Francesca Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Sorum I believe you handled this as well as can be. While it would be interesting, I doubt anyone truly wants a war here for such an easily reconcilable difference in opinion. And Francesca... why? I thought you were knee deep championing Karmic values seeing as you left VE immediately after the terms were presented in what you thought would be a symbolic gesture, as misguided as it was. In response to this, I believe I still stand for what I believe to be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Okay, you still said, "you guys." It is an informal way of speaking for a group. As I said before, it would be better if you said, "TAB," instead. By saying that, you would express the idea of the leadership. Holy !@#$ man. How about you stop worrying about the exact classification I assign to members of TAB and start dealing with the actual issue at hand and the content in my posts. Damn. Avoidance much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Pfft. That was said in a rather unserious manner, and anyone who has been talking to me recently knows that I've been slightly drunk anyway. Perhaps more than slightly drunk. If I'd been putting effort into starting the war, do you think I'd have gone and demanded it in public channels? For God's sake, people. Drunk on the internet. So cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 how desperate are you for drama, or is this your public stance that you're about to get ready to deliver a beatdown like the days of old? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Drunk on the internet. So cool. Yeah, cos I'm the only person to ever get drunk on IRC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Greenberg Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 I don't think anybody in this situation is right. TAB started this mess when they posted their topic about BTA , but some BTA members aren't exactly helping the situation either. In my opinion you should just resolve this issue in IRC or PM's. If you can't resolve it, than TAB, BTA, FIRE, MHA, or whoever can do whatever they want to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorum Posted June 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 how desperate are you for drama, or is this your public stance that you're about to get ready to deliver a beatdown like the days of old? did you read the friggin thread? while i support TAB, i have no desire to deliver a beatdown like the days of old. peace is a viable option and so this shouldn't come to war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wa Mu Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Holy !@#$ man. How about you stop worrying about the exact classification I assign to members of TAB and start dealing with the actual issue at hand and the content in my posts. Damn. Avoidance much? Well, excuse me. Having a bad night, are you? As for who is the aggressor, I have a slight inclination that MD is the aggressor here. He was told several times by TAB leadership that they did not like this, and he still went through with it. And who's right and who's wrong? Who can say. It will be debated back and forth and we may never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunnyInc Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Pfft. That was said in a rather unserious manner, and anyone who has been talking to me recently knows that I've been slightly drunk anyway. Perhaps more than slightly drunk. If I'd been putting effort into starting the war, do you think I'd have gone and demanded it in public channels? For God's sake, people. Well, you did try to save MCXA by recruiting for MK and UPN during the wars so I wouldn't be surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 did you read the friggin thread? while i support TAB, i have no desire to deliver a beatdown like the days of old. peace is a viable option and so this shouldn't come to war. I did, I just don't buy your !@#$%^&*. Either you're after drama, or you're looking for a beatdown to be delivered. Either one, take your pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Greenberg Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Well, excuse me. Having a bad night, are you? As for who is the aggressor, I have a slight inclination that MD is the aggressor here. He was told several times by TAB leadership that they did not like this, and he still went through with it. And who's right and who's wrong? Who can say. It will be debated back and forth and we may never know. How can you say MD is the aggressor? He wanted to reform BTA and he had every right to do so. TAB isn't BTA and BTA isn't TAB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Well, you did try to save MCXA by recruiting for MK and UPN during the wars so I wouldn't be surprised. You really have no idea what you're talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sileath Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 (edited) I did, I just don't buy your !@#$%^&*.Either you're after drama, or you're looking for a beatdown to be delivered. Either one, take your pick. It's a clarification of the MHA position on the issue. We do not desire for this situation to become violent, but if it does, be advised that TAB is a very strong ally. Edited June 29, 2009 by Sileath Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wa Mu Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 How can you say MD is the aggressor? He wanted to reform BTA and he had every right to do so. TAB isn't BTA and BTA isn't TAB. To be honest, I have a hard time know who the aggressor is. From what I do know, technically speaking, MD is the aggressor. Was he in the right or wrong? Once again, I don't know, but I think he is indeed the aggressor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Well, excuse me. Having a bad night, are you? Not at all. I just find it annoying when people dance around the wording of a post instead of actually answering the concerns or objections. As for who is the aggressor, I have a slight inclination that MD is the aggressor here. He was told several times by TAB leadership that they did not like this, and he still went through with it. So he's the aggressor because he didn't listen to someone who told him not to make an alliance using a name that was special to him? The fiend. Not gonna buy that one. TAB became the aggressor when they decided they were entitled to the name and asked for their allies and friends to go out of their way to hinder BTA's growth. And who's right and who's wrong? Who can say. I can. And each person in their own right can. If you can't you might as well crawl back to your private boards because no one wants to hear your wishy-washy We-call-you-out-but-let's-all-get-along bullcrap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 It's a clarification of the MHA position on the issue.We do not desire for this situation to become violent, but if it does, be advised that TAB a very strong ally. so.. you're basically posturing for a beatdown. HOORAY! THE TIMES HAVE TRULY CHANGED! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingClassRuler Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 (edited) Well said Sorum, I'm glad we could clearly clarify our position and show some love for our brothers in TAB. Edit: You have chosen to ignore all posts from: astronaut jones. · View this post · Un-ignore astronaut jones Yay. Edited June 29, 2009 by Working_Class_Ruler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sileath Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 so.. you're basically posturing for a beatdown. HOORAY! THE TIMES HAVE TRULY CHANGED! It would be posturing if we were acting in bad faith. The leaders of both TAB and BTA have said they do not desire for this to become a military conflict. The political situation is still delicate, and we respect that by ensuring that our position is clear, which is support of TAB as well as a desire for a peaceful diplomatic solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Well said Sorum, I'm glad we could clearly clarify our position and show some love for our brothers in TAB. Edit: Yay. Congratulations on figuring out how to use the forums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wa Mu Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Not at all. I just find it annoying when people dance around the wording of a post instead of actually answering the concerns or objections. I would think you can do it without being rude, however. So he's the aggressor because he didn't listen to someone who told him not to make an alliance using a name that was special to him? The fiend. Not gonna buy that one. TAB became the aggressor when they decided they were entitled to the name and asked for their allies and friends to go out of their way to hinder BTA's growth. Yes. He knew that no TAB leader liked it and went ahead with the plan anyways. So, yes, I believe he is the aggressor here. I can. And each person in their own right can. If you can't you might as well crawl back to your private boards because no one wants to hear your wishy-washy We-call-you-out-but-let's-all-get-along bullcrap. You lost me here. You obviously don't know my opinion here, or can't differentiate mine from my alliance's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorum Posted June 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 (edited) Congratulations on figuring out how to use the forums. Congratulations, you can gtfo of the thread now plz. Edited June 29, 2009 by Sorum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Greenberg Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Yes. He knew that no TAB leader liked it and went ahead with the plan anyways. So, yes, I believe he is the aggressor here. No offense, but you escalated this situation by posting the anti-BTA topic. If you had just resolved this on IRC diplomatically, maybe you two wouldn't be at the pit of war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 It would be posturing if we were acting in bad faith. The leaders of both TAB and BTA have said they do not desire for this to become a military conflict. The political situation is still delicate, and we respect that by ensuring that our position is clear, which is support of TAB as well as a desire for a peaceful diplomatic solution. The posturing comes from the making of this topic. All it's saying is "watch out, we're big and bad and can shove people around" It's just like the fire topic, except mha has been around long enough, and are supposedly well respected enough, that they should have known another topic like this would just stroke the fires even further. But yeah, whatever you say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Yes. He knew that no TAB leader liked it and went ahead with the plan anyways. So, yes, I believe he is the aggressor here. For someone to be an aggressor they have to be, you know, aggressive. Making an alliance you were previoulsy the leader of is hardly aggressive. Even if some people didn't want the alliance to be made. Asking others to deliberately hinder this new alliance, now that, that is aggressive. You lost me here. You obviously don't know my opinion here, or can't differentiate mine from my alliance's. Then stop dancing around and make your opinion known. Are you in line with your government? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 29, 2009 Report Share Posted June 29, 2009 Congratulations, you're now a semi-professional troll.Now gtfo of the thread plz? nah, I'm cool. how you doing? [ooc] discussion of moderation? why? [/ooc] 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.