The Phoenix Federation Announcement

[jer]

I did not say that it's the same – one is ZI worthy and one is not. But the presence of terms that restrict such actions imply that it is looked down upon to some degree, if not the same level as rejoining after an individual surrender.

To what degree then? I hardly think anyone can get so upset over one individual moving from one alliance to another to help out in a war as to pay special attention to it. Looking at people who theoretically might get offended, I suppose TOOL might have legitimate grievance if they were insecure and overly controlling, and TPF might have legitimate grievance if they had a phobia of people joining to help them in a war, but who else? No-one other than those two parties has any business passing judgement or looking down on anything.

[Matthew Conrad]

I really don't know what that had to do with what mhwak said but what is funny is how you declared war on your former ally(couple days before you declared war) using an oA clause like it was nothing and then act like you guys are doing the rigt thing.Next your "allies in SF" eh,tell me how the NPO were going to roll over your allies when SF attacked them with a billion other alliances

If you really need me to explain to how SF was getting set up to get rolled, you should probably take a break and actually learn some background information on this war. If you need me to explain how my post related to mhawk's, basic reading comprehension will serve you well in that regard. Your ignorance in this matter astounds me not because you don't know any better, but because you actually thought you had a legitimate argument.

[Chet Ubet]

If you really need me to explain to how SF was getting set up to get rolled, you should probably take a break and actually learn some background information on this war. If you need me to explain how my post related to mhawk's, basic reading comprehension will serve you well in that regard. Your ignorance in this matter astounds me not because you don't know any better, but because you actually thought you had a legitimate argument.

Ok soooo are you going to answer anytime soon because I still have no idea what your talking about and I;m about to go to sleep so if you need to get someone else to explain because you don't know either that will be great.thanks!

edit:Please explain how SF was about to get rolled when if they canceled and attack. Also mhawk and GtG were tlking about the MADP between the to what does that have to do with this current war.If my ignorance astounds you so much then answer the post and not tell me your emotions about it when you read it because I can really care less.

Edited June 18, 2009 by Eazy 3D

[Matthew Conrad]

Ok soooo are you going to answer anytime soon because I still have no idea what your talking about and I;m about to go to sleep so if you need to get someone else to explain because you don't know either that will be great.thanks!

NVM unnecessary

Edited June 18, 2009 by Matthew Conrad

[Chet Ubet]

Take note, this is why some people need to stay off the boards.

Take note, Matthew Conrad has no idea what he is talking about and doesn't like to answer post

[Matthew Conrad]

edit:Please explain how SF was about to get rolled when if they canceled and attack. Also mhawk and GtG were tlking about the MADP between the to what does that have to do with this current war.If my ignorance astounds you so much then answer the post and not tell me your emotions about it when you read it because I can really care less.

I'm not going into depth for you, so I'll simply direct you towards the MDP web in connection between OV and SF. Also, Delta's summary of SF's pre-war conversations will also explain this in depth for you. Mhawk tried to criticize us for attacking NPO. That was what I was responding to. Please, please read what I actually respond to instead of completely ignoring context.

[Matthew Conrad]

Take note, Matthew Conrad has no idea what he is talking about and doesn't like to answer post

No, you're right. You have time and time again proved your ability to piece apparent evidence together and come to logical conclusions. There's no way I didn't assumed you could figure things out based on the wiki alone without someone yelling it at you every 2 minutes.

[bbrownso]

Take note, this is why some people need to stay off the boards.

That's sidestepping the question. Are you going to answer it or continue to sidestep it? I think things would be more civil if people explained their motivations and what they perceived when questioned instead of ducking it and saying nothing of value.

[Matthew Conrad]

That's sidestepping the question. Are you going to answer it or continue to sidestep it? I think things would be more civil if people explained their motivations and what they perceived when questioned instead of ducking it and saying nothing of value.

Look up 2 posts please.

EDIT: I will respond in like when he criticizes my alliance without even proper evidence to back it up. You will notice I am extremely civil when someone actually uses a plausible argument to criticize me.

Edited June 18, 2009 by Matthew Conrad

[Chet Ubet]

I'm not going into depth for you, so I'll simply direct you towards the MDP web in connection between OV and SF. Also, Delta's summary of SF's pre-war conversations will also explain this in depth for you. Mhawk tried to criticize us for attacking NPO. That was what I was responding to. Please, please read what I actually respond to instead of completely ignoring context.

Yay at least a half decent effort and thanks for helping me "teacher Conrad".Now first things first, if your not going to go in depth then please,please don't go on the forums and post.Now about SF,you say they were going to get rolled, but please tell me how you or anyone would no for that matter as NPO had a treaty with some members before they canceled before the war.The NPO thought they had a valid CB for OV but I don't see how anyway that was targeted for SF if they though they were right with the whole spy thing with OV, especially when they lost all those treaties with alliances.Last about Sparta,you say your trying to defend your allies in SF,so you drop a treaty with one ally which is the NPO and then attack them because your trying to defend SF when SF attacked them and Sparta used the oA clause.

[Chet Ubet]

No, you're right. You have time and time again proved your ability to piece apparent evidence together and come to logical conclusions. There's no way I didn't assumed you could figure things out based on the wiki alone without someone yelling it at you every 2 minutes.

I don't understand what you mean there if you care to explain that as well it would be helpful

edit:or if someone else wants to

Edited June 18, 2009 by Eazy 3D

[Matthew Conrad]

Yay at least a half decent effort and thanks for helping me "teacher Conrad".Now first things first, if your not going to go in depth then please,please don't go on the forums and post.Now about SF,you say they were going to get rolled, but please tell me how you or anyone would no for that matter as NPO had a treaty with some members before they canceled before the war.The NPO thought they had a valid CB for OV but I don't see how anyway that was targeted for SF if they though they were right with the whole spy thing with OV, especially when they lost all those treaties with alliances.Last about Sparta,you say your trying to defend your allies in SF,so you drop a treaty with one ally which is the NPO and then attack them because your trying to defend SF when SF attacked them and Sparta used the oA clause.

You're telling me not to post because I don't want to type out a page worth of information anyone could easily find with minimal effort? You're the one who couldn't even figure out the former ally mhawk was referring to was NPO.

Once again, you're far too naive if you thought this whole conflict lay entirely because of the OV incident. OV was a small alliance with strong ties to SF, in which we hold two MDoAP's. Defending GOD and RIA, among our other close allies like Athens, was the reason we went to war. A basic understanding of putting together declarations for a war coalition will tell you that our oA clause was to satisfy the e-lawyers. We were fighting a defensive war, thus your argument is quite lacking to say the last.

I guess if you ran an alliance, you would probably think NPO attacked OV without expecting SF to enter the fray.

[Chet Ubet]

You're telling me not to post because I don't want to type out a page worth of information anyone could easily find with minimal effort? You're the one who couldn't even figure out the former ally mhawk was referring to was NPO.

Once again, you're far too naive if you thought this whole conflict lay entirely because of the OV incident. OV was a small alliance with strong ties to SF, in which we hold two MDoAP's. Defending GOD and RIA, among our other close allies like Athens, was the reason we went to war. A basic understanding of putting together declarations for a war coalition will tell you that our oA clause was to satisfy the e-lawyers. We were fighting a defensive war, thus your argument is quite lacking to say the last.

I guess if you ran an alliance, you would probably think NPO attacked OV without expecting SF to enter the fray.

haha that's cool.Actually I did know it was the NPO because that's who SF and your alliance is attacking, right?Soooo lets see here the NPO lots many of it's treaties before the war and your telling me at NPO's weak state with not as much dominance that they wanted to attack all of SF too right Also if they wanted to bring down SF so bad why did SF cancel on the NPO and not the other way around?It's not about that you were trying to help out an ally it's the fact that you dropped one ally which is the NPO and attacked a few days later.

Edited June 18, 2009 by Eazy 3D

[Matthew Conrad]

haha that's cool.Actually I did know it was the NPO because that's who SF and your alliance is attacking, right?Soooo lets see here the NPO lots many of it's treaties before the war and your telling me at NPO's weak state with not as much dominance that they wanted to attack all of SF too right Also if they wanted to bring down SF so bad why did SF cancel on the NPO and not the other way around?It's not about that you were trying to help out an ally it's the fact that you dropped one ally which is the NPO and attacked a few days later.

You realize that NPO had nearly all of it's treaties intact immediately prior to them attacking OV right? Your argument doesn't make much sense because all your evidence and historical context is incorrect.

[Chet Ubet]

You realize that NPO had nearly all of it's treaties intact immediately prior to them attacking OV right? Your argument doesn't make much sense because all your evidence and historical context is incorrect.

You have to be kidding me,I really hope this post is a joke.Please go back in the forums and look. Also if that was true that makes alot of Karma look like bad allies anyway.

[Matthew Conrad]

You have to be kidding me,I really hope this post is a joke.Please go back in the forums and look. Also if that was true that makes alot of Karma look like bad allies anyway.

1. Q was still together

2. 1V was still together

3. They still had other treaties with other major alliances such as MHA and NpO (also we didn't cancel on them until they decided it was better to attack during negotiations, and I'm guessing that's why many of their other allies left too).

I'm sorry, I didn't realize Q+1V didn't count as treaties. Please keep proving how little you know.

[Desperado]

You're telling me not to post because I don't want to type out a page worth of information anyone could easily find with minimal effort? You're the one who couldn't even figure out the former ally mhawk was referring to was NPO.

Once again, you're far too naive if you thought this whole conflict lay entirely because of the OV incident. OV was a small alliance with strong ties to SF, in which we hold two MDoAP's. Defending GOD and RIA, among our other close allies like Athens, was the reason we went to war. A basic understanding of putting together declarations for a war coalition will tell you that our oA clause was to satisfy the e-lawyers. We were fighting a defensive war, thus your argument is quite lacking to say the last.

I guess if you ran an alliance, you would probably think NPO attacked OV without expecting SF to enter the fray.

Infra > Class.

[Chet Ubet]

1. Q was still together

2. 1V was still together

3. They still had other treaties with other major alliances such as MHA and NpO (also we didn't cancel on them until they decided it was better to attack during negotiations, and I'm guessing that's why many of their other allies left too).

I'm sorry, I didn't realize Q+1V didn't count as treaties. Please keep proving how little you know.

Ok let me ask you this:Are any of those guys that were still in 1V and Q when the NPO was about to attack OV on Karma,I'll answer, no.Also MHA has a 1 year canceling period,NpO had the OoO and were still allies.Also alot of treaties have a 48 or 72 hour canceling period so if that were the case then the NPO would have 2 or 3 days before they got attacked instead of the following night.

I highly suggest you look back because that means that means like 20 alliances cancled on one night which didn't happen.Also for that last part,haha it looks to me you keep proving that as if you look at 1V and Q,those that haven't left already weeks before the war were on the hegemony but keep coming with those little comments is all I have to say about that.

[mhawk]

Individual nations who surrender and then rejoin the war are thought to be so low class it's one of the few ways to get a ZI without anyone complaining about it being unjustified. I think it's likely that some of the same sentiment goes with nations who go through an alliance surrender and then rejoin the war.

Putting TPF in your AA is crime enough to get ZI'ed right now bob

[Matthew Conrad]

Infra > Class.

I'll direct you to Delta's blog to answer your question. Basically, when we made the decision to enter on Karma's side, most of us thought we were going to lose. When we left Q, NPO's allies were still dominant. We were defending allies, so I guess you have no class either huh?

Ok let me ask you this:Are any of those guys that were still in 1V and Q when the NPO was about to attack OV on Karma,I'll answer, no.Also MHA has a 1 year canceling period,NpO had the OoO and were still allies.Also alot of treaties have a 48 or 72 hour canceling period so if that were the case then the NPO would have 2 or 3 days before they got attacked instead of the following night.

I highly suggest you look back because that means that means like 20 alliances cancled on one night which didn't happen.Also for that last part,haha it looks to me you keep proving that as if you look at 1V and Q,those that haven't left already weeks before the war were on the hegemony but keep coming with those little comments is all I have to say about that.

That's 2 alliances. Are you seriously trying to say Q had no firepower because MHA and TOP left? Maybe you forgot about OG, IRON (over 4k nukes), NATO, TPF, MCXA, and Valhalla. If you actually pay attention to history, NPO has almost always brought overwhelming firepower to curbstomps. Also, you know that many of those alliances canceled after they attacked right?

It's quite funny how you're trying to cover up your ridiculous posts by trying to point out facts that have nothing to do with the argument. The fact is, you said NPO had almost no treaties right before they attacked OV. I proved you wrong by showing that most of their treaties were still there. It's almost like you weren't here for that pre-war period and are just trying to act like you knew what was going on.

[Chet Ubet]

I'll direct you to Delta's blog to answer your question. Basically, when we made the decision to enter on Karma's side, most of us thought we were going to lose. When we left Q, NPO's allies were still dominant. We were defending allies, so I guess you have no class either huh?

That's 2 alliances. Are you seriously trying to say Q had no firepower because MHA and TOP left? Maybe you forgot about OG, IRON (over 4k nukes), NATO, TPF, MCXA, and Valhalla. If you actually pay attention to history, NPO has almost always brought overwhelming firepower to curbstomps. Also, you know that many of those alliances canceled after they attacked right?

It's quite funny how you're trying to cover up your ridiculous posts by trying to point out facts that have nothing to do with the argument. The fact is, you said NPO had almost no treaties right before they attacked OV. I proved you wrong by showing that most of their treaties were still there. It's almost like you weren't here for that pre-war period and are just trying to act like you knew what was going on.

What are you talking about?,I never said Q had no firepower because 2 alliances left(actually it was more than that).Second, no they didn't,do you know how long it will take them to attack.Wow ok lets see here

MA canceled

VE canceled

FOK cancled

and those are just to name a few and then that's how you can tell that sides were forming for the war that was going to come up. I can't wait til someone else comes up and sees these rediculos stuff your saying. My gosh please look back in the forums

edit:Show me where all those allies canceled after the was started when they attacked OV

Edited June 18, 2009 by Eazy 3D

[Matthew Conrad]

What are you talking about?,I never said Q had no firepower because 2 alliances left(actually it was more than that).Second, no they didn't,do you know how long it will take them to attack.Wow ok lets see here

MA canceled

VE canceled

FOK cancled

and those are just to name a few and then that's how you can tell that sides were forming for the war that was going to come up. I can't wait til someone else comes up and sees these rediculos stuff your saying. My gosh please look back in the forums

edit:Show me where all those allies canceled after the was started when they attacked OV

FOK left Q a while before the OV debacle. VE also canceled with NPO a good bit before the war. MA canceled almost a month before the DoW. It's funny that you think you actually have a argument.

To answer your edit I'll give you an easy example of when most allies canceled after they DoW.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=54884

Try reading up next time.

[Chet Ubet]

FOK left Q a while before the OV debacle. VE also canceled with NPO a good bit before the war. MA canceled almost a month before the DoW. It's funny that you think you actually have a argument.

To answer your edit I'll give you an easy example of when most allies canceled after they DoW.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=54884

Try reading up next time.

Ok the first part of your post,I know that already what was the point in telling me that.I said alot of it's allies canceled before the war .As for the link,hahahahhahhahahaha wow are you serious,first you don't know the main reason for the cancelation,second it wasn't for OV anyway it had something to do with other alliances but that's wayyyy past you,Also all those allies fought with the NPO anyway so what's your point.

You are really making yourself look like a fool on the OWF

Edited June 18, 2009 by Eazy 3D

[Matthew Conrad]

Ok the first part of your post,I know that already what was the point in telling me that.I said alot of it's allies canceled before the war .As for the link,hahahahhahhahahaha wow are you serious,first you don't know the main reason for the cancelation,second it wasn't for OV anyway it had something to do with other alliances but that's wayyyy past you,Also all those allies fought with the NPO anyway so what's your point.

You are really making yourself look like a fool on the OWF

You realize you asked me to show you where a bunch of their allies canceled treaties after they declared war right? I find it laughable that you actually ignore your previous posts.

Besides the fact that I never mentioned the reason behind the Q alliance cancellations, it doesn't even affect the fact they they canceled after NPO attacked. Meaning, NPO lost the intimidation of their military treaties only after they declared war. My original point which you have so aptly displayed ignorance of, was that NPO still had many military treaties directly before they attacked OV. Logic seems to keep eluding you.

[Jipps]

I highly suggest you look back because that means that means like 20 alliances cancled on one night which didn't happen.

Well there sure were a lot in this thread alone: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=54884, including your own.