Tygaland Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 I'm not trying to write off anything, I'm trying to allocate responsibility to those who were responsible. Sam and friends were in power at the time, and they were the ones who negotiated the terms with Polar, not Jimmy2e and the group who came to power after TSO left. Just because TSO left MCXA to form their own alliance does not absolve them from the responsibility which comes from their actions. I'm not absolving anyone of responsibility. Regardless of who went where and when, MCXA has demanded reps and significant ones from alliances they attacked and subsequently defeated. So, for an MCXA member to then come out and abuse OV for accepting reps from a war in which they were attacked but subsequently won is a bit rich, as I said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 I'm not absolving anyone of responsibility. Regardless of who went where and when, MCXA has demanded reps and significant ones from alliances they attacked and subsequently defeated. So, for an MCXA member to then come out and abuse OV for accepting reps from a war in which they were attacked but subsequently won is a bit rich, as I said. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. Perhaps I'm not conveying my points clearly enough. [OOC] Blame it on staying awake til 1.06 am. [/OOC] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 I'm not trying to write off anything, I'm trying to allocate responsibility to those who were responsible. Sam and friends were in power at the time, and they were the ones who negotiated the terms with Polar... Just because TSO left MCXA to form their own alliance does not absolve them from the responsibility which comes from their actions. TSO... yeah... aren't they the people that gave white peace to BAPS, Invicta, UPN, and Echelon? All the preaching and condemning are empty words. TSO apparently prefers actions over empty words. Good luck to both OV and NPO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 TSO... yeah... aren't they the people that gave white peace to BAPS, Invicta, UPN, and Echelon?All the preaching and condemning are empty words. TSO apparently prefers actions over empty words. Good luck to both OV and NPO. I'm talking about the War of the Coalition, not the Karma War. Nice try though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) I'm talking about the War of the Coalition, not the Karma War. Nice try though. Yes, and the announcement pertains to the Karma War. In the Karma War, we made no attempt to harm another alliance with the use of punitive reparations. Which means, your condemnation of our leadership is empty and unwarranted. Edited August 5, 2009 by watchman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tygaland Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. Perhaps I'm not conveying my points clearly enough. [OOC] Blame it on staying awake til 1.06 am. [/OOC] You are conveying your point quite clearly, I just don't think your point is a valid one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) Yes, and the announcement pertains to the Karma War. In the Karma War, we made no attempt to harm another alliance with the use of punitive reparations. Which means, your condemnation of our leadership is empty and unwarranted. I'm condemning your leadership for their actions in the War of the Coalition, not for anything to do with the Karma War. TSO's actions in the War of the Coalition arose in this announcement, hence I responded with my opinions on the matter. Edited August 5, 2009 by Francesca Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) Yes, and the announcement pertains to the Karma War. In the Karma War, we made not attempt to harm another alliance with the use of punitive reparations. Which means, your condemnation of our leadership is empty and unwarranted. Why does everyone expect the world to have the memories of goldfish? "You're only supposed to remember the last thing anyone did!" Just because you didn't kick someone lying in the road as you walked past them doesn't make people forget that you spit in their faces. I've tried to stick by my beliefs as best I can, but I have by no means played a perfect game. However, there isn't a single action I've taken that I will not admit to. I'm all or second chances, but people have to work for them. Reasons have to be given to make those a person has wronged look beyond the past, and denying that wrongs ever took place is not a good way to go about it. Edited August 5, 2009 by Delta1212 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 Actually, reps were demanded by TSO.... TSO did not come into existence until long after the War of Coalition. Fran, you conveniently forgot people like Fresh, Gopher and other MCXA government members that remain at MCXA. To pin any reparations on TSO is a disservice to my alliance's actions since it contradicts what we are all about. Should MCXA have enforced such terms? I don't know all the details, so I cannot say. What I do know is that TSO did not, and your insinuation is slanderous. We've fought well and acted honorably in the aftermath despite your attempts to paint a picture other wise. *exits thread* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy2e Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 Sigh... Ok. Let me say something. #1: I wasn't complaining or being sarcastic i was commenting on the scope of the reps. No harm meant. I wish i was getting a deal like that. #2: I am not bitter about what happened in the war in any way. This is just the way the cookie crumbles, at least the game isn't stagnating. #3: I would appreciate it Tygaland if you would treat me with respect as individual and not just tear apart my comments because of the alliance i am in. #4: Congrats on the Reps OV o/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tygaland Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) #3: I would appreciate it Tygaland if you would treat me with respect as individual and not just tear apart my comments because of the alliance i am in. No disrespect intended. If you come out making what appeared to me to be a sarcastic comment about an alliance accepting reps you are probably best served to make sure your alliance if free of similar "sins" before doing so. Otherwise, people will point those "sins" out for you. You can't pick and choose when you are to be considered a member of an alliance. Sure, you can post your own thoughts as an individual and those thoughts be considered your own and not reflective of your alliance's views on an issue but, you can't make a critical comment of another alliance and then complain when people drag up your own alliances deeds by claiming you are not speaking as a member of your alliance. I tore apart your argument based on the alliance you are in because your alliance is more "guilty" of the "sin" you are accusing another alliance of committing. Glass houses and throwing stones. I'm not sure that is disrespectful at all. Edited August 5, 2009 by Tygaland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 Every conflict the NPO has fought in,save this one, they and their allies have provided us with a unified front. They kept their issues behind closed doors and supported each other on the world stage whether they agreed or not. It made them a much more intimidating force than Karma was. You knew they meant business and would stay until the job was done. It's much easier to present a unified front when everyone is in the same bloc / have been allied for extended periods of time. Not so easy when it's a coalition of alliances, many of whom have never worked together before. But I'm pretty sure the discussion of Karma being a loose coalition of alliances has been brought up about a million times already. I guess we're going to be forced to suffer people rehashing this, especially now that it's the "cool thing to do" to hate on Karma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 This thread is not about the CB that started the war. I believe there has already been an 80 page monster about that I have a feeling you're going to be saying this a lot during the next few months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keltoi Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 Why does everyone expect the world to have the memories of goldfish? "You're only supposed to remember the last thing anyone did!" Just because you didn't kick someone lying in the road as you walked past them doesn't make people forget that you spit in their faces.I've tried to stick by my beliefs as best I can, but I have by no means played a perfect game. However, there isn't a single action I've taken that I will not admit to. I'm all or second chances, but people have to work for them. Reasons have to be given to make those a person has wronged look beyond the past, and denying that wrongs ever took place is not a good way to go about it. I did what I did, I've never denied it and certainly never regretted it. When the day comes that retribution is sought I will face it with open arms, without mewling about the injustice of it or flooding the media of PB with cries of "no CB!". Those of you who feel that the pre-war polar government had every right to abuse it's allies will always feel that we committed some terrible injustice, while those of us who actually experienced those abuses will continue to feel justified. It's not a matter of right or wrong, simply a matter of a stand taken, of sides chosen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 I did what I did, I've never denied it and certainly never regretted it. When the day comes that retribution is sought I will face it with open arms, without mewling about the injustice of it or flooding the media of PB with cries of "no CB!". Those of you who feel that the pre-war polar government had every right to abuse it's allies will always feel that we committed some terrible injustice, while those of us who actually experienced those abuses will continue to feel justified. It's not a matter of right or wrong, simply a matter of a stand taken, of sides chosen. To be honest, I don't really care about that war. Not in the same way a lot of people do. It was hardly the only thing MCXA has ever done, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) TSO did not come into existence until long after the War of Coalition. Fran, you conveniently forgot people like Fresh, Gopher and other MCXA government members that remain at MCXA. No, I'm pretty sure you took everyone else. Hell, more government members from when that decision was made are in TOP than in MCXA today. Dr. Fresh was in government at the end of the war, but I was absent from any position of power for a month on either side of that conflict. The other 10 are with you. I cannot downplay or ignore the actions taken at the time. That decision was made by the legitimate MCXA government, fully under the MCXA banner, and for the benefit of the MCXA. That was MCXA who made the decision, and I will not say otherwise. However, not to recognise the realities of where those decision-makers now reside would likewise be a mistake. God help us if we cannot speak despite our decisions in the past; we will all be silent soon enough. Edited August 5, 2009 by Gopherbashi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomInterrupt Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 I'm not spinning anything, I'm not actually biased in either direction, thanks. MCXA's active membership then is what now comprises TSO. I think the active membership constitutes an alliance, not the vast hordes of inactives and ghosts that now make up MCXA. Oh man, it's the GATO defense. I haven't seen this one in a while. Yes, it was a previous government therefore the current government is immune. A true classic. Also complete crap. While it is true that the MXCA did improve and shed some bad eggs with the formation of TSO, that doesn't absolve the alliance of its previous crimes. It didn't work when the government of GATO turned over every week, it didn't work when the government of Polaris turned over entirely, and it wont work when the MCXA tries it. It may sound like a good defense on paper, but it always fails. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) Oh man, it's the GATO defense. I haven't seen this one in a while. Yes, it was a previous government therefore the current government is immune. A true classic. Also complete crap. While it is true that the MXCA did improve and shed some bad eggs with the formation of TSO, that doesn't absolve the alliance of its previous crimes.It didn't work when the government of GATO turned over every week, it didn't work when the government of Polaris turned over entirely, and it wont work when the MCXA tries it. It may sound like a good defense on paper, but it always fails. I don't think she was saying that MCXA is innocent, rather that TSO is just as guilty. Edited August 5, 2009 by Lord Brendan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaBuc Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 No, I'm pretty sure you took everyone else. Hell, more government members from when that decision was made are in TOP than in MCXA today. Dr. Fresh was in government at the end of the war, but I was absent from any position of power for a month on either side of that conflict. The other 10 are with you.I cannot downplay or ignore the actions taken at the time. That decision was made by the legitimate MCXA government, fully under the MCXA banner, and for the benefit of the MCXA. That was MCXA who made the decision, and I will not say otherwise. However, not to recognise the realities of where those decision-makers now reside would likewise be a mistake. God help us if we cannot speak despite our decisions in the past; we will all be silent soon enough. This is why I respect this man. -Bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomInterrupt Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 I don't think she was saying that MCXA is innocent, rather that TSO is just as guilty. That isn't how it reads. It reads like this. The other point is that I'm sure MCXA has clawed reps from downtrodden alliances in the past even after their bloc started the conflict. Or are you going to pretend that never happened either? Hardly a position to be throwing stones from. Actually, reps were demanded by TSO, MCXA's former government, not by Jimmy2e. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) TSO... yeah... aren't they the people that gave white peace to BAPS, Invicta, UPN, and Echelon? Considering TSO's war effort against Invicta (and the other purples in that list), asking for reps from us when nobody else was asking for them would have been pretty ... dicey. Edited August 5, 2009 by Haflinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gn0xious Jr Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) I don't think she was saying that MCXA is innocent, rather that TSO is just as guilty. I would argue that that TSO is not guilty for the "crimes" committed while the TSO leadership was in MCXA. I feel that an alliances actions are 100% reflective of the alliance as a whole. This is why an alliance is responsible as a whole when leadership mucks up. This is also why it is important to be a part of an alliance where you share values/ideals with leadership, be it appointed or elected. I will also argue that a single nation's actions follow them whereever they go, good actions or bad. If you assist in a decision that is poorly viewed by the public, it will follow you to [ooc]deletion[/ooc] and beyond. While I wouldn't hold them personally responsible for a previous alliance decision... it would make me weary and/or question their motives moving forward. edit: too too many thats edit#2: dang... Edited August 5, 2009 by Gn0xious Jr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike199777 Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 o/ TSO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 o/ TSO! Did you really just post that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 I think those 15 minutes are just about up, Ordo Verde. 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.