know well enough to make a statement about left because of the actions that lead to this war, even if they had to take part in a few first. Leaving, then later fighting a war is an attempt to atone for transgressions, and you cannot do much better. That said, the fact you're willing to accept that leaving an alliance does not absolve people of responsibility for their former alliances actions after they've left is completely and totally false. Someone with no control whatsoever over the actions of an alliance deserves none of the blame. I'll even take it further: I blame you for all of the NPO's actions ever. You weren't even OOC playing the game /OOC yet? Irrelevant. You never had any say in the decisions made? Irrelevant. The fact at some point in history your AA was "New Pacific Order" is enough to condemn you. Does this argument seem plausible to you? Edited June 13, 2009 by deth2munkies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Yes because us paying over 200% in tech for reps is great ration compared to what they got. Paying over 200% in tech for reps is great ration (ratio?) compared to being attacked on a trumped up CB. In this mad rush to play the victim you guys are forgetting what this war is about. It's about you attacking someone just to flex your muscles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Put up or shut, oh slave to the lying COWard.You're in my range. Come on....one click. Just one.... Do it. I had 50k NS at the start of the war. And almost got ZIed. I'm no coward, I'm just taking a break and getting my nuke count to 20. But maybe we'll see each other soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letum Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I am actually pretty sure they got worse. 533k tech (with the 7b converted by the official rate) to pay out. 250k tech (look at the numbers we've given, 2 weeks of nukes does that to you) on hand. 213.2% No, I don't think they got worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of the Port Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) As requested... I, unlike the members of the Karma Coalition who you accuse of hypocrisy, have never participated in a roll, never chased players through EZI, and have never enjoyed the benefits of being allied to your greedy and destructive alliance. So yes, I'll take the [swearing] moral high ground. Interesting War Declaration. At the start of the war, you attack The Phoenix Federation, as part of Avalanche, and you claim not to be part of Karma, and to take the moral high ground because of that? [edit]Can I have that "Vilien Gold Star for Excellence in Posting" now? You said I should respond to it, not to refute it to the point that you actually agree with me Edited June 13, 2009 by Lord of the Port Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron deSandersted Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Dear Great and Powerful Friends over the Planet Digiterra, The humble nation of Alisaunder has never had any formal dealings with those of the NPO. We have heard that many have unresolved disputes, while many others are faithful and dedicated patrons. Alisaunder has long both greatly respected and feared the NPO, for their enormous strength and legendary resolve. Though this war has not ended well for them, I suspect that we have not seen the end of the NPO as a leader in world politics, or at least a commanding presence in our world. If this is not the case, it seems that Digiterra could be entering a new and uncharted age. It is hard for me to fathom a world, where the NPO is not an enormous presence in all things political. What Next Dear Friends? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qazzian Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 The different is that your alliance has long committed huge atrocities, while none of your enemies ever did. Karma has been for fair reps, and fair reps can sometimes be huge. You mean enemies like Ragnorok that imposed a viceroy with Illuminati before NPO went to war with GATO? Or when they went to war against them again 2 months later and destroyed what was left of the alliance? Or their war against the New Eclipse Order that ran for a month until the alliance was defunct? Or when they imposed PZI on two members of Bushido? Or Veridian Entente in the Roman-Inertia War when they went to war against an alliance of 29 people, resulting in the destruction of the alliance? The VE that took tech reps from MK in the War of the Coalition? I do not contest that fair reps can be huge, but demanding the very nations who would be required to pay come out of peace mode to be pummelled for two weeks before hand only serves to be overly draconian. We will not sink into a smear war with them. Their sins are long, and they are known to us all. We will fight this war with no joy, and we will fight it with honor and dignity. We will not impose draconian terms, but we will not tolerate such underhanded tactics being employed against us. Our haste was unbecoming, and it was shameful, but our hand was forced. I hope that the population of Planet Bob will understand this, and forgive us our malfeasance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I do. We are being attacked now, not for our attack on OV, but rather on our previous transgressions on Planet Bob (see the previous 70 some odd pages for reference). These ex-NPOers were a part of these transgressions. I believe they are accountable for supporting the NPO while they were here. Just my personal opinion. Not really, a lot of them left because NPO did such actions and a lot of them are now even fighting against you for it. Coming from a man who was in Vox who made dozens of thread that you bawwwed in.Oh the NPO is EBIL. There is a difference between your bawwwing now because your getting what you deserved, and what we use to do, which is called using logic to make a point. A point you guys never seemed to figure out, and still haven't figured out to this day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Can someone try and explain the "It would be impossible logistically for the NPO to get 90% of it's nations into war mode" canard? Is there any alliance in Cybernations other than NPO and TPF that have less than 90% of it's nations in war mode? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letum Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Put up or shut, oh slave to the lying COWard.You're in my range. Come on....one click. Just one.... Do it. He can't. You are not a sanctioned target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEWBert Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I have resigned from VE tonight, primarily as a result of these terms. I do not support this sort of thing. Francesca I'd hope you reconsider not leaving your alliance. I can understand that one may not agree w/ terms, but that's up to the Karma alliance governments to work out and you should have faith with the VE government. I don't think if an alliance stepped out at this point the rest of Karma would be vengeful, either. I certainly don't know VE's stance, but it's quite apparent there are some differences in how the situation should be treated. Some people just have the "burn them to the ground" attitude, where others have the "let's change CN" stance. In short, value the camaraderie within your alliance Francesca. I'm sure things will change soon enough, all you can do is stick by your friends at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts