The New Grämlins

[Wes Walz Pants]

[quote name='Delta1212' date='12 April 2010 - 05:02 PM' timestamp='1271106140' post='2257698']
Either you have terms that are so heavy they need additional leverage to get them accepted, or you have terms so light they would be accepted in the current situation. [b]If it is the latter case, then additional bargaining power is entirely unnecessary strategically and you are making a lot of people on the other side hate you enough that I doubt you'd get out of a losing war without being crippled now while simultaneously burning a lot of goodwill with the people that you will need to defend you and [i]which are now only obligated to defend you on the basis of friendship per your own choice[/i] for absolutely no reason whatsoever.[/b]

So, your argument that it is strategically sound flies out the window completely if you are planning to offer terms that would be acceptable under the current circumstances. You need a better argument if you want this demand to be taken seriously than "It's good strategy." It isn't. It's beyond idiotic from any standpoint that doesn't look at strategy one-dimensionally.
[/quote]
And this is exactly while Matthew PK and Gramlins will continue with their irrational stance. People can say over and over in public that they hate what Gramlins are currently doing, and yet those same people sit and watch while IRON and DAWN suffer. Stop feining and do something about it if you aren't beholden to surrender terms.

Step one for all should be ironchef's excellent suggestion of a Tech Embargo.

[MCRABT]

[quote name='The Warrior' date='12 April 2010 - 10:11 PM' timestamp='1271106679' post='2257714']
No unconditional surrender required.
[/quote]

God damn you got morals

[Crymson]

All present should note that MatthewPK is no more than a mindless physical extension of the will of Ramirus's massive ego.

Edited April 12, 2010 by Crymson

[Zangmonkey]

[quote name='shilo' date='12 April 2010 - 02:10 PM' timestamp='1271106612' post='2257713']
I just have to say this:
You currently are voluntarily weakening your position, you yourself, and everyone of your alliance mates getting fed false sentences from ram to be blurred out here.
Please continue doing so, I promise, in good time, we will allow you a seat at our table.
[/quote]
It is your own contention that Ram has refused to speak with you until you lay down your arms (which I'm sure is authentic)
So if he has been so silent then I hardly see any discrepancies between what he has told you and what he has told me.

Furthermore, for the record, Ram has told me nothing about the OWF other than to stop feeding the hyenas.

[MCRABT]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 10:14 PM' timestamp='1271106858' post='2257721']
Furthermore, for the record, Ram has told me nothing about the OWF other than to stop feeding the hyenas.
[/quote]

And yet you defy him so, such heroism.

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 05:08 PM' timestamp='1271106468' post='2257709']
And is it your contention that we would miraculously and instantly regain goodwill by saying "nvm, glhf thx dudez!" ?
I'm going to assume it's not; so you can stop wasting your keyboard ink trying outline how deep a hole you think we've dug.
[/quote]
The sunk cost fallacy is the belief that because you have already spent a great deal (of resources, times, or in this case, political capital) you need to keep throwing in more to see it through or you'll have wasted the initial expenditure despite the fact that you are unlikely to get the project to work and it wouldn't be worth the cost if you did.

You may not, and probably will not, regain all of the political capital you've thrown away so far if you were to backtrack, but you are losing good will in increasing amounts every day this continues. The longer it takes you to resolve the situation, the weaker your political position will be at the end of it. I don't really care what you do, but you are strategically running in the wrong direction and I suggest you find some way to end this fiasco now instead of embracing it and pretending it isn't a major political disaster.

[Adrian LaCroix]

This has got to be one of the stupidest situations I've ever seen arise in my time on this planet. It would seem that Gramlins have jumped completely off the deep end.

[Letum]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 10:08 PM' timestamp='1271106468' post='2257709']
And is it your contention that we would miraculously and instantly regain goodwill by saying "nvm, glhf thx dudez!" ?
I'm going to assume it's not; so you can stop wasting your keyboard ink trying outline how deep a hole you think we've dug.
[/quote]

I don't think this is about [i]gaining[/i] goodwill anymore.

Edited April 12, 2010 by Letum

[Zangmonkey]

[quote name='Crymson' date='12 April 2010 - 02:14 PM' timestamp='1271106842' post='2257720']
All present should note that MatthewPK is no more than a mindless physical extension of the will of Ramirus's massive ego.
[/quote]

Oh Crymson, you know better than that from the posts I made during the TPF incident; which stated that I would take actions outside the orders of my government and in TOP's interest. Sometimes I forget that your myopia is strategically deliberate.

[Cobalt]

[quote name='goldielax25' date='12 April 2010 - 05:00 PM' timestamp='1271106039' post='2257692']
Every day that this stretches out it makes me personally want to defend IRON more and more. What has the world come to.
[/quote]

This.

o/ IRON and what not.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 05:08 PM' timestamp='1271106468' post='2257709']
And is it your contention that we would miraculously and instantly regain goodwill by saying "nvm, glhf thx dudez!" ?
I'm going to assume it's not; so you can stop wasting your keyboard ink trying outline how deep a hole you think we've dug.
[/quote]

I'd say the hole is approximately this deep:

[img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3022/2402548202_26e8a2d464.jpg[/img]

Reading the Gre posts in this thread has been an exercise in pr-masochism. My advice (which you will most assuredly not take) would be to quit before those that don't hate you yet don't start to do so.

[Crymson]

[quote name='MCRABT' date='12 April 2010 - 03:17 PM' timestamp='1271107023' post='2257724']
And yet you defy him so, such heroism.
[/quote]

Aye. He's risking everything in order to lend his assistance towards digging his alliance's grave!

I call the rights to convert his tale into a major motion picture!

Edited April 12, 2010 by Crymson

[Zangmonkey]

[quote name='Delta1212' date='12 April 2010 - 02:17 PM' timestamp='1271107026' post='2257725']
The sunk cost fallacy is the belief that because you have already spent a great deal (of resources, times, or in this case, political capital) you need to keep throwing in more to see it through or you'll have wasted the initial expenditure despite the fact that you are unlikely to get the project to work and it wouldn't be worth the cost if you did.

You may not, and probably will not, regain all of the political capital you've thrown away so far if you were to backtrack, but you are losing good will in increasing amounts every day this continues. The longer it takes you to resolve the situation, the weaker your political position will be at the end of it. I don't really care what you do, but you are strategically running in the wrong direction and I suggest you find some way to end this fiasco now instead of embracing it and pretending it isn't a major political disaster.
[/quote]

I'm not afraid of sunk costs, I just haven't folded after the turn. Seems to me like IRON/DAWN is on the draw for the river.
Naturally, they will think otherwise.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Delta1212' date='12 April 2010 - 03:17 PM' timestamp='1271107026' post='2257725']
The sunk cost fallacy is the belief that because you have already spent a great deal (of resources, times, or in this case, political capital) you need to keep throwing in more to see it through or you'll have wasted the initial expenditure despite the fact that you are unlikely to get the project to work and it wouldn't be worth the cost if you did.
[/quote]

This is sounding eerily like a 409 scheme.

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 05:22 PM' timestamp='1271107358' post='2257735']
I'm not afraid of sunk costs, I just haven't folded after the turn. Seems to me like IRON/DAWN is on the draw for the river.
Naturally, they will think otherwise.
[/quote]
You are beyond help. I give up.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 03:18 PM' timestamp='1271107102' post='2257729']
Oh Crymson, you know better than that from the posts I made during the TPF incident; which stated that I would take actions outside the orders of my government and in TOP's interest. Sometimes I forget that your myopia is strategically deliberate.
[/quote]

Are you really still talking?

[The Warrior]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 10:22 PM' timestamp='1271107358' post='2257735']
I'm not afraid of sunk costs, I just haven't folded after the turn. Seems to me like IRON/DAWN is on the draw for the river.
Naturally, they will think otherwise.
[/quote]

It appears to me that the Gramlins are bluffing with a 7-2 off suit.

[shilo]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 11:14 PM' timestamp='1271106858' post='2257721']
It is your own contention that Ram has refused to speak with you until you lay down your arms (which I'm sure is authentic)
So if he has been so silent then I hardly see any discrepancies between what he has told you and what he has told me.

Furthermore, for the record, Ram has told me nothing about the OWF other than to stop feeding the hyenas.
[/quote]
I know there are no discrepancies between what your master commands you to say and what he says himself.
Ram commanded you to say that you should say he told you to stop posting.


Please, if there is shred of autonomy left in you, with all your willpower, continue posting here, it's just too good

[Zangmonkey]

[quote name='The Warrior' date='12 April 2010 - 02:26 PM' timestamp='1271107563' post='2257741']
It appears to me that the Gramlins are bluffing with a 7-2 off suit.
[/quote]

Then don't complain about how the game is playing out.
You're not going to assert you're checking for my benefit.

[The Warrior]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 10:29 PM' timestamp='1271107759' post='2257746']
Then don't complain about how the game is playing out.[/quote]

Well if these forums were actually for a poker game, then your 7-2 off suit bluff would be proper grounds to continue commenting as you are here.

As it stands this is CN and the world is awaiting the end of these poor excuse's for responses to our inquisitions.

Edited April 12, 2010 by The Warrior

[Joe32320]

Wow, I've never seen such a display of stubborn stupidity from one alliance.

I'm also intrigued by this idea that this whole episode is strategically advantageous for the Gramlins, I forgot making the rest of the world annoyed about your stunt was a sure fire way to stay out on top in this game...it's worked for many alliances previously.......

[Booter]

[quote name='The Warrior' date='12 April 2010 - 04:33 PM' timestamp='1271108004' post='2257753']
Well if these forums were actually for a poker game, then your 7-2 off suit bluff would be proper grounds to continue commenting as you are here.

As it stands this is CN and the world is awaiting the end of these poor excuse's for responses to our inquisitions.
[/quote]

I'm afraid Matthew isn't playing with a full deck.

Edited April 12, 2010 by Booter

[jer]

[quote]I know right, who uses passwords anymore?[/quote]
[quote name='Crymson' date='12 April 2010 - 10:04 PM' timestamp='1271106247' post='2257700']
Well-played!
[/quote]
Why don't you go ahead and explain to me how exactly that poor excuse for a response is 'well-played'. To me it all it said is that that he had no good answer to give and had to resort to that time old avoidance technique of deliberately missing the point.

I understand that you are enjoying the role of mindless cheerleader here, but at least put some thought into your replies, please.

[Carlton the Great]

I love this sig, I hope no one objects to me using it

[Baden-Württemberg]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 10:06 PM' timestamp='1271102775' post='2257610']
You, sir, are probably the sharpest of the detractors!
What a great point.
[/quote]

Yeah, in this thread I have made about 8 arguments. What you are doing is following: You are singling one argument out, and then take one sentence, an assumption after the conclusion, and try to argue it. Yet you skipped the other points. This is very smart.

But back to the sentence. Yes, it might look a little stupid now, but we'll see what happens and talk again in 6 months, maybe a year.


[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 10:25 PM' timestamp='1271103888' post='2257636']
So your contention is that once you have dismissed military that you are permanently helpless? It is amazing then, to me, that when people are hit by nukes which destroy most of their soldiers and planes that they can ever recover to continue fighting!
[/quote]

If they can recover that quick, and continue to fight, why do you ask them to disarm their military in first place?

I mean, you claim that it gives you a better position on the negotiation table. But if they can rebuy all their military quickly, this point is moot. And why don't you reveal your terms of surrender, why do you keep them in the dark? Because they are just? HAHA!

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 10:33 PM' timestamp='1271104392' post='2257646']
I would love that, it would change the bargaining table quite a bit wouldn't it...
[/quote]

In 4 years (?) of Cybernations that wasn't needed. Why do Grämlins need it now?

When it comes to negotiations you are in a perfect position, unless you want to give them some idiotic terms, then again, of course you need a better position. You aren't fooling anyone here.

[quote name='Crymson' date='12 April 2010 - 10:50 PM' timestamp='1271105388' post='2257671']
I think you've reached that level already.
[/quote]

Agreed.

[Heft]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='12 April 2010 - 03:52 PM' timestamp='1271105519' post='2257674']
The real humor would be if you [b]really[/b] couldn't see any strategic logic in it beforehand.
And here I was thinking our position was obvious!
[/quote]
I would actually contend that it's not a strategic benefit, but a tactical benefit.

A semantical difference, to be sure, but since semantics is all Gramlins seem to have left I thought you would appreciate it.

Strategically, it would seem to be proving detrimental.