Veritas Aequitas Announcement

[jer]

This issue has been handled and is now dead. It didn't involve you, and continues to not involve you. Go get cause your drama elsewhere.

Hilarious. You were the person who made the thread to show off about being able to wield your alliance leader power stick over an individual rogue (what other reason is there for it?), so you are in no position to be upset because people are actually taking notice of how you've acted.

Also, what did you hope to achieve by including a term that banned the rogue from certain alliances?

Edited November 12, 2009 by Aimee Mann

[JWConner]

Hilarious. You made this thread to show off about being able to wield your alliance leader power stick over an individual rogue (what other reason is there for it?), so you are in no position to be upset because people are actually taking notice of how you've acted (instead of just saying 'yeah, way to go! stick it to the rogue! good job you rule well done!').

Also, what did you hope to achieve by including a term that banned the rogue from certain alliances?

Thanks for asking such a hard-hitting, journalistic in design, question. But, as I've stated, issue is over. If you don't like that answer, I'll refer you to the wall where you can bang your head til you forget what you originally had asked.

Thanks for noticing us though.

[Erixxxx]

Hilarious. You were the person who made the thread to show off about being able to wield your alliance leader power stick over an individual rogue (what other reason is there for it?), so you are in no position to be upset because people are actually taking notice of how you've acted.

Also, what did you hope to achieve by including a term that banned the rogue from certain alliances?

I fail to see how keeping on dead topics accomplish anything. Terms were removed, deal with it.

EDIT: Seems like Conner was faster o/

Edited November 12, 2009 by Erixxxx

[Bob Janova]

I answered the question, please do not put it on Conner.

Indeed, although your answer was incomplete and I'm sure lacks details, you made a credible effort to answer the question. That makes it even stranger that Conner decided to make an issue out of me asking it.

Conner, you really aren't in the position to issue 'put up or shut up' when clearly by 'putting up' we could defeat your alliance

[JWConner]

Indeed, although your answer was incomplete and I'm sure lacks details, you made a credible effort to answer the question. That makes it even stranger that Conner decided to make an issue out of me asking it.

Conner, you really aren't in the position to issue 'put up or shut up' when clearly by 'putting up' we could defeat your alliance

Thanks again. I'm glad your perceptions of alliance size and strength are keen. Again, thanks for your inquiry into our matters.

[jer]

Thanks for asking such a hard-hitting, journalistic in design, question. But, as I've stated, issue is over. If you don't like that answer, I'll refer you to the wall where you can bang your head til you forget what you originally had asked.

Thanks for noticing us though.

Your inability to answer a simple question coupled with the general immaturity you have displayed makes continual probing worthwhile, so I think I'll continue on as I am.

[JWConner]

Your inability to answer a simple question coupled with the general immaturity you have displayed makes continual probing worthwhile, so I think I'll continue on as I am.

All questions that have been deemed relevant have been asked and answered. Again, if this doesn't suit your needs, I refer you back to that wall.

[jer]

All questions that have been deemed relevant have been asked and answered. Again, if this doesn't suit your needs, I refer you back to that wall.

I have already said that I am not going to ignore the term that banned a ruler from certain alliances purely on the basis that you couldn't get away with it. You made the decision and I think you would've carried it through if there weren't strong alliances standing in your way.

And clearly it is still relevant to me or I wouldn't have asked it.

Edited November 12, 2009 by Aimee Mann

[JWConner]

Listen, to Bob and Aimee, I realize you guys feel you deserve some sort of explanation. But, all explanations have been provided to those that deserve them. Nobody will stop you from continuing to ask, but you will no longer get answers from us on this topic. You thrive on drama and accusations and feeling you deserve to know certain things, but you don't.

Have a good day.

[Bob Janova]

You turned this argument into a toxic thread, Conner, not us. You're undoing the decent diplomatic attempts to cover the issues by Erixxxx. In fact my question was pretty much answered by him before you decided to come in here and throw your (non-existent) weight about. A Hegemony henchman isn't so scary these days, you know.

I'd pretty much forgotten all about VA to be honest, but now I have a negative impression for sure.

[jer]

Listen, to Bob and Aimee, I realize you guys feel you deserve some sort of explanation. But, all explanations have been provided to those that deserve them. Nobody will stop you from continuing to ask, but you will no longer get answers from us on this topic. You thrive on drama and accusations and feeling you deserve to know certain things, but you don't.

Have a good day.

Meh, if you are unwilling to clear up such basic issues for proles like me, don't bring your !@#$ to the forums.

[Bilrow]

Should have went the GOD route and just forced the alliance that wanted to take him in to pay you the reps.

[The Reccesion]

You got us BJ. Can I call you BJ? Ok, good.

Listen BJ, as I stated, this topic doesn't concern you. All rogues are treated differently due to circumstances. That will remain to be our stance and as I stated, this issue is over. If that's not ok with you then I'm sorry I couldn't appease the all important BJ. Although most BJ's are welcome, and often bring interesting conversation, you, Mr. BJ, are just trying to cause issues, as you have done many times in the past.

So with that, Mr BJ, I'll bid you adieu.

Amazing.

[Vilien]

Listen, to Bob and Aimee, I realize you guys feel you deserve some sort of explanation. But, all explanations have been provided to those that deserve them. Nobody will stop you from continuing to ask, but you will no longer get answers from us on this topic. You thrive on drama and accusations and feeling you deserve to know certain things, but you don't.

You posted a public thread with the intention of showing everyone how you can handle rogues like a grown up. Congratulations. When you proceed to treat those persons who you opened this issue to in the first place with disrespect and ignore a number of important questions, don't expect people to fall over themselves to praise you. If you don't want to deal with this publicly, then you shouldn't have aired your problems in a public forum.

[enderland]

Listen, to Bob and Aimee, I realize you guys feel you deserve some sort of explanation. But, all explanations have been provided to those that deserve them. Nobody will stop you from continuing to ask, but you will no longer get answers from us on this topic. You thrive on drama and accusations and feeling you deserve to know certain things, but you don't.

Have a good day.

When you post things in a public forum you might have to deal with hard questions. Refusing to answer them makes you look like a fool.

So either don't post them in public (like this was), answer hard questions, or look like a fool.

You appear to have chosen the latter option.

[astronaut jones]

Thanks for asking such a hard-hitting, journalistic in design, question. But, as I've stated, issue is over. If you don't like that answer, I'll refer you to the wall where you can bang your head til you forget what you originally had asked.

Thanks for noticing us though.

And you thought I handle myself poorly, here in the fiery depths of the OWF. Good show, JW, you're quite good at this foreign affairs thing.

[Mathias]

Voldorish:

How you're able to admit joining under false pretences and then claim not to be spying, when you have already admitted to making use of the information you've gained is mind-bogglingly idiotic. Here, it's like this. You went to place X, looked at their private info and used it. That's a simple case of spying mate, pure and simple.

Be that as it may, I'm glad things have worked out between yourself and VA.

Edit: mind-bogglingly

If you think that's spying, you should check out a dictionary. If you still think it's spying, get a better dictionary.

[welshgazza1992]

I'm glad to see an end to this!

o/ VA!!!!!

Hai JWconnor!

[Mechanus]

If you think that's spying, you should check out a dictionary. If you still think it's spying, get a better dictionary.

spy

  /spaɪ/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [spahy] Show IPA ,noun, plural spies, verb, spied, spy⋅ing.

–verb (used without object)

5. to observe secretively or furtively with hostile intent

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spying

Main Entry: spy

Pronunciation: \ˈspī\

Function: verb

Inflected Form(s): spied; spy·ing

transitive verb 1 : to watch secretly usually for hostile purposes

intransitive verb 1 : to observe or search for something

source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spying

[Lord Panda]

I think we found a better dictionary, wouldn't you say?

[Veneke]

I was going to reply to you Mathias, but I see I was beaten to the punch.

Cheers lads, next round's on me.

[Darth Andrew]

If you think that's spying, you should check out a dictionary. If you still think it's spying, get a better dictionary.

Can I join the IAA?

[NationReaper]

The original terms didnt just call for high reps..it called for 45 mil and 200 tech for each nation i was at war with..AND ZI..so yeah i opted to do self ZI and 75 mil in reps...because id come out ahead..

but now the ZI thing got dropped thanks to my beloved IAA and a VA nation messing up after peace was declared...

And the spying thing..i hardly count 1 nations warchest as spying..i could have ghosted the AA and asked for it and gave a fake tag the night before i rolled and got the same thing..fact of the matter is i was just wanting to be out of IAA before i went rogue so they wouldnt be held responsible..i look out for my alliance like they look out for me..i did the work as the LoAF and cleaned it all up for you as well..so no..it wasnt an intense spy op..it was just like mrott wanted to do with penk send a nation to another alliance for a while so you arent liable then send him in to hit penk

So lets go down the terms ladder

my first set was 45 mil and 200 tech to each member i was fighting plus they got to ZI me and the alliance restrictions

second set was 75 mil and self ZI and an apology and the restrictions on alliance

then 75 mil self ZI and an apology and after the apology the restrictions are lifted

and finally 100 mil and no ZI

i just played a game of deal or no deal on CN...D= hope they dont sue

Edited November 13, 2009 by Voldorish

[Penkala]

You got us BJ. Can I call you BJ? Ok, good.

Listen BJ, as I stated, this topic doesn't concern you. All rogues are treated differently due to circumstances. That will remain to be our stance and as I stated, this issue is over. If that's not ok with you then I'm sorry I couldn't appease the all important BJ. Although most BJ's are welcome, and often bring interesting conversation, you, Mr. BJ, are just trying to cause issues, as you have done many times in the past.

So with that, Mr BJ, I'll bid you adieu.

Making enemies where they don't need to be made has worked out so well for you in the past, and keeping it up will certainly improve your alliance's future welfare. Just like it worked for NPO!

Should have went the GOD route and just forced the alliance that wanted to take him in to pay you the reps.

Or the NPO route and ZId the whole alliance for daring to accept whomever they would like into their own alliance!

Spy

  /spaɪ/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [spahy] Show IPA ,noun, plural spies, verb, spied, spy⋅ing.

–verb (used without object)

5. to observe secretively or furtively with hostile intent

Nice try.

1. a person employed by a government to obtain secret information or intelligence about another, usually hostile, country, esp. with reference to military or naval affairs.

From your same source. You know, the one you had to dig into for the most vague possibly accepted definition of spy that might possibly cover Reaper. Around these parts spying is very clearly defined and what he did was not spying. Try again!

Edited November 13, 2009 by Penkala

[astronaut jones]

The original terms didnt just call for high reps..it called for 45 mil and 200 tech for each nation i was at war with..AND ZI..so yeah i opted to do self ZI and 75 mil in reps...because id come out ahead..

but now the ZI thing got dropped thanks to my beloved IAA and a VA nation messing up after peace was declared...

And the spying thing..i hardly count 1 nations warchest as spying..i could have ghosted the AA and asked for it and gave a fake tag the night before i rolled and got the same thing..fact of the matter is i was just wanting to be out of IAA before i went rogue so they wouldnt be held responsible..i look out for my alliance like they look out for me..i did the work as the LoAF and cleaned it all up for you as well..so no..it wasnt an intense spy op..it was just like mrott wanted to do with penk send a nation to another alliance for a while so you arent liable then send him in to hit penk

So lets go down the terms ladder

my first set was 45 mil and 200 tech to each member i was fighting plus they got to ZI me and the alliance restrictions

second set was 75 mil and self ZI and an apology and the restrictions on alliance

then 75 mil self ZI and an apology and after the apology the restrictions are lifted

and finally 100 mil and no ZI

i just played a game of deal or no deal on CN...D= hope they dont sue

For the way JWconner has acted here towards just about everyone, I wouldn't pay a cent of what he was claiming was owed by you in reparations.