Vanguard Edict

[raasaa]

always nice to see treaty announcements.....wish we could share the wub

o/ Vanguard

o/ Stickmen --> really weird name though

[Chickenzilla]

Edit: Also, lol at this treaty. I've pulled the same stunt before, so I'll just leave my comment at "lol".

I expect a five page apology when we don't use this treaty to enter this conflict.

[raasaa]

I disagree, even though racism is a terrible thing I don't think it's a cause for war.

Where were you when NoV nearly got rolled cos their leader (kaiser Martens) replied using the word "fail / phail" to a thread using the n-word, on the NoV forums...

[D34th]

"We don't like techraiding" is a piss-poor casus belli when it applies selectively. Over half the alliances in the Cyberverse allow raiding, including some of Polar's allies. Where are the treaty cancellations? Where are the wars? Where is the righteous indignation? I despise \m/ as much as the next person, but the entire justification for the war is dubious.

Wrong again, the CB isn't "We don't like techraiding" or are you trying to make people believe this is true or you really have problems to understand things. We don't support alliances mass tech raiding defenseless alliances like Athens/FoB did with KoN! and as GOONS, \m/ and PC did with FoA. Tell me how it applies selectively, what other alliances was raided that we in Polaris do not saw? Plus that behaving as idiots in private channels doesn't helped \m/.

For the treaty cancelations we in fact informed GOONS our intention of cancel our treaty with them after the FoA incident but they were very reasonable and we fixed thing diplomatically and now still friends.

So one more time, the CB is there and it is very clear.

Or the side that doesn't allow community values to be imposted unilaterally by asinine, pedantic and unreasonable madmen. This war is about more than raiding and you know it.

Looks like that criticize and bash Polaris in public isn't enough for some MK members, now you will start to insult our Emperor? I understand how thing works inMK and Archon allow their members to have freedom of speech but one thing is freedom of speech other completely different is lack of respect.

Should I remeber you guys about the treaty we signed?

Stay classy MK.

Article II: Conduct

Signatories of this pact pledge to show only respect and good will towards each other. While this will prohibit outright verbal hostility in all its forms, it will not restrict healthy debate or productive disagreement.

Edited January 25, 2010 by D34th

[Joe Stupid]

Where were you when NoV nearly got rolled cos their leader (kaiser Martens) replied using the word "fail / phail" to a thread using the n-word, on the NoV forums...

I was just a wee lil noober at that time. But I would have said the same thing then.

Edited January 25, 2010 by Joe Stupid

[hizzy]

No, he even went that far and gave a deadline to one of the raiders (I'm going to left out the discrepancy of letting the others off the hook).

Since it seems nobody cares about the facts behind this war, allow me to point out that you're absolutely wrong here. PC and GOONS were not let off the hook... the only discrepancy was that \m/ acted like significantly larger idiots and instigated the war much sooner than the deadline expired. GOONS also had their treaty cancelled initially and then spoke to NpO rationally like adults and came to terms about what happened.

[bay102174]

If I understand the situation correctly, \m/ isn't angry about Polaris invading, they're angry because Polaris plans on telling them how they're allowed to operate after their defeat.

They have obliviously shown they still can not govern themselves to even the basic minimum standards of class and honor. And to those who think OMG world police, join a 30 man alliance with %m{ attacking and we will see how loud you scream.

Roll on Polaris

Vanguard you are so full of fail, I can't believe your Orange.

[delendum]

They have obliviously shown they still can not govern themselves to even the basic minimum standards of class and honor. And to those who think OMG world police, join a 30 man alliance with %m{ attacking and we will see how loud you scream.

Roll on Polaris

Vanguard you are so full of fail, I can't believe your Orange.

You could always move to purple, I'm sure they'd welcome you with open arms.

[sethb]

TLDR: Vanguard really really want to go to war and they're not going to take "No," for an answer.

Ok, first of all This war is going to hit them regardless, claiming they signed this treaty just to be able to get in the war is pretty stupid. Now, it's fairly obvious this isn't the case, but what is so wrong with signing a treaty to give them a tactical advantage during wartime?

[delendum]

Looks like that criticize and bash Polaris in public isn't enough for some MK members, now you will start to insult our Emperor? I understand how thing works inMK and Archon allow their members to have freedom of speech but one thing is freedom of speech other completely different is lack of respect.

Should I remeber you guys about the treaty we signed?

Stay classy MK.

We reminded you of treaties ever since you expressed your intention to hit \m/, but Polaris doesn't really care much about those lately.

You are correct, we still have a treaty together. I personally hope it won't be for much longer.

[D34th]

We reminded you of treaties ever since you expressed your intention to hit \m/, but Polaris doesn't really care much about those lately.

You are correct, we still have a treaty together. I personally hope it won't be for much longer.

Yeah because hit an alliance who is allied with an ally of your allies is the same thing to come in public and criticize, bash and insult an alliance that MK have a MDoAP.

And if this behavior continues at least we will share the same opinion about our treaty.

Edited January 25, 2010 by D34th

[TehChron]

The situation was handled, nor was it the interest of Polaris to interfere what was something between the raiders (PC, Goons and \m/) and the raided (FoA). Again, the situation was over, but yet, this was not enough in the mind of Grub. No, he even went that far and gave a deadline to one of the raiders (I'm going to left out the discrepancy of letting the others off the hook). And cause they didn't respond in a fashionable state Grub decided to Attack (which is even worse than raiding i.m.o.).

So to get back to your analogy, if TOP raided us, and if we settled it with TOP, the situation would be completely fine indeed.

Considering it was only handled due to outside pressure (from Polaris no less) forcing Athens hand, I would wonder how you'd be alright if TOP simply kept beating on you, as indicated by the posturing shown by the raiding parties in both FoA and KoN!'s case? Once again, the issue in both cases was only handled due to the interference of third parties, so you can't quite argue that you handling it on your own is equivalent.

Also, lol at legitimate wars being worse then tech raids. But hey, I never accused you of having your priorities straight.

Difference is that Nemesis has treaties and whatnot.

(Not that I agree with tech raiding at all, since I find it despicable, just making a point)

His point was claiming that the desire for tech a valid CB, whereas Polar's CB was somehow invalid. I was making an argument demonstrating the absurdity of that stance.

[delendum]

Yeah because hit an alliance who is allied with an ally of your allies is the same thing to come in public and criticize, bash and insult an alliance that MK have a MDoAP.

And if this behavior continues at least we will share the same opinion about our treaty.

Keep chugging on the ally of an ally of an ally argument, it's not like you're currently at war with one of our best friends and this whole !@#$%^&* conflict will escalate into us having friends killing each other on both sides. It's obvious MK was wrong in asking you not to attack \m/, your little moral battle was far more important than this. Oh, and reaching peace was just not appropriate it seems.

Your opinion on our treaty doesn't change the fact that it is pretty much a sinking ship by this point. I personally like a lot of Polar's members, as most of MK do, but a treaty between us simply can not exist anymore. Of course, that's just my humble opinion until (and if) a cancellation is posted.

[cjav0]

His point was claiming that the desire for tech a valid CB, whereas Polar's CB was somehow invalid. I was making an argument demonstrating the absurdity of that stance.

Incorrect, neither was valid. As you may have noticed, one has allies however.

[TehChron]

Keep chugging on the ally of an ally of an ally argument, it's not like you're currently at war with one of our best friends and this whole !@#$%^&* conflict will escalate into us having friends killing each other on both sides. It's obvious MK was wrong in asking you not to attack \m/, your little moral battle was far more important than this. Oh, and reaching peace was just not appropriate it seems.

Your opinion on our treaty doesn't change the fact that it is pretty much a sinking ship by this point. I personally like a lot of Polar's members, as most of MK do, but a treaty between us simply can not exist anymore. Of course, that's just my humble opinion until (and if) a cancellation is posted.

You know, I just can't help but laugh at the fact you're all willing to shred that side of the treaty web over \m/'s right to be complete !@#$%bags.

But hey, I'm pretty sure Polaris saw a pattern of enabling starting to develop, one called "thinking of the larger picture". I guess they simply decided that the picture was a bit larger than a single war down the road.

Incorrect, neither was valid. As you may have noticed, one has allies however.

What?

Edited January 25, 2010 by Chron

[cjav0]

Well perhaps we see another 'bigger picture' with NpO doing the same nasty crap it was previously doing, it appears \m/ isn't the only one that has reverted to old bad habits. So what is their excuse?

Edited January 25, 2010 by cjav0

[TehChron]

Well perhaps we see another 'bigger picture' with NpO doing the same nasty crap it was previously doing, it appears \m/ isn't the only one that has reverted to old bad habits. So what is their excuse?

I'm sorry, I didn't know Grub planned on taking down an entire bloc in order to politically isolate Pacifica.

Ohwai-

[delendum]

You know, I just can't help but laugh at the fact you're all willing to shred that side of the treaty web over \m/'s right to be complete !@#$%bags.

But hey, I'm pretty sure Polaris saw a pattern of enabling starting to develop, one called "thinking of the larger picture". I guess they simply decided that the picture was a bit larger than a single war down the road.

I can't believe you think MK would shred any of its allies over Polar's desire to enforce "community standards". We didn't have a choice in this, it was forced upon us, despite our pleas.

Oh how silly of me, I should have known Polar had a sudden revelation and realized MK's side of the web are evil enablers. You'd think they would have cancelled on us and RoK first, or were they just trying to save us with this move? Thank god for daddy.

I didn't know the NSO supported the larger community standard picture. I could have sworn you were recruiting from neutral alliances just a while ago. Aren't you guys suppose to be all evil and devious?

[cjav0]

You didn't Chron?

[Facade]

I'm so sorry for you Stickmen.

[D34th]

Keep chugging on the ally of an ally of an ally argument, it's not like you're currently at war with one of our best friends and this whole !@#$%^&* conflict will escalate into us having friends killing each other on both sides. It's obvious MK was wrong in asking you not to attack \m/, your little moral battle was far more important than this. Oh, and reaching peace was just not appropriate it seems.

Your opinion on our treaty doesn't change the fact that it is pretty much a sinking ship by this point. I personally like a lot of Polar's members, as most of MK do, but a treaty between us simply can not exist anymore. Of course, that's just my humble opinion until (and if) a cancellation is posted.

FOK declared on us using a offensive clause and I don't see you criticizing them, biased opinion may be?

As I said yesterday if we can't attack alliances who are allies with our allies ally then let's hold our hands and sing "kumbaya my lord" enjoying a boring peace until the end of the days.

Edited January 25, 2010 by D34th

[Bob Janova]

I can't believe you think MK would shred any of its allies over Polar's desire to enforce "community standards". We didn't have a choice in this, it was forced upon us, despite our pleas.

Wait, what? You are at two chains away from \m/. Both FOK and yourselves have a choice. From your comments here I take it you're going to take the wrong one as well?

[Bob]

Wait, what? You are at two chains away from \m/. Both FOK and yourselves have a choice. From your comments here I take it you're going to take the wrong one as well?

What is the wrong choice here? EVERYTHING. There is no right choice for MK.

We have woven a web of friends we thought were able to get along, and we seen from these results that some people are unwilling to. This puts us in a difficult position.

Edited January 25, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris

[Stonewall14]

I have fought 2 major wars for CnG and suffered major damage both times and it is sad to see what they have become and I am ashamed to be connected to them...o/ NpO We got your back and will not betray you like "some" people...

[delendum]

FOK declared on us using a offensive clause and I don't see you criticizing them, biased opinion may be?

As I said yesterday if we can't attack alliances who are allies with our allies ally then let's hold our hands and sing "kumbaya my lord" enjoying a boring peace until the end of the days.

I don't know what view you have on offensive clauses, but if they're written on a treaty, I'm guessing it's because they were intended on being used. FOK supported their ally. The only reason I'm criticizing you is because you held all they keys: you were the one who could have refrained from doing this, and you were the one who could have settled it with peace before it escalated. In both instances, ego's prevailed.

Hey, MK likes war just as much as the next guy (even more than most), but the thought of attacking an ally's ally never really appealed to us as a good way to rid ourselves of boredom. We're just silly like that. (inb4 BUT MK IT WAS AN ALLY OF AN ALLY OF AN ALLY)