ChairmanHal Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) I'd like to see Atlantis reform just to see you !@#$%* and moan about what a terrible alliance they are. Actually I'd like to see them come back and get it right this time. They'd have more than enough haters without me kick them around. As for NAAC, should someone get serious about a comeback on Planet Bob some day, I'd have to root for them a bit. OOC: I was a member of NAAC "on another world" you see...we pretty much dominated things for a very long time. Edited December 26, 2009 by ChairmanHal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomInterrupt Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Who says that era is gone. Target approved. I love you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Jack, you have surpassed Francesca, Grats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Dead alliances should stay dead. Go away. Like IAA...which your alliance has a MDoAP with at the moment.... When you are done eating your Nikes, relax. This too shall pass. It's Jack after all...and your Emperor seems to be dealing with it nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jphillips412 Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) Like IAA...which your alliance has a MDoAP with at the moment.... When you are done eating your Nikes, relax. This too shall pass. It's Jack after all...and your Emperor seems to be dealing with it nicely. Or you might mean GOONS? I do have the right to have a personal opinion. EDIT: With all respect, if Polar were to suffer the same fate as NAAC and disband, I would be horribly upset to see them reformed especially by someone with no connection whatsoever. Edited December 26, 2009 by Jphillips412 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ty345 Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Or you might mean GOONS? I do have the right to have a personal opinion. EDIT: With all respect, if Polar were to suffer the same fate as NAAC and disband, I would be horribly upset to see them reformed especially by someone with no connection whatsoever. It'd be fairly ironic if Polar disbanded for the same reasons NAAC did... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meer Republic Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) Dead alliances should stay dead. Go away. Yet Polar protected the GOONS revival, maybe just some alliances should stay dead? Edit: and maybe I should read the whole thread... Edited December 26, 2009 by Meercats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sin Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 I cannot say that I agree with this mentality that only former alliance leaders have the right to reform an alliance. Since when do alliances belong to the former leaders? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NationRuler Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Jack, read my post in the CSN Public Area. This was literally your worst idea yet. They did? ONOS was never given a fair chance and you all know it. If any of you believe the contrary, it's simply because you WANT to believe it. I don't want to argue the specifics as this has nothing to do with the OP. This will be my last post on the subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sin Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Jack, read my post in the CSN Public Area. This was literally your worst idea yet.ONOS was never given a fair chance and you all know it. If any of you believe the contrary, it's simply because you WANT to believe it. I don't want to argue the specifics as this has nothing to do with the OP. This will be my last post on the subject. I think he's referring to how it was refounded and merged with another alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) Sentence length yet to be determined. You're upset that \m/ reforms so you decide to bash us with your self-congratulatory thread about the NAAC and then when someone decides to help you stick your foot further in your mouth you place this individual on a ZI list for an undetermined amount of time (while threatening to have it for as long as that nation exists; PZI) because he helped you realize how foolish you were being? Boy oh boy. And they say \m/ are nothing more than a group of babies and whiners. Edited December 26, 2009 by Emperor Marx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NationRuler Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 I lied about that being my last post. I think he's referring to how it was refounded and merged with another alliance. Well yeah. You're right in that case. That ONOS I opposed. I never considered that to be ONOS. But please, people. Let ONOS stay dead. There are plenty of old ONOSers in concentrated locations across the Cyberverse. Make your home there, and leave ONOS alone. Dear omnipotent being of your choice, please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 You're upset that \m/ reforms so you decide to bash us with your self-congratulatory thread about the NAAC and then when someone decides to help you stick your foot further in your mouth you place this individual on a ZI list for an undetermined amount of time (while threatening to have it for as long as that nation exists; PZI) because he helped you realize how foolish you were being?Boy oh boy. And they say \m/ are nothing more than a group of babies and whiners. No, its more that this is one of the things you don't do, reform a dead alliance when you weren't a member of it, especially when half of CN still honors (FAN still protects the AA from people doing anything to it) the alliance. Using it to advance his own pathetic agenda is sad on Jack's part, and really just disgraceful. As to the other two nations, raid Chozo at your own risk. He is protected by far more then he would appear to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) ONOS didn't die an honorable death in my opinion. I would have fought even if my alliance leaders screwed up. That is what an alliance does. Then again, ONOS leaders were in a tight position. Edited December 26, 2009 by Ejayrazz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sin Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 ONOS didn't die an honorable death in my opinion. I would have fought even if my alliance leaders screwed up. That is what an alliance does. That's also what true allies do as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NationRuler Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 That's also what true allies do as well. Let's not do this. You all know ONOS told GUARD not to suicide for no reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) In all fairness, ONOS requested its allies to remain out of it. If I was their ally, I would have been in a difficult position, but ultimately, ONOS decided it didn't wish for its members to suffer a losing war over one person's actions. So who was honorable? The leaders for not making their members suffer? Or were they dishonorable? I forgot all about that, my apologies. ONOS surrendered honorably to its own members, something I don't really look too down upon. But I wouldn't have had ONOS die the way it did. That, in my opinion, was flimsy, and was my initial response. Sorry for the vague response beforehand. Edited December 26, 2009 by Ejayrazz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 So who was honorable? The leaders for not making their members suffer? Or were they dishonorable?I forgot all about that, my apologies. ONOS surrendered honorably to its own members, something I don't really look too down upon. But I wouldn't have had ONOS die the way it did. That, in my opinion, was flimsy, and was my initial response. Sorry for the vague response beforehand. Sounds like \m/ tbh. Our members were willing to fight on for a long time, we just honestly didn't feel like putting them through it and we also felt like moving on with our lives (worked out well ) But yeah, no one is taking this NAAC seriously so whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Like IAA...which your alliance has a MDoAP with at the moment.... When you are done eating your Nikes, relax. This too shall pass. It's Jack after all...and your Emperor seems to be dealing with it nicely. you realize there is quite a difference between IAA's revival and naac's don't ya? IAA has many of the original people and is led by Chimaera, who led IAA for a while when it was first around. Jack has nothing to do with NAAC and is essentially just defiling the name. so i have no clue why you would even attempt to besmirch the name of IAA by equating it with this naac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheshire Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Don't you see, i mean it's right in front of us. How could we be so blind! Jack is here to show us the way, shame on all of you who think other wise. He wants to show us how bad karma was, by getting onto ZI lists, he is sad about the world he created and is now trying to show us the way back into the light... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weirdgus Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Regardless of anything else I do believe that Jack delivers in this thread. Well done! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brenann Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 You're upset that \m/ reforms so you decide to bash us with your self-congratulatory thread about the NAAC and then when someone decides to help you stick your foot further in your mouth you place this individual on a ZI list for an undetermined amount of time (while threatening to have it for as long as that nation exists; PZI) because he helped you realize how foolish you were being?Boy oh boy. And they say \m/ are nothing more than a group of babies and whiners. One big difference... AirMe did something about it. \m/ will always continue to whine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Diorno Posted December 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) I suppose I asked for this. Oh well. /me Adds Jack Diorno to the Enemy of Ronin list. Have fun in peace mode for the rest of your nations life. The NAAC is displeased your creativity levels are so low that your only answer to our recreation is to put us on PZI regardless of what alliance we belong to. Being rather ill thought out, it gives no reason for the new NAAC to disband or move on, rather to simply continue existing as NAAC in spite of infrastructure levels. Edited December 26, 2009 by Jack Diorno Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) Wow, this'll be the third alliance in the last six months that Jack has founded alone. I'll be putting lots on it also disbanding inside of two months. It's too bad he's taking the name of the NAAC down with him. I wasn't much a fan of them when they existed, but not even they deserved this. Edited December 26, 2009 by Duncan King Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) You're upset that \m/ reforms so you decide to bash us with your self-congratulatory thread about the NAAC and then when someone decides to help you stick your foot further in your mouth you place this individual on a ZI list for an undetermined amount of time (while threatening to have it for as long as that nation exists; PZI) because he helped you realize how foolish you were being?Boy oh boy. And they say \m/ are nothing more than a group of babies and whiners. There has been no threat of PZI or EZI in reference to Jack Diorno. It has yet to be determined whether he will be taken to ZI, ZT or ZL. He also has brought undue attention to the people who have been flying the NAAC AA since the game was created. Some of that blame can be placed on me of course. The only people whining about my actions are \m/ ....I mean BelAir 2.0 members. To quote you guys "Keep crying, your tears are delicious." Edited December 26, 2009 by AirMe 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.