Issues Surrounding Browncoats

[Lord Panda]

Hrm.

I do believe that more or less is a reason for why your post is absurd...In the second sentence of my post, no less. Of course, that was the shorthand version, the rest of my post actually goes into more detail about the logical absurdity of your conduct in this thread.

I used the word "honorable"? I thought I simply said that...

Here I point out that Schatt didnt meet a certain level of despicability. Hardly praising him. Moreover, as I also pointed out, the intent wasn't to betray his alliance, it was to save it from certain death. Had things gone according to plan, Browncoats would have been beaten and bruised, but a hell of a lot better off than IAA, who were the ones about to drag Browncoats into the grave with them, forcing Schatt's hand.

Hahahahaha, notable exceptions? God, you really are ignorant. So, let me guess, you'd have rather ended up like IAA, getting pounded into disbandment over a treaty chain into a situation you had nothing to do with with?

Well, if you'd rather have slit Browncoat's wrists in a less roundabout way, all the more power to ya, Mr. Martyr.

Ah...Youth.

It's wasted on the hopeless.

Point by point.

1. It's selective quoting to take the only real point brought up in a post and respond to it, and ignore the fluff? I'll keep that in mind.

2. I'll give you that one, I misread what was said, but my point is valid.

3. He didn't so much save BC as dig it's grave, so, nice job breaking it hero. Besides, it wasn't his call to make. He was an opportunist who took a chance because he, and he said this himself, figured he wouldn't get caught until he was well clear of BC. That doesn't sound like someone with their alliance's best interests at heart.

4. If the MDP is triggered, it's triggered. "Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to fight and die." I'm sorry if in my blind optimism, I value loyalty and honor over my pixels and infra.

5. I'll disregard that, as it has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion.

Well, you tried. One more time?

[TehChron]

Point by point.

1. It's selective quoting to take the only real point brought up in a post and respond to it, and ignore the fluff? I'll keep that in mind.

2. I'll give you that one, I misread what was said, but my point is valid.

3. He didn't so much save BC as dig it's grave, so, nice job breaking it hero. Besides, it wasn't his call to make. He was an opportunist who took a chance because he, and he said this himself, figured he wouldn't get caught until he was well clear of BC. That doesn't sound like someone with their alliance's best interests at heart.

4. If the MDP is triggered, it's triggered. "Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to fight and die." I'm sorry if in my blind optimism, I value loyalty and honor over my pixels and infra.

5. I'll disregard that, as it has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion.

Well, you tried. One more time?

When using numbers or bullet points, it's generally considered polite to include references to what you're talking about for the sake of the reader. Otherwise, no one will know what you're talking about.

And frankly, I for one, can not fathom why you would want to inflict your affliction upon innocent bystanders.

1. Define "Real point" and define "fluff". Then you get to pass the 'mediocre fake debater' exam.

2. If you give me anything (what did you give me, exactly?) then your point does not stand. Here I can understand why you figured vagueness would work in your favor, what you likely did not consider was that no one notices what points you're scoring if no one knows the game you're playing.

3. Being the only alliance leadership around at a time of crisis, and being head of FA no less? If it wasnt his call to make, who's was its, exactly?

figured he wouldn't get caught until he was well clear of BC

O rly? Where was this? Surely someone with as razor-sharp a memory such as yours, such an infallible authority should be able to reference this confession you hint at?

4. The entire situation was meant to be one whereby the MDP would not be triggered as a result. Hence (supposedly) saving the alliance. Well, sorry to say, Panda, but Schatt seemed to value your infra more than you did.

I guess that means he cared more about the alliance than you did?

5. What are you disregarding? Feel free to share it with the class.

[Fort Pitt]

Point by point.

1. It's selective quoting to take the only real point brought up in a post and respond to it, and ignore the fluff? I'll keep that in mind.

2. I'll give you that one, I misread what was said, but my point is valid.

3. He didn't so much save BC as dig it's grave, so, nice job breaking it hero. Besides, it wasn't his call to make. He was an opportunist who took a chance because he, and he said this himself, figured he wouldn't get caught until he was well clear of BC. That doesn't sound like someone with their alliance's best interests at heart.

4. If the MDP is triggered, it's triggered. "Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to fight and die." I'm sorry if in my blind optimism, I value loyalty and honor over my pixels and infra.

5. I'll disregard that, as it has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion.

Well, you tried. One more time?

1) Its selective quoting, bringing up a point that can be seen negative from your standing point thus making it seem like you are actually making a post worth reading.

2) No comment...

3) The important thing is he tried to save BC. He may have failed, yes, but that was only because a mole leaked logs. This engineered war was no where to the extent that other wars engineered by those who eventually destroyed BC.

4) You should pay a visit to This topic. And perhaps the topics which were of all but a few of NPO's allies canceling treaties as the Karma war began before making a statement about treaties and honor.

5) No comment again...

[Nintenderek]

4. The entire situation was meant to be one whereby the MDP would not be triggered as a result. Hence (supposedly) saving the alliance. Well, sorry to say, Panda, but Schatt seemed to value your infra more than you did.

Chron, while I hate to disagree with you, I must point out that Schatt did not value Panda's infra more then he did, because Panda was never a member of Browncoats. He's arguing for friends right now, who although were Browncoats at one point, were not Browncoats at the time of these events.

[TehChron]

Chron, while I hate to disagree with you, I must point out that Schatt did not value Panda's infra more then he did, because Panda was never a member of Browncoats. He's arguing for friends right now, who although were Browncoats at one point, were not Browncoats at the time of these events.

Well, that's a shame. I enjoy trolling/arguing/debating with you.

Anyway, wait, if he wasn't even in Browncoats, then that makes this situation all the more absurd. Really, I mean, I laughed out loud at that.

[Fort Pitt]

Chron, while I hate to disagree with you, I must point out that Schatt did not value Panda's infra more then he did, because Panda was never a member of Browncoats. He's arguing for friends right now, who although were Browncoats at one point, were not Browncoats at the time of these events.

I actually took Chron's statement in a way that was more like "He would rather not kick your $@!." But perhaps he wasn't in any involved party at the time which makes his argument with out reason.

[TehChron]

I actually took Chron's statement in a way that was more like "He would rather not kick your $@!." But perhaps he wasn't in any involved party at the time which makes his argument with out reason.

Argument without motive, you mean. Reason was invalidated as a part of his responses quite a while ago.

[Lord Panda]

When using numbers or bullet points, it's generally considered polite to include references to what you're talking about for the sake of the reader. Otherwise, no one will know what you're talking about.

And frankly, I for one, can not fathom why you would want to inflict your affliction upon innocent bystanders.

1. Define "Real point" and define "fluff". Then you get to pass the 'mediocre fake debater' exam.

2. If you give me anything (what did you give me, exactly?) then your point does not stand. Here I can understand why you figured vagueness would work in your favor, what you likely did not consider was that no one notices what points you're scoring if no one knows the game you're playing.

3. Being the only alliance leadership around at a time of crisis, and being head of FA no less? If it wasnt his call to make, who's was its, exactly? O rly? Where was this? Surely someone with as razor-sharp a memory such as yours, such an infallible authority should be able to reference this confession you hint at?

4. The entire situation was meant to be one whereby the MDP would not be triggered as a result. Hence (supposedly) saving the alliance. Well, sorry to say, Panda, but Schatt seemed to value your infra more than you did.

I guess that means he cared more about the alliance than you did?

5. What are you disregarding? Feel free to share it with the class.

1. Irrelevant.

2. I already said I had misread that particular paragraph. I more or less agreed with you, so it's a moot point.

3.

Had Nintenderek not posted those logs that he he recieved, then they would never have been leaked to the OWF, and (assuming no other leaks) no one would have ever known until well after the deed was done.

His first response directly to me. Reading the whole thread is good for you.

4. This has been covered, it wasn't my infra anyway. But the direct result of his actions cost BC everything. Why argue the point? He made a bad judgment call, that's all there is to it. Why didn't he take into account what the membership thought? It's been explicitly stated this was done without anyone's knowledge or consent, it was all Schatt. Don't believe me, peruse the thread your damn self, I don't have the time or patience to go on an easter egg hunt for you.

5. It's obvious that I'm disregarding your final statement. If I'm responding to your post paragraph by paragraph, or point by point, it should be fairly clear what goes where.

[Lord Panda]

1) Its selective quoting, bringing up a point that can be seen negative from your standing point thus making it seem like you are actually making a post worth reading.

2) No comment...

3) The important thing is he tried to save BC. He may have failed, yes, but that was only because a mole leaked logs. This engineered war was no where to the extent that other wars engineered by those who eventually destroyed BC.

4) You should pay a visit to This topic. And perhaps the topics which were of all but a few of NPO's allies canceling treaties as the Karma war began before making a statement about treaties and honor.

5) No comment again...

1. I can't help it's the only sentence in his reply worth responding to.

2. Then I have no comment.

3. People finding out about what went went on was only a question of when.

4. Hence the notable exceptions. Was my alliance allied to NPO? No, we fought on the Karma side. Get your facts straight. Reading comprehension is useful too.

5. Ditto.

Edited September 2, 2009 by Lord Panda

[Schattenmann]

3. He didn't so much save BC as dig it's grave, so, nice job breaking it hero. Besides, it wasn't his call to make. He was an opportunist who took a chance because he, and he said this himself, figured he wouldn't get caught until he was well clear of BC. That doesn't sound like someone with their alliance's best interests at heart.

4. If the MDP is triggered, it's triggered. "Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to fight and die." I'm sorry if in my blind optimism, I value loyalty and honor over my pixels and infra.

3a. It was my call to make. I was the democratically elected MoFA and only member of gov around for the entire runup to the war. If I had used the same opportunity to attack NPO as soon as they declared first, would you challenge my autority to have done that?

3b. I did not say I did it becauese I figured I wouldn't get caught until I was clear. I did it because it was the course that I felt fit the situation, that would remove Browncoats from real harm, remove its uninvolved allies from any harm, and after a period of PoW status, bring Browncoats back to full speed with some new friends. It kept dozens of alliances out of the 1V-GATO war as it was designed to. Only by the revelation of it was Browncoats doomed, and that revelation was done by members who were too angry to think about the repurcussions of their OWF logdumps. (Yes, logdumps that couldn't not have happened without a plot to begin with).

My removal from BC was, as clearly stated in the OP, not a factor until Zzzptm made up surrender terms after the war had already begun.

4. If you want to take your alliance to war in defense of surrender terms violators who MDPed you knowing full well that they had violated those terms, but not disclosing to you that they were in danger of war at NPO's whim, then you're welcome to recite your poem as you midlessly send your soldiers to headbutt bullets intended for someone else. GATO was cool, but they basically broke all their treaties before they were signed.

[TehChron]

1. Irrelevant.

2. I already said I had misread that particular paragraph. I more or less agreed with you, so it's a moot point.

3.

His first response directly to me. Reading the whole thread is good for you.

4. This has been covered, it wasn't my infra anyway. But the direct result of his actions cost BC everything. Why argue the point? He made a bad judgment call, that's all there is to it. Why didn't he take into account what the membership thought? It's been explicitly stated this was done without anyone's knowledge or consent, it was all Schatt. Don't believe me, peruse the thread your damn self, I don't have the time or patience to go on an easter egg hunt for you.

5. It's obvious that I'm disregarding your final statement. If I'm responding to your post paragraph by paragraph, or point by point, it should be fairly clear what goes where.

Your "responses" are vague and irreverent to the point of attempting to interpret the less than obvious targets a futile endeavor.

1. Quite relevant. Arent you the one trying to defend the fact you decided to selectively quote schatt's defenses and clarifications to make a straw man? At least defend yourself, rather than try to dismiss your actions, after all, you picked this fight. I suggest you own up to it.

2. Yes it is. I was correct (whatever point it was), however, knowing which point you consider "moot" would be a great boon, as you would be taking a step closer to demonstrating an actual opinion on this matter, rather than attempting to hurl nonsense Schatt's way.

3.

figured he wouldn't get caught until he was well clear of BC.

=/=

Had Nintenderek not posted those logs that he he recieved, then they would never have been leaked to the OWF, and (assuming no other leaks) no one would have ever known until well after the deed was done.

Where did Schatt say he was planning to bail on Browncoats? I believe that was what I was asking.

4. Actually, if you want to play the blame game, it goes in this order: First, NPO for the Chris Kaos term, Second, GATO for knowingly violating it, Third, IAA for saying theyd go to the grave for GATO against 1V (and giving Schatt the impression they intended to activate their MDP), Fourth, the folks who negotiated that treaty, and then Fifth, Schatt for taking that action to try and hold off BC's imminent destruction.

Which once again brings up the question, if you werent there, then why do you continue to act like you know better than everyone else, even when that's clearly not the case? I mean, Im just curious at this point, as your efforts are proving very entertaining for me.

5. You're responding paragraph by paragraph? I didnt know each of my posts conformed to a five-paragraph structure.

[Schattenmann]

4. This has been covered, it wasn't my infra anyway. But the direct result of his actions cost BC everything. Why argue the point? He made a bad judgment call, that's all there is to it. Why didn't he take into account what the membership thought? It's been explicitly stated this was done without anyone's knowledge or consent, it was all Schatt. Don't believe me, peruse the thread your damn self, I don't have the time or patience to go on an easter egg hunt for you.

Poll:

Browncoats, should we die in a fire for GATO, or should we set a fake war into motion that yuo can't tell anyone about? You have 2 hours to decide, the real war starts tonight.

Yeaaaaaaaahhhhh. The situation itself demonstrates that asking your membership about super secret operations makes them automatic OWF material.

3. People finding out about what went went on was only a question of when.

Exactly. And if it had been long enough, it wouldn't have mattered who found out.

[Fort Pitt]

Argument without motive, you mean. Reason was invalidated as a part of his responses quite a while ago.

I was never good at vocabulary.

1. I can't help it's the only sentence in his reply worth responding to.

2. Then I have no comment.

3. People finding out about what went went on was only a question of when.

4. Hence the notable exceptions. Was my alliance allied to NPO? No, we fought on the Karma side. Get your facts straight. Reading comprehension is useful too.

5. Ditto.

1) But that does not change the fact you ignored parts of his post.

2) blah

3) But the fact is, the mole exposed what should not have been exposed until a later time, after the other war had ended.

4) Did I once state that you were allied to NPO? No. Did you care to read my post carefully? No. Why? You don't really know how to debate when your against 3 other people.

5) asdfasd

[LiquidMercury]

4. If the MDP is triggered, it's triggered. "Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to fight and die." I'm sorry if in my blind optimism, I value loyalty and honor over my pixels and infra.

Not true what so ever. E-lawyering 101, it's only triggered if the help is requested by the alliance that would do the triggering.

See IRON's MDoAP with TOP

See ACF's MDoAP with Rok

See Coalition of Cowards

See plenty of other opportunities orchestrated during the Karma war.

[TehChron]

I was never good at vocabulary.

Meh, it happens.

4) Did I once state that you were allied to NPO? No. Did you care to read my post carefully? No. Why? You don't really know how to debate when your against 3 other people.

I don't think it's the number of opponents that's causing him trouble...

[Fort Pitt]

I don't think it's the number of opponents that's causing him trouble...

I was implying that an experienced debater, if they haven't already, would carefully word their statements before posting when they are at a disadvantage.

[LiquidMercury]

4. Actually, if you want to play the blame game, it goes in this order: First, NPO for the Chris Kaos term, Second, GATO for knowingly violating it, Third, IAA for saying theyd go to the grave for GATO against 1V (and giving Schatt the impression they intended to activate their MDP), Fourth, the folks who negotiated that treaty, and then Fifth, Schatt for taking that action to try and hold off BC's imminent destruction.

More along the lines of First, NPO for CK term, Second Barbula1 for knowingly violating it, Third and fourth chaining MDP's, Schatt because it's fun to blame stuff on him like [ooc] gonnasyphaherpaHIVswine infection [ooc]

[Nintenderek]

3. People finding out about what went went on was only a question of when.

I can't help but respond to this, as it's the one thing I was actually involved for this whole affair. I don't think anyone outside of us four would have found out for a long time if I hadn't posted the logs in the private government forums. In fact, if we at BC were better at masking, I think I could have still posted them on the government forums and nobody would have found out. The plan was well orchestrated, something you have to admit even if you are against what Schattenmann did. The only flaw was me forgetting who all could actually see the government forum, and Schattenmann thinking that no other member of government wouldn't get on in a while, considering I had other worldly issues to take care of at the time, and so did the other members of BC's government.

[Haflinger]

I went to Peace Mode because I objected strongly to the notion of the ZI [ooc]and I refused to re-roll[/ooc]. I had a number of alliance leaders approach me and offer me MoFA or triumvirate positions if I would take the ZI [ooc]or re-roll[/ooc]. I was not going to go down any of those roads. I was not going to go nuke rogue. I waited for another path to take, and NV offered that path.

You were offered a reps deal, which you refused to even consider. Nobody wanted to ZI you, this is a story you have invented.

If we'd been a bit more aggressive, you'd have been on a permazi list, and things would have gotten very much like the KM to Zenith story I suspect.

[Fort Pitt]

You were offered a reps deal, which you refused to even consider. Nobody wanted to ZI you, this is a story you have invented.

If we'd been a bit more aggressive, you'd have been on a permazi list, and things would have gotten very much like the KM to Zenith story I suspect.

Actually being involved in a small manner during the whole thing, ZI was ordered, so I believe this is more of something you are inventing.

KM actually had nothing to do with the whole thing, he was framed by someone, and I am not even sure who that was. If you would really PZI someone for engineering a war, than you would have had to PZI at least half of your current allies and friends, maybe more.

I also see that you waited until the discussion was pretty much over to say anything.

Edited September 2, 2009 by Fort Pitt

[Haflinger]

Actually being involved in a small manner during the whole thing, ZI was ordered, so I believe this is more of something you are inventing.

Not by us.

There was a reps offer, it was ... ignored. In classic zzzptm style, so much easier to bury your head in the sand and wait for new people come along and like you while using OOC connections to undermine your former allies.

Ignoring the other side is not how negotiations work.

However, I don't believe you were in NV, so I'm not sure how this matters to you.

KM actually had nothing to do with the whole thing, he was framed by someone, and I am not even sure who that was. If you would really PZI someone for engineering a war, than you would have had to PZI at least half of your current allies and friends, maybe more.

Umm... I'm referring to an entirely different incident. Remember when Zenith paid GOD reps for accepting KM despite GOD keeping him on their permazi list?

Also, what zzzptm did was not "engineering a war." What he did more falls into the category of "complete and total betrayal of trust between allies." If you think it's OK to just go ahead and get your allies to plan wars for no reason - well he's very lucky none of the real wars that he nearly caused started.

I also see that you waited until the discussion was pretty much over to say anything.

What are you talking about?

[Leftbehind]

What Schattenmann done was one of the most interesting plans and attempts to avoid a major war on planet bob. I remember talking to MASH a lot before the GATO war started because the alliance I was running at the time was allied to them. We would have fought, got crushed and probably disbanded if we went to war but we would have fought. The Bubblegum war saved me a lot of headaches and for that I am grateful.

@Haflinger: I was in NV and have been friends with their government at the time when Zzzptm joined. Do I recall hearing that ZI was threatened on him but if it was you guys I have no idea or I do not remember. I'll take your word for it but I know Invicta have ZI people before or at least followed the order from another alliance.

[Kzoppistan]

Is this going to be made into a movie?

It should.

Ah, the best laid plans of mice and men...

This is the dirt that I stick around for. Good read, Schattenmann.

[Lusitan]

Also, what zzzptm did was not "engineering a war." What he did more falls into the category of "complete and total betrayal of trust between allies." If you think it's OK to just go ahead and get your allies to plan wars for no reason - well he's very lucky none of the real wars that he nearly caused started.

Quoted for the Truth. It was specially painful. The entire CDT ready to come in defense of BDC at the first move, zzzptm feeding us with made up information, a sudden Browncoats surrender and us learning we were all fooled on OWF. The support we vouched for BDC, the plans we made to help them, suddenly looked like a pathetic joke. And we felt the joke was on us.

zzzptm got away with it with his head over his shoulders, and that's something that I was strongly against, personally. No idiot should be allowed to play his friends the way he did and get away with an "exile" at another alliance. Specially because BDC's entry in CDT involved a major ammount of faith from some signatories and some internal disagreements at the time, most CDT signatories were not expecting zzzptm would slam the door back in their face after such demonstration of trust less than one month before.

zzzptm's punishment was indeed very generous for what he would have deserved. This whole affair had a bigger price to be paid by CDT than it should have, mostly due to indirect consequences.

[Mathias]

How much planning did it take to attack Browncoats? BDC could have handled them on their own, and then some.