The Opening of Pandora's Box

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Ejayrazz' timestamp='1286950957' post='2483348']
I love when people try making themselves sound all intelligent and !@#$ with the unnecessary complexed verbiage. Seriously, "no" (On purpose for those who can't keep up) the words you're preaching. Complexity isn't intelligence, children.
[/quote]
Are you talking about the wording in our charter? Because someone wrote up a copy in painful legalese and I rewrote it in what I figured were layman's terms.

[Kowalski]

edited, nvm.

Edited October 13, 2010 by Kowalski

[Denial]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1286951474' post='2483356']
[color="#0000FF"]It's only a matter of time really. [b]You're not able to use #stratego itself as a CB.[/b] Not if you're hitting alliances on at a time, but I'm quite sure all alliances there have found themselves on a list, if they weren't already. For some reason I doubt you fellows are going to sit back and ignore alliances you know to be enemies.[/color][/quote]
Sure we could. But we aren't and, in regards to your mistaken analysis, therein lies the rub.

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1286949654' post='2483332']
Its people like you and Stumpy who are saying bring it on. It takes real guts to say thay when most of the world who have twice devastated any potential opposition in the last 18 months simply by weight of numbers.[/quote]

wat

Okay, what I think you are trying to say here is that the 'opposition' has been crushed twice in 18 months. Let me hit you with some knowledge. Firstly, that's what wars do; one side inevitably loses. Secondly, eighteen months is a rather long time. Yes, the Karma and BiPolar wars were substantial and game-changing, but alliances like MK, TOP and NpO have shown how easy it is for a decent alliance to rebuild and remain politically significant even under the burden of reparations. Lastly, maybe if you stopped relying on the same rag-tag bunch of misfits from 18 months ago, you might be able to do something more than moan on about 'curbstomps' and 'extortion' that never actually happened. Want to know why you're still in opposition? Because after a year and a half you still haven't found even one single useful propaganda tool, let alone a viable strategy.

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1286949654' post='2483332']
Your excessive beatdowns and extortive reps demands from key alliances have guaranteed your dream of another beatdown will not happen unless you just decide to roll another alliance trying to get their allies sucked into the war. Why dont you tell all the dozens of fringe alliances around your 3 blocs to get lost and when the numbers are no longer 3 to 1 in your favour you might have the potential of an opposition forming.[/quote]

Excessive beatdowns? You mean the Karma War, where Pacifica was brought down to just under sanctioned alliance status? Or the BiPolar War, where TOP suffered the same [i]terrible[/i] injustice of falling out of top 12 alliances for a small period of time? Need I remind you that in both cases, the alliances that received these putative 'beatdowns' were in fact the initial aggressors? If the Karma and BiPolar wars - two of the closest and least predictable wars we have had since the first two Great Wars - are your idea of 'excessive beatdowns', then I would hate to see what you call what happened to alliances in the One Vision/GATO War, the myriad stompings of Legion, the noCB War, and so on. I'm beginning to think you use the term 'excessive beatdown' synonymously with 'war which Alterego was on the losing side of'.

As for your last assertion, it really is indicative of how pathetically incompetent you people are. You expect me and my alliance to specifically demand that alliances go and join your side? How about you do some damned work instead of !@#$%*ing incessantly on the forums about things that have never happened, and will never happen. Heh, I am suddenly reminded of your campaign against the forces of Karma based on the fact that we were going to EZI every BAPS member. Ah, you are a comedy goldmine.


[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1286949654' post='2483332']
I didnt you notive you complaining about the opposition when you were being torn up in the last war.
[/quote]
I don't even know what that is meant to mean. If you are referring to the BiPolar War, didn't you just state that it was an 'excessive beatdown' on our part? But not we got 'torn up'? Make up your mind, fool.

Edited October 13, 2010 by Denial

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1286956035' post='2483396']
Sure we could. But we aren't and, in regards to your mistaken analysis, therein lies the rub.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]You could, but you won't. For the simple reason that doing so would cost you most of your political capital, and could also potentially backfire. Therefore you will do exactly as I say, and wait for the individual alliances involved to provide you with a CB, or at least an excuse, to do as you wish. PB may be a lot of things, but stupid it is not.[/color]

[Denial]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1286956273' post='2483398']
[color="#0000FF"]You could, but you won't. For the simple reason that doing so would cost you most of your political capital, and could also potentially backfire. Therefore you will do exactly as I say, and wait for the individual alliances involved to provide you with a CB, or at least an excuse, to do as you wish. PB may be a lot of things, but stupid it is not.[/color]
[/quote]
So, what you're saying is that we won't attack anyone until an alliance gives us a concrete and valid reason to?

Yeah, pretty much.

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1286956513' post='2483402']
So, what you're saying is that we won't attack anyone until an alliance gives us a concrete and valid reason to?

Yeah, pretty much.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]NPO did the same thing, but that doesn't mean they didn't have certain alliances within their sights prior to that, however. And that is what I am saying in regards to PB and #stratego.

Although I must say that it is humorous to see an MK member talking as if he is a member. I suppose it is no longer a secret where MK lies on the spectrum.[/color]

Edited October 13, 2010 by Rebel Virginia

[Denial]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1286956638' post='2483403']
[color="#0000FF"]NPO did the same thing, but that doesn't mean they didn't have certain alliances within their sights prior to that, however. And that is what I am saying in regards to PB and #stratego.

Although I must say that it is humorous to see an MK member talking as if he is a member. I suppose it is no longer a secret where MK lies on the spectrum.[/color]
[/quote]
There are quite obviously alliances we dislike, but unlike other alliances - pre-Karma NPO, GGA, Valhalla, and so on - we don't use that as motivation to fabricate justification for war against those alliances. The history of Mushroom Kingdom and, more importantly, the history of Mushroom Kingdom since the Karma War, demonstrates that we are happy to leave alliances alone as long as they leave us alone. If we were an aggressive alliance void of any ethical standards, The Legion would have been rolled as many times in 2010 as they were in 2007.

[Banksy]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1286926141' post='2482971']
And the one thing left in the box was hope.[/quote]
The horrors were released, the box was closed and the hope was still trapped inside the box.

Edited October 13, 2010 by Banksy

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1286957093' post='2483404']
There are quite obviously alliances we dislike, but unlike other alliances - pre-Karma NPO, GGA, Valhalla, and so on - we don't use that as motivation to fabricate justification for war against those alliances. The history of Mushroom Kingdom and, more importantly, the history of Mushroom Kingdom since the Karma War, [b]demonstrates that we are happy to leave alliances alone as long as they leave us alone[/b]. If we were an aggressive alliance void of any ethical standards, The Legion would have been rolled as many times in 2010 as they were in 2007.
[/quote]
That's not quite true, there are several incidents over the last year where MK forced its view on alliances with issues and said issues had zero MK involvement. Just because you haven't "rolled" a alliance doesn't mean you haven't had a dramatic negative impact on it.

[Voytek]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1286957851' post='2483409']
That's not quite true, there are several incidents over the last year where MK forced its view on alliances with issues and said issues had zero MK involvement. Just because you haven't "rolled" a alliance doesn't mean you haven't had a dramatic negative impact on it.
[/quote]
Name one.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1286958081' post='2483412']
Name one.
[/quote]
\m/ NpO or \m/ STA, there is two

[Denial]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1286957851' post='2483409']
That's not quite true, there are several incidents over the last year where MK forced its view on alliances with issues and said issues had zero MK involvement. Just because you haven't "rolled" a alliance doesn't mean you haven't had a dramatic negative impact on it.
[/quote]
I'll echo Voytek and ask you to actually back up your claims by naming those alliances and how we've had a "dramatic negative impact" on them.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1286958157' post='2483414']
I'll echo Voytek and ask you to actually back up your claims by naming those alliances and how we've had a "dramatic negative impact" on them.
[/quote]
Look above for your answer.

[Voytek]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1286958152' post='2483413']
\m/ NpO or \m/ STA, there is two
[/quote]
OK now explain a) how we had zero invested interest in these events and b) what dramatic negative impact we had.

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1286958596' post='2483415']
Look above for your answer.
[/quote]
You didn't explain what dramatic negative impact we had.

Edited October 13, 2010 by Voytek

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1286956638' post='2483403']
[color="#0000FF"]NPO did the same thing, but that doesn't mean they didn't have certain alliances within their sights prior to that, however. And that is what I am saying in regards to PB and #stratego.[/color]
[/quote]

I had something more elaborate written up, but instead I think I'll just go with this;


NPO has rolled for less than what went down in those logs, much less. They were real big on preemptive strikes to neutralize "threats to their security".

This is the difference between the two power structures, NPO and its Hegemon went looking for trouble, we are willing to sit back and wait for some idiot to poke the bear. That way we get to point and laugh when he acts surprised he got mauled for his efforts.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1286958597' post='2483416']
OK now explain a) how we had zero invested interest in these events and b) what dramatic negative impact we had.
[/quote]
Really? Really? What did you have invested in the \m/-NpO war? and again, what did you have invested in the \m/-STA incident? In both cases nothing, nothing at all short of treaties chaining, and that wasn't the case. Yet in both cases MK came in heavy and at a serious political cost to us.

[Merrie Melodies]

To those members of Pandora's Box, cheers to you for doing what most just whinge about, actually doing something that changes the dynamics of our little world. Heres to hoping more follow your lead.

[Denial]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1286958919' post='2483419']
Really? Really? What did you have invested in the \m/-NpO war? and again, what did you have invested in the \m/-STA incident? In both cases nothing, nothing at all short of treaties chaining, and that wasn't the case. Yet in both cases MK came in heavy and at a serious political cost to us.
[/quote]
I'm pretty sure the 'political cost' of those incidents were a direct result of your own stupidity.

In both circumstances, Mushroom Kingdom acted as a mediator attempting to avoid heightened conflict that would be to the detriment of both sides. The fact that you are trying to equate curbstomps to some used political capital - which was in fact wasted by the alliance complaining, not reduced by any third party - is downright hilarious. That's all you've got on us, really? We hurt your feelings after you acted like morons? Get your hand off it.

[Voytek]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1286958919' post='2483419']Really? Really? What did you have invested in the \m/-NpO war? and again, what did you have invested in the \m/-STA incident? In both cases nothing, nothing at all short of treaties chaining, and that wasn't the case.[/quote]
Our vested interest was that of not wanting to see friends fighting friends with TOP on the horizon.

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1286958919' post='2483419']Yet in both cases MK came in heavy and at a serious political cost to us.[/quote]
You're going to have to explain that one to me.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1286959236' post='2483421']
I'm pretty sure the 'political cost' of those incidents were a direct result of your own stupidity.

In both circumstances, Mushroom Kingdom acted as a mediator attempting to avoid heightened conflict that would be to the detriment of both sides. The fact that you are trying to equate curbstomps to some used political capital - which was in fact wasted by the alliance complaining, not reduced by any third party - is downright hilarious. That's all you've got on us, really? We hurt your feelings after you acted like morons? Get your hand off it.
[/quote]
Oh, Im not speaking for an alliance, just my own observations. Your demeaning attitude just further confirms to me my beliefs. But yes, you are right, MK is the glorious becon of light and the shining moral example to us all, how could I have been so mistaken.

Edited October 13, 2010 by Merrie Melodies

[Voytek]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1286959695' post='2483425']
Oh, Im not speaking for an alliance, just my own observations. Your demeaning attitude just further confirms to me my beliefs. But yes, you are right, MK is the glorious becon of light and the shining moral example to us all, how could I have been so mistaken.
[/quote]
Dude this is literally "this is just my opinion also your meanness only makes me think my belief more but yeah i mean [sarcastic thing]"

You couldn't have stuffed more posting cliches into that if you'd tried. Or responded to any less of what Denial actually said.

Edited October 13, 2010 by Voytek

[D34th]

A bit later for the party but congratulations, nice grouping. I was expecting MK as a founder member but may be they still need sometime until sign treaties again and the others PB alliances didn't wanted to wait.

[erikz]

If they had only consulted me, then this would never have happened.

[raasaa]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1286941315' post='2483179']
you guys do have major interconnected treaties with SF, CnG, and Aztec blocs. VE has treaties with SF alliances (did you forget your MADP with GOD- Not to mention due to the MADP plus the MDoAP with RIA: you could bring in Chestnut Accords bloc), or the MDoAP with RoK, plus your MDoAP with NV who is in a MADP Bloc). FOK is in LEO with RnR/Int, Athens has an MDoAP with PC, GOONS holds MDoAPs with LOST and GOD,

Then there is MHA, Fark, Argent, WF, NEW, and Guru Order as direct treaties. then you have several indirect treaties with alliances like Sparta along with others, like IAA, LoSS, GATO, NpO, STA, and others.

so you have heavy and direct connections to SF, CnG, Aztec, Chestnut Accords, and LEO. along with the fact that LEO is overlapping due to FOK being in both LEO and PB. Chestnut Accords overlap with SF. so if you description of being hegemonic is the world of Q or WUT in which Q or WUT was the center of other major blocs, well that is pretty much what PB is considering it can call on many blocs to surround it just like Q or WUT did.
[/quote]
Actually, you do have a point. Q had ties / Overlap with 1V, BLEU, LEO, Citadel and CDT. PB's ties / overlap is not as big as Q's, but the trend is quite similar

[quote name='hizzy' timestamp='1286942039' post='2483198']
If I can make one thing clear regarding anyone's ties to Nueva Vida;

all our treaties (except AZTEC, of course) are non-chaining. This was done specifically so that we wouldn't have to pick and choose our friends' friends. Whatever our feelings are for VE, they do not necessarily extend to VE's allies. You gotta be out of your mind if you think we're going to let anyone use our treaty with them bring us and our AZTEC friends in to help some bozo in GOONS.
[/quote]
Well with that line up of alliances, i dont think VE will require our assistance

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1286943294' post='2483228']
i honestly wonder if NV would not defend VE should VE get attacked for defending GOONS even if GOONS aggressively attacks another alliance (unless the alliance was allied to NV of course). While i get your treaties are non-chaining, NV has never struck me as an alliance who would let their friends get attacked and then do nothing about it regardless of the reason for the attack.
[/quote]


[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1286951474' post='2483356']
[color="#0000FF"]It's only a matter of time really. You're not able to use #stratego itself as a CB. Not if you're hitting alliances on at a time, but I'm quite sure all alliances there have found themselves on a list, if they weren't already. For some reason I doubt you fellows are going to sit back and ignore alliances you know to be enemies.[/color]

[color="#0000FF"]You can claim I am trying to have it both ways, but that simply is just not the case. Their [b]offenses are almost always done against weaker and less connected parties[/b], who are often disliked by most. Those who are capable of making a difference simply won't, because they simply do not care what happens to others. Who do you see GOONS acting against? Methrage mostly, and then extorting a few people lacking enough in judgment to aid him. While they were wrong, clearly, decency tells one that even they do not receive the treatment that they have gotten. And you're going to see GOONS continue to acting against these types of individuals, and not against alliances such as NV, Polaris, or STA (not yet anyway), simply because doing so would cause people to care. They do not wish for that to happen.[/color]
[/quote]
If the #stratego logs are going to used as a CB, then you have my sword. I doubt any alliance is dumb enough to use that as singular reasons to start a war. However, the #stratego logs combined with a few other issues / stupidities / mistakes can make a lovely CB.

IMO The bold part is not true. I know of mutiple fck up's with Nueva Vida. Fortunately or unfortunately, we did not pursue them very much....we dont like to push hard on certain issues, specially where Grey areas are involved. Actually, from what i have seen...they dont really care whether the said party is less connected or well connected....they fck up just the same. The way it is handled is different though


Edit: spelling

Edited October 13, 2010 by raasaa

[erikz]

I would defend NV whenever they need me, treaty'd or not. They are awesome.