You know honestly

[Penkala]

Not to dishonour your allies, but a part of me says there may be some folks out there (only a tiny number, I assure you, not like most of CN or anything) that find NSO to be extremely annoying and wouldn't mind seeing them reduced to rubble/gone.

That part of you would probably be wrong. NSO is a nuisance to many, for sure, but if enough of them (since the insinuation is they'd be SF) wanted NSO rolled they could have done it after what Corinan said.

[Lord Boris]

And you said this new CN world would suck B)

Still does, quite truthfully.

[TheyCallMeJeezy]

That part of you would probably be wrong. NSO is a nuisance to many, for sure, but if enough of them (since the insinuation is they'd be SF) wanted NSO rolled they could have done it after what Corinan said.

After the incessant baiting over the past few days, I think we are all well aware that enough of "them" do want NSO rolled. Somehow I doubt it would be so easy.

[Doitzel]

Complete waste of time... This instant-gratification nonsense really gets on my nerves sometimes. People need to learn to keep it in their pants.

[Caliph]

I literally can't wait for this to happen, if it does. Since I could literally drop my AA and join one side and help smash the other, I'd literally outfight all of my opponents in the process. Then I'd literally have to beg Archon to let me back into Mushroom Kingdom, but not before I ran around with my manhood literally dragging the floor out of smugness.

Literally.

I literally lolled.

[WarriorConcept]

I knew it was wrong to put any faith in this game.

Edited December 27, 2009 by WarriorConcept

[kevin32891]

I knew it was wrong to put any faith in this game.

Sometimes there are gifts even Santa can't give.

[New Frontier]

After the incessant baiting over the past few days, I think we are all well aware that enough of "them" do want NSO rolled. Somehow I doubt it would be so easy.

If the majority of the world wanted us dead, we would be.

There are enough people with a vested interest in our survival for us to survive. That's the bottom line.

[Ch33kY]

It would be funny if both alliances grew past 1000 members for the war and got sanctioned.

Interesting point. Would there be certain guidelines to the war, such only the membership at the time the war begins can fight? Are nukes allowed? At what point will it end? Is there going to be a referee (alliance) to enforce these rules? Etc. etc. have fun!

[WarriorConcept]

Interesting point. Would there be certain guidelines to the war, such only the membership at the time the war begins can fight? Are nukes allowed? At what point will it end? Is there going to be a referee (alliance) to enforce these rules? Etc. etc. have fun!

Nothing is happening.

[Ejayrazz]

Well, Delta tried to call out NSO for not doing 1v1s and offered them a challenge... NSO agreed... so now Delta has to go back to RIA and vote on whether or not to accept NSO's acceptance of his challenge.

Cause you know, RIA's a democratic alliance, so they have to vote on stuff like the "terms of the engagement", but not small issues like whether or not people can run their mouth and issue challenges that are above their paygrade on the forums.

He didn't run his mouth in the terms you are suggesting. He was straightforward and didn't excessively pull his weight, he wondered if they'd accept a duel from someone their size. After much chanting and prancing from Ivan about "With allies" and "Without allies," he finally answered Delta's request, which could have easily been done with a simple "Yes" or "No" from the very beginning. Delta called them out, NSO called them out for the calling. We'll see where this goes, but don't for one second even try fingering this on a loudmouth lout speaking incoherently on anger or speaking without reason. He isn't VincentXander.

Edited December 27, 2009 by Ejayrazz

[TehChron]

He didn't run his mouth in the terms you are suggesting. He was straightforward and didn't excessively pull his weight, he wondered if they'd accept a duel from someone their size. After much chanting and prancing from Ivan about "With allies" and "Without allies," he finally answered Delta's request, which could have easily been done with a simple "Yes" or "No" from the very beginning. Delta called them out, NSO called them out for the calling. We'll see where this goes, but don't for one second even try fingering this on a loudmouth lout speaking incoherently on anger or speaking without reason. He isn't VincentXander.

Actually, Ivan said yes to begin with.

One moment, Ill pull up the quote and edit it in.

[Ejayrazz]

If I recall correctly, he kept bringing the issue up of allies

"If you feel that such an action is in your best interests and that you are actually justified in making such a claim then declare.

Oh, you want me to tell you that I will have NSO fight RIA one on one because that is the only way you will go to war, right? "

Which Delta replied:

"Hahahaha

My god, man you are a riot. If we want to fight with allies, then we refuse to fight without back up. If we want to fight one on one, then we are afraid to fight your back up?

What do you want me to do, offer to suspend all of our treaties and let you bring a coalition against us? Your mental gymnastics are gold worthy."

Which eventually lead to:

Last I checked, Penkala wasn't in government. I have absolutely no CB to attack NSO with. I do think you are a pompous blowhard who uses the threat of war and the gimmick of 1v1 battles to try to intimidate people that you don't think will take you up on the offer or that you'd be able to safely wallop on even if they did, and I think you do this because 90% of the game has more friends than you and if you go even one place removed from your direct allies, your allies' allies don't want to defend you either, so you have nothing to lose and everything to gain. The thing is, I think you'd rather spend time dancing around semantics and feinting through logical loopholes than put your nukes where your mouth is.

I asked you a simple question, "Will you accept a 1v1 fight from anyone?" and you've now spent several pages dancing around giving me a straight answer and lumping in qualifications. It's your own system. I know this because your membership loves touting how it pioneered it every other !@#$@#$ day of the week. You get told to put up or shut up a lot, and so far you've been able to fall back on the defense that it was your subordinates that were writing the checks you've been refusing to cash.

You don't get to do this now. Ivan, either put up, or shut. the. $%&@. up.

He danced around if I recall correctly, it wasn't a simple answer.

[TehChron]

Half-assedly doing things earns you nothing good, you know.

For a justified CB?

Certainly.

I've heard Corinan say that "I don't like you" is a justified CB.

So that's a yes, then? Because we certainly have a justified CB against you (you know, threatening our MDAP partners?)

If you feel that such an action is in your best interests and that you are actually justified in making such a claim then declare.

Oh, you want me to tell you that I will have NSO fight RIA one on one because that is the only way you will go to war, right?

Hahahaha

My god, man you are a riot. If we want to fight with allies, then we refuse to fight without back up. If we want to fight one on one, then we are afraid to fight your back up?

What do you want me to do, offer to suspend all of our treaties and let you bring a coalition against us? Your mental gymnastics are gold worthy.

I haven't backed down at all.

I have not stated anything different from my initial comment.

The RIA can declare upon the NSO any time that it wishes if it has a valid CB.

Do you want it to be an unrestricted war?

I love your qualifications! I have absolutely no CB whatsoever. Would you take a 1v1 challenge?

Right. And?

You said you had a CB and now you are backpedaling?

Okay, so you want to fight NSO without a reason but you want to fight us one on one. That works. Do you want to go 3-4 days without nukes as Dopp suggested or unrestricted until someone dies?

Edit: Haha, right. Ivan sure danced around that one, Ejay.

Edit2: Seems my last used quote was made before the only quote you actually used, Ejay.

Edited December 27, 2009 by Chron

[Ejayrazz]

Yes, thanks for proving my point.

"Valid CB", I consider dancing around. You may not, but myself and many others do. It was clear Delta merely wished to have a 1v1, it was him who ignored the duel request and brough CB technical !@#$%^&* into the picture.

I like you.

[TehChron]

Yes, thanks for proving my point.

"Valid CB", I consider dancing around. You may not, but myself and many others do. It was clear Delta merely wished to have a 1v1, it was him who ignored the duel request and brough CB technical !@#$%^&* into the picture.

I like you.

Really? Mind showing this in-depth discussion of Delta's thought process? It's pretty clear he made a challenge, and Ivan said he was welcome to make a go of it if he felt he had good reason.

Where's the obfuscation? Really?

Quit making !@#$ up.

[Ejayrazz]

I'm not making anything up, you're too biased to even acknowledge another viewpoint which clearly has logical validation for such claims. I am not grabbing !@#$ from thin air, but rather from a smelly $@! of messy last-night-girlfriends-failed-cooking experiment.

Mind you, even Delta acknowledged the prancing along being done. Delta asked for a duel, Ivan mentioned CB -- which a CB is for wars, not duels -- which, Ivan even used as meaning in the recent logs being leaked. It is a duel, not a war. If it were a war, in CN terms, it'd be far different. I thought this was clearly acknowledged from both parties by now.

A simple yes or no. "A valid CB" adds nothingness. It is a duel, not a war.

Like I said, I like you.

Edited December 27, 2009 by Ejayrazz

[TehChron]

I'm not making anything up, you're too biased to even acknowledge another viewpoint which clearly has logical validation for such claims. I am not grabbing !@#$ from thin air, but rather from a smelly $@! of messy last-night-girlfriends-failed-cooking experiment.

Mind you, even Delta acknowledged the prancing along being done. Delta asked for a duel, Ivan mentioned CB -- which a CB is for wars, not duels -- which, Ivan even used as meaning in the recent logs being leaked. It is a duel, not a war. If it were a war, in CN terms, it'd be far different. I thought this was clearly acknowledged from both parties by now.

A simple yes or no. "A valid CB" adds nothingness. It is a duel, not a war.

Like I said, I like you.

A duel?

You're trying to define a duel when Delta was the one who was dicking around about who got to declare first? I mean, seriously? What kind of precedent is there for these kind of semantic games?

You're making !@#$ up, and just throwing out random interpretations of events and hearsay without any evidence to back it up, when I've already shown that evidence is abundant.

You are !@#$ting me, man. Quit making stuff up.

[Ejayrazz]

A duel?

You're trying to define a duel when Delta was the one who was dicking around about who got to declare first? I mean, seriously? What kind of precedent is there for these kind of semantic games?

You're making !@#$ up, and just throwing out random interpretations of events and hearsay without any evidence to back it up, when I've already shown that evidence is abundant.

You are !@#$ting me, man. Quit making stuff up.

It was precautionary, even I thought it was silly, but could understand giving the competence of Cybernations as a whole. We all laugh at the IQ level of the average person, but when people are cautious, such as this, we laugh at them. Right. Good justification. This is called understanding both perspectives.

I am not throwing random interpretations, it is how many interpreted his messages -- so I guess everyone but you or those siding with your viewpoint is random? I get your logic now. The evidence is by the very logs you have given, which you still have failed to argue my standpoint on dueling vs war and how a "Valid CB" comes into play, which you blatantly ignored by involving other uninvolved semantics into play, which now you got me commenting about AND causing comma splices in which I am too lazy to correct. Now let me guess..if I contribute to how you argue, this is the part where I say "NO U" and also say "YOU ARE RANDOM WITH YOUR INTERPRETATIONS". But unfortunately I know the drill. Even my comments on your newest rebuttal concerning the logs, which really had nothing to do with the conversation pertaining to Ivan dancing around, will be regarded as finger painting with Paris Hilton's !@#$ and 'random interpretations of events and hearsay'. I should say I could understand the viewpoint of Delta dancing around with the recent logs as not everyone knows him like I do, but this would be called understanding rather than !@#$ tossing.

I like you.

--

Edit reason: Forgot the comma splice comment.

Edited December 27, 2009 by Ejayrazz

[TehChron]

It was precautionary, even I thought it was silly, but could understand giving the competence of Cybernations as a whole. We all laugh at the IQ level of the average person, but when people are cautious, such as this, we laugh at them. Right. Good justification. This is called understanding both perspectives.

I am not throwing random interpretations, it is how many interpreted his messages -- so I guess everyone but you or those siding with your viewpoint is random? I get your logic now. The evidence is by the very logs you have given, which you still have failed to argue my standpoint on dueling vs war and how a "Valid CB" comes into play, which you blatantly ignored by involving other uninvolved semantics into play, which now you got me commenting about AND causing comma splices in which I am too lazy to correct. Now let me guess..if I contribute to how you argue, this is the part where I say "NO U" and also say "YOU ARE RANDOM WITH YOUR INTERPRETATIONS". But unfortunately I know the drill. Even my comments on your newest rebuttal concerning the logs, which really had nothing to do with the conversation pertaining to Ivan dancing around, will be regarded as finger painting with Paris Hilton's !@#$ and 'random interpretations of events and hearsay'. I should say I could understand the viewpoint of Delta dancing around with the recent logs as not everyone knows him like I do, but this would be called understanding rather than !@#$ tossing.

I like you.

--

Edit reason: Forgot the comma splice comment.

You're using semantics to create definitions in order to fit your line of argument. Stating that "such and such term" applies to "such and such situation" requires some kind of commonly accepted definition to be a valid argument.

What precedent is there to define the difference between a "war" and a "duel" on an alliance vs. alliance scale? There isn't one. Your creating definitions to fit your arguments and claiming that events fit these definitions without any contextual evidence, and just hearsay.

Of course I'm going to call shenanigans. Because you are performing shenanigans.

Edit: Also, you can't just say the evidence I've cited is invalid just because you say it is. Not with a straight face.

Edited December 27, 2009 by Chron

[Haflinger]

It's not a duel, Ejay. It's a war. Ivan was talking about having a real war with Delta. NSO normally fights alliance wars on a limited engagement basis.

[Ejayrazz]

I am defining this by how your own alliance defines it -- 1v1 -- as well as how RIA defines it. Both agreed to set terms, so yes, I will use the definitions in which your OWN alliance agrees to, or agreed to, since you wanted to bring the logs up.

And yes, a duel and a war are different -- hence the thread created by WC stating it was the first one ever done. We call it a duel because it isn't a 'war', because if it was, allies would be in this card game, even limited engagement; others refer to it as a duel hundreds of times by now. Since they are not, both parties stressed on the word duel rather than war. You KNOW this, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

When attorneys are unable to use precedent, sometimes both meet before a case and mutually agree on certain things before the case is started to avoid clutter $%&@s and confusion. This is exactly what your boys and their duelers did -- yell at them, not myself.

"It's not a duel, Ejay. It's a war. Ivan was talking about having a real war with Delta. NSO normally fights alliance wars on a limited engagement basis."

A duel is exactly that, a war, as others interpret it, is different. I am not the lone sole here, a war vs a duel has differences -- hence the thread. Lets create a poll, since that apparently solves every issue.

Big Edit: Dueling or not, it was still moronic to add the "Valid CB" statement in the mix of the salad tossing. It wasn't straight to the point. This whole arguing over definitions is redundant, its the dancing we were on about.

Edited December 27, 2009 by Ejayrazz

[TehChron]

I am defining this by how your own alliance defines it -- 1v1 -- as well as how RIA defines it. Both agreed to set terms, so yes, I will use the definitions in which your OWN alliance agrees to, or agreed to, since you wanted to bring the logs up.

And yes, a duel and a war a different -- hence the thread created by WC stating it was the first one ever done. We call it a duel because it isn't a 'war', because if it was, allied would be in this card game. Since they are not, both parties stressed on the word duel rather than war. You KNOW this, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

When attorneys are unable to use precedent, sometimes both meet before a case and mutually agree on certain things before the case is started to avoid clutter $%&@s and confusion. This is exactly what your boys and their duelers did -- yell at them, not myself.

What are you talking about? You realize that you can only put words in people's mouths for so long before you need to actually show what you're referring to, right?

Edit: And what does this have to do with Ivan supposedly dancing around, which isn't what happened to begin with?

Edited December 27, 2009 by Chron

[Lord Brendan]

It's not a duel, Ejay. It's a war. Ivan was talking about having a real war with Delta. NSO normally fights alliance wars on a limited engagement basis.

Eh, from the very beginning Delta was referring to a 1v1 duel, not an inter-alliance war.

I need to interject into this mess one last time just to ask a quick question:

Will NSO accept a 1v1 challenge with no allies from anyone at any time?

edit: I think I posted in the wrong topic... time for bed

Edited December 27, 2009 by Lord Brendan

[TehChron]

Eh, from the very beginning Delta was referring to a 1v1 duel, not an inter-alliance war.

Isn't an inter-alliance war a war between different alliances?