Some-Guy Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 We normally pay folks to attack our ghosts, so... thanks I guess? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chasmic Descent Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 At 19 days old I would have known what I was getting into by performing such actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Khan Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 I don't know what was suppose to happen but, all I see is one of those guys attackiing IRON, TOP, and CTC. I though they were suppose to attack at least someone on purple? One of them did to begin with, he attacked Jorost from Invicta, but his nation went "poof".... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 If a Gov of SLCB says that if they leave they are permanently not allowed to be SLCB again, then yes. You should probably keep that line of the permanently part in context, as when it was written the writer himself thought that the guy was going to do his own thing completely independent of SLCB in SLF, but when the guy decided not to what other reason would there be for them to deny membership for a guy who didn't do anything wrong? You just saidSo what are to trying to say? He had no idea what is going on so he did not do it on his own. At the same time you say no one told him to? Well then just how did it happen? Yes totally SLCB ordered the 19 day old nation to attack IRON and Citadel. You already figured it out why all the questions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
draov Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 I am dropping out of these discussions. They have taken a turn for the worse and are becoming increasingly ridiculous. Anyone with any self respect should do the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) SLF is no more , I guess the last rogue was speedily re-accepted to former alliance. Show's over. Edited October 31, 2009 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brenann Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) SLF is no more yup the last one went back to SLCB... so 3 have returned home, 1 was destroyed and one ran to iFOK Edited October 31, 2009 by Brenann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Curzon Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Not every alliance has to attack ghosts. If they don't though will you? Well, my issue is that if they harbor SLF individuals it detracts from their previous statement clarifying their position on SLF. This is the post you so kindly pointed out to me and I think it is relevant with respect to this discussion. look i dont know how to make it any more clear than this.if someone is flying the SLF AA, their actions are not condoned, supported or sanctioned by the rest of SLCB. if someone changes from SLCB to SLF that simply means they are declaring their intentions to both leave SLCB permanently AND conduct their own operations outside of SLCB influence or governance. The "leave SLBC permanently" was the only confidence building measure SLCB offered to prove that their two alliances were different. I am a bit more wary of that original claim if they go back on their previous statements. So in short I certainly think that SLCB may desire to attack their ghosts, otherwise they are de facto protecting these individuals under their banner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iosif Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 SLF is no more , I guess the last rogue was speedily re-accepted to former alliance.Show's over. I guess there's no point in keeping this alive anymore then, I don't believe there's left anything to this what isn't a private matter between SLCB and Invicta. Off to your home boys, we're out of low-quality drama for today! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Well, my issue is that if they harbor SLF individuals it detracts from their previous statement clarifying their position on SLF. This is the post you so kindly pointed out to me and I think it is relevant with respect to this discussion.The "leave SLBC permanently" was the only confidence building measure SLCB offered to prove that their two alliances were different. I am a bit more wary of that original claim if they go back on their previous statements. So in short I certainly think that SLCB may desire to attack their ghosts, otherwise they are de facto protecting these individuals under their banner. I'm pretty sure the "if someone is flying the SLF AA, their actions are not condoned, supported or sanctioned by the rest of SLCB." would've been more of a confidence building measure. If they don't attack their "ghosts" as you call them, I'd love to see someone attack them instead. Pretty sure that they'll accept these people back according to their latest post and the fact that the people who went back to SLCB did nothing wrong. You can play semantics now but the fact of the matter is SLCB can accept who they please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreddieMercury Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Wait, wut? And just when I thought this drama couldn't get dumber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Wait, wut?And just when I thought this drama couldn't get dumber. This is Planet Bob, drama can always get dumber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacky Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Anybody who joined the SLF AA and did nothing else than don the SLF AA hath committed no wrong. I challenge anybody to question that statement with action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Khan Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) So I guess SLCB will be chalking "Operation Purplenurple" up as a success? Edited October 31, 2009 by Emperor Khan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amonra Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Show's over. No way, we still get to see the part when SLCB tells IRON, TOP and CTC that the nation wasnt that big and no reps are necessary and/or they are not gonna pay them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) The past 9 pages have been nothing but bickering. Truth be told, Magnum should have made clear what this thread was about (ogodai going rogue) and that it wasn't a SLCB announcement. Some people are making a fuss about nothing though. Edited October 31, 2009 by Tromp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) No way, we still get to see the part when SLCB tells IRON, TOP and CTC that the nation wasnt that big and no reps are necessary and/or they are not gonna pay them. They said he's a ghost. Free for all. Edited October 31, 2009 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Curzon Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 I'm pretty sure the "if someone is flying the SLF AA, their actions are not condoned, supported or sanctioned by the rest of SLCB." would've been more of a confidence building measure.If they don't attack their "ghosts" as you call them, I'd love to see someone attack them instead. Pretty sure that they'll accept these people back according to their latest post and the fact that the people who went back to SLCB did nothing wrong. You can play semantics now but the fact of the matter is SLCB can accept who they please. Well perhaps we are confusing statements with measures. The statement that "if someone is flying the SLF AA, their actions are not condoned, supported or sanctioned by the rest of SLCB" is just that, a statement. Just because something is said does not mean it is true. However, SLCB originally offered something more concrete than their statements. To back up their statements they proposed a future action would be taken. That action would then prove the validity of their statements. The action they proposed was that SLF individuals would not be let back into SLCB, that is what permanent means, and what was implied with if someone changes from SLCB to SLF that simply means they are declaring their intentions to both leave SLCB permanently I am not saying SLCB is lying, I am simply saying their statement engendered more trust when there was something tangible backing it up, i.e. that individuals going to SLF would be leaving SLCB permanently. Now that they have gone back on their word, it would make more sense that we would have less confidence in that word. This is not semantics, this is pointing out a reality. This is what was said and this is what was offered Bob as an assurance package. We now have no assurances and are forced to rely on SLCB's word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyriq Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 WTF is going on here? SLF forms, declares war, and then re-merges? Do I have it right... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some-Guy Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 The past 9 pages have been nothing but bickering.Truth be told, Magnum should have made clear what this thread was about (ogodai going rogue) and that it wasn't a SLCB announcement. Some people are making a fuss about nothing though. TOP was attacked babe, where's the love?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Curzon Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Thats about the long and short of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) TOP was attacked babe, where's the love?? As SLCB have said, even Shahenshah on this page, it's a ghost. Edited October 31, 2009 by Tromp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 So I guess SLCB will be chalking "Operation Purplenurple" up as a success? I must admit I'm curious. When did Magnum start making announcements for SLCB? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some-Guy Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 As SLCB have said, even Shahenshah on this page, it's a ghost. BUT HE ATTACK A TOP GHOST!!!!111!! Where's the moral outrage, pet? You're going to make me cry unless you personally DoS us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 I must admit I'm curious. When did Magnum start making announcements for SLCB? Don't mind the ignorant, they just hop onto the bandwagon. 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.