United Purple Nations Announcement

[Voytek]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1286870327' post='2482199']You have the wrong alliance there.

Now think. Which alliance is it that famously launched a war by attacking an ally's ally? Not very long ago. Now is this alliance allied to UPN?

What sort of opinions have the posters from this alliance been espousing in this thread?

Man you guys. You're so off base and it's so obvious, it makes me wonder if you really have missed what's happening here, or if this is all just an elaborate smokescreen for some reason that I cannot work out.[/quote]
Dude we know about ~*~that alliance~*~'s involvement but even the most cynical reading of those logs doesn't show them as the primary agitators here.

[nutkase]

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1286871371' post='2482203']
It is true. To say UOKMB was ever anything but a group of rogues is a lie either born of ignorance or you are posting in bad faith.




That's from the original declaration. The intent to attack GOONS before the raids ever took place is stated.
[/quote]

It is a alliance by my definition and general definition, Just because it does not fit your particular definition makes it universally true.

[Monster]

[quote name='nutkase' timestamp='1286879701' post='2482226']
It is a alliance by my definition and general definition, Just because it does not fit your particular definition makes it universally true.
[/quote]

Okay, there have never existed groups of people who have gone rogue together. It cannot happen by definition. If a group of people get on an alliance affiliation for the express purpose of causing destruction, they are a legitimate alliance. CoUNT was a legitimate alliance. The Smurfs were an alliance by general definition as well, in that case.

UOKMB was never formed with the explicit intention of going out with a bang and did not have the original intent of causing destruction to GOONS or someone else. They were merely minding their own business the entire time and were operating as any established alliance would.

If either of the two is the case, you have a point. If neither is true, you're grasping at straws.

Edited October 12, 2010 by Antoine Roquentin

[nutkase]

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1286881199' post='2482237']
Okay, there have never existed groups of people who have gone rogue together. It cannot happen by definition. If a group of people get on an alliance affiliation for the express purpose of causing destruction, they are a legitimate alliance. CoUNT was a legitimate alliance.

UOKMB was never formed with the explicit intention of going out with a bang and did not have the original intent of causing destruction to GOONS or someone else. They were merely minding their own business the entire time and were operating as any established alliance would.

If either of the two is the case, you have a point. If neither is true, you're grasping at straws.
[/quote]

You have it all wrong, a Alliance is not defined so because of their cause its the fact they came together for a common cause, which is the basic definition of a alliance.

Don't make me get the dictionary out to prove it

Edited October 12, 2010 by nutkase

[Voytek]

[quote name='nutkase' timestamp='1286882669' post='2482239']
You have it all wrong, a Alliance is not defined so because of their cause its the fact they came together for a common cause, which is the basic definition of a alliance.

Don't make me get the dictionary out to prove it
[/quote]

I don't believe you, get out a dictionary and prove it.

[nutkase]

[quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1286883555' post='2482256']
I don't believe you, get out a dictionary and prove it.
[/quote]

"a connection based on kinship or marriage or common interest; "the shifting alliances within a large family"; "their friendship constitutes a powerful bond between them"
"a formal agreement establishing an association or alliance between nations or other groups to achieve a particular aim"
"An alliance is an agreement between two or more parties, made in order to advance common goals and to secure common interests."


No where does it state it is only called a Alliance based on number of nations/members or based on certain goals, just the fact they actually have a goal.

[Voytek]

I don't believe you, cite your sources.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1286881199' post='2482237']
Okay, there have never existed groups of people who have gone rogue together. It cannot happen by definition. If a group of people get on an alliance affiliation for the express purpose of causing destruction, they are a legitimate alliance. CoUNT was a legitimate alliance. The Smurfs were an alliance by general definition as well, in that case.
[/quote]
Why can't an alliance go rogue?

I mean... Universalis did it. They were an alliance.

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1286881199' post='2482237']
UOKMB was never formed with the explicit intention of going out with a bang and did not have the original intent of causing destruction to GOONS or someone else. They were merely minding their own business the entire time and were operating as any established alliance would.
[/quote]
Alliances don't have to mind their own business the whole time they operate in order to be alliances.

[Monster]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1286889269' post='2482310']
Why can't an alliance go rogue?

I mean... Universalis did it. They were an alliance.


Alliances don't have to mind their own business the whole time they operate in order to be alliances.
[/quote]

I believe it can be the case, but the reason is it's an issue because there are differing treatments for both.

Also you had denied the claim that UOKMB's leader stated their intent was to hit GOONS from the start. Are you giving that up? The main defense for UOKMB has been that they were an innocent micro that merely defended itself from GOONS. If they did go rogue as an alliance, why were reps not in order?

Edited October 12, 2010 by Antoine Roquentin

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1286889515' post='2482318']
Also you had denied the claim that UOKMB's leader stated their intent was to hit GOONS from the start. Are you giving that up? The main defense for UOKMB has been that they were an innocent micro that merely defended itself from GOONS. If they did go rogue as an alliance, why were reps not in order?
[/quote]
Yeah I don't think they're an innocent micro, lol. I've made that clear in enough posts and don't like to repeat myself endlessly.

But they've also said they hadn't decided on who they were going to hit, and the raid was what clinched their decision. Admittedly we only have their word to go on but it strikes me as a plausible story.

[Andre27]

The amount of love in here is startling. Best of luck to UPN and ODN

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1286840907' post='2481891']
I would like to add to this, that when SWAT rogued on UPN 3 months back, as he drew near to ZI, Peggy was demanding $30 million reps from him. Just to put GOONS $15 million number in perspective.
[/quote]
I would like to add to this, that when Sargun sent Methrage $3,000,000 while he was flying TOP Applicant several months ago GOONS demanded $20m. So there ya go, Number of times UPN has (according to you) asked for high reps: 1, GOONS: Eleventy.

[Sardonic]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1286894029' post='2482398']
I would like to add to this, that when Sargun sent Methrage $3,000,000 while he was flying TOP Applicant several months ago GOONS demanded $20m. So there ya go, Number of times UPN has (according to you) asked for high reps: 1, GOONS: Eleventy.
[/quote]
Doesn't make them any less giant hypocrites.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1286894029' post='2482398']
I would like to add to this, that when Sargun sent Methrage $3,000,000 while he was flying TOP Applicant several months ago GOONS demanded $20m. So there ya go, Number of times UPN has (according to you) asked for high reps: 1, GOONS: Eleventy.
[/quote]


That is totally irrelevant to the broad brush of hypocrisy my good man. You can act like it changes something, but it doesnt. UPNs unwillingness to accept a BETTER offer than THEY themselves were willing to offer a rogue, speaks volumes about UPN and a) their intentions, and b) there ridiculously wrong impression of exactly what political stroke they weild within this game.

[Volgan]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1286895661' post='2482423']
Doesn't make them any less giant hypocrites.
[/quote]

It does by the magnitude. Thats why he used the word eleventy, it means times without number. One time by the UPN hardly makes them giants.

[Dexomega]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1286907180' post='2482638']
a) their intentions
[/quote]

Yes, we plan to take over the WORLD!




[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1286895661' post='2482423']
Doesn't make them any less giant hypocrites.
[/quote]
To be honest, until you pay me 3 million for killing off my first nation I could care less. Well, I suppose it wasn't [i]GOONS[/i] that did it, but close enough.

Edited October 12, 2010 by Dexomega

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1286889269' post='2482310']
Alliances don't have to mind their own business the whole time they operate in order to be alliances.
[/quote]
Can an "alliance" say "We freely admit we are rogues and always have been" and still not be rogues?

[wickedj]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1286894029' post='2482398']
I would like to add to this, that when Sargun sent Methrage $3,000,000 while he was flying TOP Applicant several months ago GOONS demanded $20m. So there ya go, Number of times UPN has (according to you) asked for high reps: 1, GOONS: Eleventy.
[/quote]
solution: destroy them both

[Volgan]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1286914462' post='2482757']
Can an "alliance" say "We freely admit we are rogues and always have been" and still not be rogues?
[/quote]

NO. A rogue is a rogue. Whats the solution take their word they have turned over a new leaf and arent rogues anymore. yea right.

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

Congratulations, ODN.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1286914462' post='2482757']
Can an "alliance" say "We freely admit we are rogues and always have been" and still not be rogues?
[/quote]
I believe I was discussing whether or not they were an alliance. You appear to wish to change the topic.

For example, to use an example the people in the ODN should understand, Rebbilon was a rogue alliance. That they were rogues did not negate the fact that they had forums (absurdly bad ones) and coordinated (really badly).

[ckmanero]

LOLUPN! This is almost as funny as when they asked us to make them a new flag. Y'all remember that! Right?

[Eddard Stark]

Gravedigging.