Announcement from The Order of the Paradox

[joracy]

[quote name='flak attack' date='07 February 2010 - 05:37 PM' timestamp='1265582278' post='2167508']
There is one key difference. TOP proved it when they hit us.
[/quote]

But beside the fact TOP preemptively hit us, it's the same. Clearly; we are just as evil.

[Hyperbad]

[quote name='joracy' date='07 February 2010 - 05:52 PM' timestamp='1265583160' post='2167540']
But beside the fact TOP preemptively hit us, it's the same. Clearly; we are just as evil.
[/quote]
I prefer equally delusional. No one here is really evil.

[Heft]

[quote name='flak attack' date='07 February 2010 - 04:37 PM' timestamp='1265582278' post='2167508']
There is one key difference. TOP proved it when they hit us.
[/quote]
Nope, they just (stupidly) handed you the perfect narrative.

[quote name='joracy' date='07 February 2010 - 04:52 PM' timestamp='1265583160' post='2167540']
But beside the fact TOP preemptively hit us, it's the same. Clearly; we are just as evil.
[/quote]
Where did I ever say anyone was evil?

It's easy to misrepresent and twist things and create whatever truth you want in a war like this, where nothing really makes sense and everyone is so confused that it's difficult, and sometimes impossible, to actually sift through what's real and what isn't. But blatantly twisting the post three above your own is a bit much, no?

[joracy]

[quote name='Heft' date='07 February 2010 - 07:01 PM' timestamp='1265587319' post='2167661']
Nope, they just (stupidly) handed you the perfect narrative.


Where did I ever say anyone was evil?

It's easy to misrepresent and twist things and create whatever truth you want in a war like this, where nothing really makes sense and everyone is so confused that it's difficult, and sometimes impossible, to actually sift through what's real and what isn't. But blatantly twisting the post three above your own is a bit much, no?
[/quote]

That was Sarcasm and more generally targeted at the people who believe we are destroying the community and a group of lowdown asshats. Also, the general attitude that people in CN act with serious malicious and evil attitudes and motivations. Since the original comment also commented about the NoCB war, the war before Karma and the fall of the hegemony, any linkage between the current war(and our motivations) and that war(and it's motivations) is also a linkage between the hegemony and us, which following the hegemony is evil train of thought is also partly what I was referencing with the we are evil part(If the hegemony is evil, and we are following in their footsteps/are the new hegemony, we are evil, etc).

[Blue Lightning]

You're being paranoid with the whole Hegemony !@#$, Joracy. The WotC was nothing to do with "hegemony", in fact that term is BS in general. And Heft would be the last person to use it since he was President of IRON for a large period of the Continuum. All he was saying was that it is hypocritical of CnG to be holding us at war because we're a "threat", when CnG was very vocally against our declaration on Polaris in the WotC because they were a threat. He wasn't passing personal judgement on whether it's wrong/right that we did it back then or that you do it now.

[der_ko]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' date='08 February 2010 - 01:34 AM' timestamp='1265589297' post='2167703']
You're being paranoid with the whole Hegemony !@#$, Joracy. The WotC was nothing to do with "hegemony", in fact that term is BS in general. And Heft would be the last person to use it since he was President of IRON for a large period of the Continuum. All he was saying was that it is hypocritical of CnG to be holding us at war because we're a "threat", when CnG was very vocally against our declaration on Polaris in the WotC because they were a threat. He wasn't passing personal judgement on whether it's wrong/right that we did it back then or that you do it now.
[/quote]
You are at war with us because you attacked us. If NpO had attacked you in the WoTC, and not the other way around, then you'd have a leg to stand on.

[Bob]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' date='07 February 2010 - 07:34 PM' timestamp='1265589297' post='2167703']
You're being paranoid with the whole Hegemony !@#$, Joracy. The WotC was nothing to do with "hegemony", in fact that term is BS in general. And Heft would be the last person to use it since he was President of IRON for a large period of the Continuum. All he was saying was that it is hypocritical of CnG to be holding us at war because we're a "threat", when CnG was very vocally against our declaration on Polaris in the WotC because they were a threat. He wasn't passing personal judgement on whether it's wrong/right that we did it back then or that you do it now.
[/quote]
Actually I'm pretty sure CnG was against NPO postingwise, I can't remember MK/Athens/etc supporting Polaris all that much.

GR, yes.

Edited February 8, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris

[Sandwich Controversy]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' date='07 February 2010 - 07:34 PM' timestamp='1265589297' post='2167703']
You're being paranoid with the whole Hegemony !@#$, Joracy. The WotC was nothing to do with "hegemony", in fact that term is BS in general. And Heft would be the last person to use it since he was President of IRON for a large period of the Continuum. All he was saying was that it is hypocritical of CnG to be holding us at war because we're a "threat", when CnG was very vocally against our declaration on Polaris in the WotC because they were a threat. He wasn't passing personal judgement on whether it's wrong/right that we did it back then or that you do it now.
[/quote]
Actually a lot of us were in favour of Polar getting rolled in noCB, because quite frankly, they deserved it and even they will admit it. Obviously we were opposed to the whole Hyperion deal because that was ridiculous.

And like how my other comrades said, you're at war with us because [i]you[/i] attacked [i]us.[/i]

[Blue Lightning]

I was just reiterating what I think Heft was saying. Calm down.

[Sandwich Controversy]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' date='07 February 2010 - 07:54 PM' timestamp='1265590454' post='2167725']
I was just reiterating what I think Heft was saying. Calm down.
[/quote]
I am calm. Are you?

[der_ko]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' date='08 February 2010 - 01:54 AM' timestamp='1265590454' post='2167725']
I was just reiterating what I think Heft was saying. Calm down.
[/quote]
We're very calm. You'd notice if we weren't calm by the wave of divine interventions (OOC: Bans) which would occur.

[joracy]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' date='07 February 2010 - 07:54 PM' timestamp='1265590454' post='2167725']
I was just reiterating what I think Heft was saying. Calm down.
[/quote]

I explained I was making a sarcastic joke and explained the context of it. You jump on it and start swearing and yelling. We are quite calm thank you very much.

The WoTC is linked to the hegemony(or if you really insist it is named something else; whatever.). The idea that it isn't is quite frankly silly and unsupportable. But regardless, sarcastic joke, remember? All I was saying is there is a major difference between WoTC, and us not granting TOP et al white peace, and taking a sarcastic jab at the "New hegemony/Supercomplains is just as bad as NPO/we are evil horrible people destroying the community" crowd.

[Believland]

Polaris, I started to like you, but that move was just lame

[DictatatorDan]

Actually, Polaris actions make sense in a conspiracy/realpolitik sort of way. It is a stretch, but I will try to make it. Also, considering that I am such an insignificant person, nobody will pay attention, and I will not be held acountable for my speculation, and I am more than likely completely wrong because situations and actions change day to day, without any real foresight.

First, look at the facts. The dramtic update blitz was pathetic. A DoW with only one war, is at most, either a half $@! war effort, or the result of an unprepared and overextended alliance. At this point, its a little bit of both for all I can tell.

Second, Grub has stated in the second DoW (the one attacking GOD) that it he beleives he has a responsibility to finish this war, and would prefer that everyone gets white peace, however up until now, he has been unable to give it.

Now for the rampant speculation part:

Up until now, Grub has not had a legal impetus to demand any form of Peace for TOP and Co, because Polaris was on their side. Publicly Polaris is in a bad position for flip flopping; However, by switiching sides, Grub is in a more favorable political position within the war coalitions themselves to be on both ends of the bargaining table. By doing so, he has the legal impetus to demand the conclusion of this war, and can legitamatly lean on the head of CnG, the Mushroom Kingdom to bring a quicker, and hopefully painless end to this war.

[Steve Buscemi]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' date='07 February 2010 - 01:59 PM' timestamp='1265572760' post='2167184']
Get over us, Steve. It was just never meant to be between us, I appreciate you are lashing out in anger, we've all been there. It's time to move on though. I'm sure you'll find an alliance that is just right for you and you'll be very happy together.
[/quote]
I'm sorry if the TOP OWF Diplomatic Squad finds it necessary to respond to every single post I make. I think I could say the same about you, get over it.

I'm going to post when someone posts commentary of the exact time period that I find was TOP's downfall, also a most interesting time in CN politics and as I have internal knowledge of the going-ons in TOP, I still going to make posts about it. Anger, . Nice try though. At least you were somewhat respectful vs. so many of your other bawing members continuing the posting trend that started after you guys hit #1.

[Remaliat]

[quote]First, look at the facts. The dramtic update blitz was pathetic. A DoW with only one war, is at most, either a half $@! war effort, or the result of an unprepared and overextended alliance. At this point, its a little bit of both for all I can tell.[/quote]
Managing one's resources is key in a war. If we are fighting a war we will fight to the best of our ability but at the moment we are controlling where and who is sent to the front lines. The fact that our forums have been down since the Nor'easter doesn't help.

[quote]Up until now, Grub has not had a legal impetus to demand any form of Peace for TOP and Co, because Polaris was on their side. Publicly Polaris is in a bad position for flip flopping; However, by switiching sides, Grub is in a more favorable political position within the war coalitions themselves to be on both ends of the bargaining table. By doing so, he has the legal impetus to demand the conclusion of this war, and can legitamatly lean on the head of CnG, the Mushroom Kingdom to bring a quicker, and hopefully painless end to this war.[/quote]

If you think Polaris has any influence whatsoever in this war you really need to think harder. We know we have made mistakes, quite a few actually but it does not change the fact that everything we have done on the TOP/CnG front has been in honor of treaties. I still do like TOP... a lot, as i'm sure most members who's names don't begin with Ski would agree.

Edited February 8, 2010 by Remaliat

[Gen Lee]

TOP is reaping what they've sowed. How that came about...I could care less. Either way you picked the wrong enemies to make.

Edited February 8, 2010 by Gen Lee

[BlkAK47_002]

[quote name='Jimmy2e' date='06 February 2010 - 12:57 AM' timestamp='1265435866' post='2163345']
End this pointless conflict, white peace for all?
[/quote]
Yeah seriously, this war made a little sense at first now it just deteriorated into....................i dont even have the words

[Nedved I]

Let's just white peace and end it. Were fighting for nothing now.

Edited February 8, 2010 by Nedved I

[Bob Janova]

[quote]There is one key difference. TOP proved it when they hit us.[/quote]
TOP hit you because you'd already chosen to be on the other side of a global war which was in progress, and because you were the slated counter for wherever they entered the war. If you had not been backing the raiding side, you would not have been hit. TOP was never a 'threat' to C&G (as you could tell by looking at the connections of their allies) until you made them one by choosing the other side and not mentioning that you were pushing a peace agreement that would leave them out in the cold. (That is mostly Polar's fault but if you really didn't want a war, you could have tipped TOP off; considering the peace agreement came out before update you could have negotiated an instant peace before the war expanded again.) Don't forget that the pre-emptive strike was acquiesced to (if not backed) by the other parties in the Polar coalition as a valid military move.

Obviously it was not a good decision. But most of the reason for that is the outrageous spin C&G are putting on it. The fact is, if TOP wanted to crush you for no reason they had plenty of opportunities to do so pre-Karma and did not. The only reason you are at war now is because (i) you chose from the very beginning to be on the raiding side, through political and logistical support (and preparing for a military entrance against the very alliances you are now against), and (ii) you chose not to inform TOP/IRON of the impending peace agreement, or call a lightning peace with them once the agreement came out, even though you knew that they were likely to declare on the Polar side that update.

[Tomcat]

[quote name='Nedved I' date='08 February 2010 - 05:25 AM' timestamp='1265635534' post='2168656']
Were fighting for nothing now.
[/quote]
This implies that at at one point your side actually was fighting for something.

What was it exactly? "Kill CnG?"
And now that it hasn't worked out you want to peace out?

[lebubu]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='08 February 2010 - 02:43 PM' timestamp='1265636612' post='2168666']
TOP hit you because you'd already chosen to be on the other side of a global war which was in progress, and because you were the slated counter for wherever they entered the war. If you had not been backing the raiding side, you would not have been hit. TOP was never a 'threat' to C&G (as you could tell by looking at the connections of their allies) until you made them one by choosing the other side and not mentioning that you were pushing a peace agreement that would leave them out in the cold. (That is mostly Polar's fault but if you really didn't want a war, you could have tipped TOP off; considering the peace agreement came out before update you could have negotiated an instant peace before the war expanded again.) Don't forget that the pre-emptive strike was acquiesced to (if not backed) by the other parties in the Polar coalition as a valid military move.

Obviously it was not a good decision. But most of the reason for that is the outrageous spin C&G are putting on it. The fact is, if TOP wanted to crush you for no reason they had plenty of opportunities to do so pre-Karma and did not. The only reason you are at war now is because (i) you chose from the very beginning to be on the raiding side, through political and logistical support (and preparing for a military entrance against the very alliances you are now against), and (ii) you chose not to inform TOP/IRON of the impending peace agreement, or call a lightning peace with them once the agreement came out, even though you knew that they were likely to declare on the Polar side that update.
[/quote]

MK and CnG's involvement and the course of the war had TOP & various bootlickers not hit us, are subject to speculation at this point. We're dealing with simple facts here:

1. CnG was uninvolved on the battlefield
2. CnG was aggressively hit
3. TOP's declaration of war states that "For our part, however, much our reason to enter this war lies in our desire to defeat those who have shown time and time again, in public and in private, that doing harm to us is high on their agenda---and that, indeed, they would take advantage of any advantageous opportunity to do so."

We have every reason to be concerned about the security of our alliance in the future and will continue this [i]defensive[/i] war until we feel that our attackers are no longer a threat to CnG and its web of allies. Anyone calling this a spin, has trouble dealing with facts. [img]http://thecastlehall.com/boards/Smileys/kickass/tipofthehat.gif[/img]

[Saber]

[quote name='Krack' date='07 February 2010 - 08:32 PM' timestamp='1265571143' post='2167145']
The [i]problem[/i] was it ... along with several other TOP decisions and actions ... made many of the other Karma coalition allies believe (justified or not*) that TOP's main concern during the Karma War was setting themselves up for the best possible post-war position (leading directly to this war) and not with winning the Karma War as quickly and decisively as possible so that the entire Karma coalition would take the least amount of damage possible. In other words, it looked like TOP didn't care how much damage everyone else took, as long as they earned themselves some meatshields for the next war down the road (which we're currently involved in).

Now you're broken hearted because you guys tried to be opportunistic, one of your presumed meatshields screwed you, and now nobody feels bad for you. Oh well, you'll get over it.

[size="1"]*I happen to believe it's justified[/size]
[/quote]
We did not like what Karma turned out to be because people who we were close with were telling us for months that if we moved away from NPO no one would jump at their throat and attack them. Then moment we move away slightly everyone and their mother starts hitting NPO. So no, we weren't happy with Karma and we were not going to be gung ho about killing people who were our friends and allies for years.

Setting up for best post war position is totally wrong assumption. I am sure you can recognize that "antagonizing" Karma by not being willing participant was not best move. If we wanted best post war position we could have jumped in bed with all of Karma and destroyed the Hegemony. No one would be shouting at us post war like they did (look at MHA/Sparta/FOK/Gre, all who were Hegemony and who jumped on opportunity to take it down, they took no flak).

[quote name='Steve Buscemi' date='07 February 2010 - 08:48 PM' timestamp='1265572137' post='2167168']
This is actually a great and accurate summation of many people's beliefs and it was too bad TOP didn't see it. What made it so bad is it's true. TOP didn't really want to join the Karma side. Everyone knew it despite TOP trying to convince people otherwise in stupid ways. Internally, Crymson has said he now regrets cutting non-nuclear deals with Karma's enemies, but TOP doesn't go as far as to acknowledge how much bad PR they created for themselves during that war. It was worse than TOP DoW'ing the GPA.

I think TOP feels that they were the salvation to Karma, when the reality is they were bangwagoners looking for a better strategic position post-war. Ironic that Crymson/TOP shot down the Bastion bloc so quickly pre-Karma because TOP was so close to the NPO (without even telling the GA in TOP until after it was done). I guess they were such buddies to NPO it's fitting they get destroyed in the same way NPO did. By declaring a aggressive war and biting off more than they can chew.

Sad TOP tried to hard to get easy terms for IRON that war. In fact a lot of TOP wanted to DoW Ragnorak at the time over how much they requested [i]for being attacked by IRON[/i]. Yea, it sounds stupid to even me. Heaven forbid you ask for partial damage reps when you are nuked several thousand times aggressively.

tl;dr - TOP has been an epic failure on so many levels ever since the Karma war.
[/quote]
As I said, post war positioning accusation is totally wrong. Anyone can see that antagonizing a huge winning coalition is not way to position post war. Jumping in bed with them and being one of champions of Karma is (which we didn't do and some others did).

We never thought and we do not think we were salvation to Karma. We are aware we played a minor role primarily in support of our allies (who asked us). Our involvement was no where near critical.

About IRON terms, Gremlins entered against IRON and in the process broke Lux Aeterna (Citadel) by telling us they will get white peace for IRON. We were extremely upset over them hitting IRON but we felt better about it because they promised white peace for them (and quick end to the war). When that didn't happen we were obviously upset, mainly at Gre but also at others at war with IRON. I believe Gremlins also put extreme amounts of pressure for light terms for IRON, specifically because they entered saying they would.


Bastion was shot down not before Karma war, but it just didn't materialize. Mainly because we saw faces of some members and alliance involved who when Karma war was on horizon dropped their masks and decided to become openly hostile to our allies and when we disagreed us. I distinctly remember being trolled like mad by some individuals on that forum.

Also, Steve, I am truly amazed to what levels people who are failures in TOP go to troll us when they leave. You are but one in a long line of people who left on bad terms and proceeded to troll us. I hope you enjoy that esteemed company. Your credibility is non existent.

[Saber]

[quote name='lebubu' date='08 February 2010 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1265644077' post='2168755']
MK and CnG's involvement and the course of the war had TOP & various bootlickers not hit us, are subject to speculation at this point. We're dealing with simple facts here:

1. CnG was uninvolved on the battlefield
2. CnG was aggressively hit
3. TOP's declaration of war states that "For our part, however, much our reason to enter this war lies in our desire to defeat those who have shown time and time again, in public and in private, that doing harm to us is high on their agenda---and that, indeed, they would take advantage of any advantageous opportunity to do so."

We have every reason to be concerned about the security of our alliance in the future and will continue this [i]defensive[/i] war until we feel that our attackers are no longer a threat to CnG and its web of allies. Anyone calling this a spin, has trouble dealing with facts. [img]http://thecastlehall.com/boards/Smileys/kickass/tipofthehat.gif[/img]
[/quote]
I must question that line of thinking. You cannot take us out as a threat unless if you give us no reason to consider you a threat. As things stand now you just continue to reinforce our belief, and at the same time destroy your alliance fighting potential.

I seriously doubt that at the end of the conflict MK or CnG will be much more powerful than TOP. I must question how you intend to make us a non threat if we can fight longer, harder and more fierce than you can. And when all is over, we can outgrow you.

From my perspective instead of pushing this agenda of "we must neutralize TOP threat" you should be looking for a way we can reconcile and avoid this in the future and that won't happen by curbstomping us while we curbstomp you. If you are truly concerned for your safety it's not way to go.

[Commisar Gaunt]

[quote name='Saber' date='08 February 2010 - 11:35 AM' timestamp='1265646937' post='2168794']
I must question that line of thinking. You cannot take us out as a threat unless if you give us no reason to consider you a threat. As things stand now you just continue to reinforce our belief, and at the same time destroy your alliance fighting potential.

I seriously doubt that at the end of the conflict MK or CnG will be much more powerful than TOP. I must question how you intend to make us a non threat if we can fight longer, harder and more fierce than you can. And when all is over, we can outgrow you.

From my perspective instead of pushing this agenda of "we must neutralize TOP threat" you should be looking for a way we can reconcile and avoid this in the future and that won't happen by curbstomping us while we curbstomp you. If you are truly concerned for your safety it's not way to go.
[/quote]

I dunno, when you're willing to declare on an entire bloc who was uninvolved at the time, and who were only willing to jump in to defend their allies, probably just so you can get at and destroy a specific alliance then welp! That seems pretty threatening to me.