merlin Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Well, first of all Merlin, GGA is an IRON ally. We believe in supporting our allies. Unlike your alliance. Well if it isn't Mr. High and Mighty himself. However, I must say the last few pages have been dedicated to IRON lasing out. I highly doubt your allies appreciate being used as an excuse to attack the ODN, but that is up to them I suppose. I do say that I find the total lack of GGA posters and the extreme blustering by IRON in the proceeding pages indicative that you are carrying out a personal vendetta here. Secondly, you have no business telling anyone where they should or should not post. But that can be overlooked. On the contrary! I love it when you guys post. That's how we get gems like this: Honestly, if IRON tries to paint ODN in negative picture, it will only add bias as per neutral parties and hence discredit the awesome repute you guys have accumulated since ??? very long?. Now, what is not subjective: As a matter of policy, as you could ask GGA or any other ally of ours, what happens between our ally and any other third-party is not our business and we state that when & if we're asked unless there is a direct threat of war. Why we are here? because insults were being thrown at our ally by some members of ODN (not all) and by ODN's allies, /shrugs. There you go contradicting yourself. Why are you really here? I will say this: I am aware of some of the back channel discussions. ODN wishes to put forward a particular front regarding this, however, some of us *DO* know what went on. I certainly won't share the details, as it is not my place. But, I'll say this: I know what went on. Your front is appalling. I find it pretty funny that ODN can't pull the strings without snapping them that is why I have took a vested interest in this thread.There were likely many reasons why the treaty was cancelled some of them are not posted in this thread. More of the same. IRON, you guys are starting to come off as quite the sissies. If you have something to say, man up and say it. Or is this just more posturing from the same people who lead the fabled Coalition of Cowards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 (edited) You know, I find this particular line extremely hilarious. You can't really follow IRON's example when you have been abandoning allies for years now and they just did it within the last 8 months.Carry on. Because IRON has been involved in so many important wars as a swing alliance, right? How about we stick to the argument at hand? Edited December 10, 2009 by WarriorConcept Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 (edited) Everyones agreeing with DeSceptor and that DesCeptor has verified your front, I'm asking you what this means: I am agreeing with myself, and pointing out her confirmation of my point and support for my argument. If you wish to get into the specifics of that line, then the first half further confirms my argument that we were going to cancel the treaty. The latter half refers to our discontentment with GGA's treaty with IRON. Did you know that ODN and IRON are not friends? Now, considering that I know IRON has expressed discontent with GGA's former treaty with ODN, I am curious as to what, exactly, your point is. Edited December 10, 2009 by Style #386 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iotupa Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Because IRON has been involved in so many important wars as a swing alliance, right? How about we stick to the argument at hand? It was an ODN member that brought it up, I'm hardly off topic, but I suppose I can mention something about the original topic as well. Both ODN and GGA have shown themselves to be not very good allies, so this is a beneficial situation for them both. Neither one has to worry about an ally making bad decisions or abandoning them, they can focus on making bad decisions for themselves and abandoning their other allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 (edited) I am agreeing with myself, and pointing out her confirmation of my point and support for my argument.If you wish to get into the specifics of that line, then the first half further confirms my argument that we were going to cancel the treaty. The latter half refers to our discontentment with GGA's treaty with IRON. Did you know that ODN and IRON are not friends? Now, considering that I know IRON has expressed discontent with GGA's former treaty with ODN, I am curious as to what, exactly, your point is. So IRON was indeed an issue brought up by ODN in regards to this cancellation advanced by yourside but left behind due to slower process. Whoever was whining about IRON not involved? Actually, now let me tell you something Arsenal: We were of opinion that GGA-ODN relations were none of our business, have you verified this front with GGA? So your problem was GGA's treaty with IRON? And GGA got sick of you trying to tell them to drop it? You know, refusing to play grabass. Again, your hatred of us got to your relations with GGA, just like your hatred of NPO got to your relations with Legion. Lessons not learned. Or is this just more posturing from the same people who lead the fabled Coalition of Cowards? Sorry we joined your club couple? years late for couple days. Edited December 10, 2009 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Sorry, I reffered to the bolded part, my apologies if I wasnt clear enough: If you read the post you quoted, you'll see he does address that part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Your opinion has been duly noted Tromp. Your note has been noted, Finsterbaby. (I'm sure it'll be of good use in the future?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 How about it IRON, actually back up your "arguments" with some facts and proof then maybe you wouldn't end up looking foolish. Dude, I've tried asking people to do that so many times...no one ever comes through. Also, its been established that IRON is attempting to speak for GGA and blatantly contradicting what they already stated what the reason for their own cancellation was. There was no "proofreading error" in MCRABIT's post, something was plainly said to be false when GGA plainly said it was essentially true. Seeing as IRON still is insisting that the statement was correct, I wonder what GGA has to say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finster Baby Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Dude, I've tried asking people to do that so many times...no one ever comes through. Also, its been established that IRON is attempting to speak for GGA and blatantly contradicting what they already stated what the reason for their own cancellation was. There was no "proofreading error" in MCRABIT's post, something was plainly said to be false when GGA plainly said it was essentially true. Seeing as IRON still is insisting that the statement was correct, I wonder what GGA has to say? Ah yes, ODN's e-lawyer has returned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Ah yes, ODN's e-lawyer has returned. You're really not as good at this as you think you are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 (edited) Ah yes, ODN's e-lawyer has returned. To be fair, I don't really consider Impero to be a great lover of the ODN, and his fans in ODN are few and far between. Beyond which, you continue to ignore his point. Edited December 10, 2009 by Style #386 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Ah yes, ODN's e-lawyer has returned. Heh, believe me, you don't want me to actually start "e" lawyering anything Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 I think I can say that everything possible has already been posted in this thread. Oh, not even close. This discussion has been interesting though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 This discussion has been interesting though. There's a discussion going on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 There's a discussion going on? It was a euphemism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 (edited) Heh, believe me, you don't want me to actually start "e" lawyering anything Yea you should go back to couping allies. I think you do that better than E-lawyering. Finster should continue to ignore subjectives 'established' by someone who'd want to see IRON as THE alliance to be rolled. Edited December 10, 2009 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iotupa Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 There's a discussion going on? Has any uninvolved party told any other uninvolved party that they are uninvolved and shouldn't be posting? No discussion around here is complete without that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finster Baby Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 You're really not as good at this as you think you are. Never said I was WC - never said I was. The fact that I'm NOT good at it is why I stay out of this Cesspool called OWF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 (edited) Yea you should go back to couping allies. I think you do that better than E-lawyering. Finster should continue to ignore subjectives 'established' by someone who'd want to see IRON as THE alliance to be rolled. Again with your personal characterizations. How about a decent argument out of you instead of changing the subject whenever you have nothing left to say. Never said I was WC - never said I was. I never said you were either Edited December 10, 2009 by WarriorConcept Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 The phrase "put up or shut up" comes to mind here. MCRABT if you know something, out with it. If you aren't willing to state it and no one else between the two involved parties (ODN and GGA) even acknowledges what you are saying to be true, then you know nothing.So if you have something to say, say it. Otherwise, stop the posturing. Thank god somebody said this. He's been dancing around spouting off nothing meaningful for pages. Hopefully if he does post again it's something worthwhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 MCRABT definitely did directly contradict what both GGA and ODN had agreed on. So far, IRON have sent several big guns into the thread to try to bluster their way around that point (via ad homs, mostly) without actually addressing it, except to back him up (and therefore implicitly call GGA and ODN liars). This subplot is now far more interesting than the cancellation, which makes sense from both sides and with which both ODN and GGA seem to be entirely happy (and are dealing with each other admirably). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Has any uninvolved party told any other uninvolved party that they are uninvolved and shouldn't be posting? No discussion around here is complete without that. I thought about it, but then figured that we have an opportunity to set a CN "NO U" record. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iotupa Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 I wonder if this image will become a reality now that the prerequisite has been met. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 (edited) Finster should continue to ignore subjectives 'established' There is nothing subjective about conclusions that are drawn from Deceptor and MCRABIT's contradicting posts, as it is plainly obvious that they are contradicting on a material fact. Ignoring that is what all the flack is about, and the establishment of that conclusion should not be sarcastically put in quotation marks. Also, I'll ignore the rest of your post. Edited December 10, 2009 by Il Impero Romano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Havok Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 You're really not as good at this as you think you are. being good at arguing on message boards is not something i would actually brag about 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.