The Princess is in Another Treaty

[JackSkellington]

Hi. I'm one of the leaders of one of the alliances that got "shafted"

I hate you MK

Obviously, this is where you say that Ronin wasn't the alliance(s) that would have caused a PR "nightmare".

Edited October 31, 2010 by JackSkellington

[SirWilliam]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1288570448' post='2498447']
Taking a break until I figure this out.
[/quote]

Forget your communication median [OOC: browser], please take a break while you figure out, and better comprehend, MK's intentions. The flailing and speculation (as well as the passing off of the latter as concrete fact) is rather unbecoming, even if it's far from unexpected.

[SpoiL]

I thought for sure that the ODN treaty was the one MK wanted to get out of.

[Twizzler]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1288568331' post='2498403']
completelymissingthepoint.jpg

You weren't one of the alliances who got shafted, but nice try.
[/quote]

Here's my point.

You clearly don't give a damn about anything MK says. Even if they completely explain themselves and admit you are correct, you'd still find something to complain loudly about.

MK, ODN, and just about everyone else doesn't give a damn about what you say. No one is capable of making you understand or stopping you from being an obnoxiously fine gentleman, and I simply don't care about anything you say because its most likely ridiculous. Seeing as you weren't even involved in anything that MK has done here, why don't you just voice your opinion (check) and move on.

[Banksy]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1288561628' post='2498302']
[size="6"]Alliances lie about what goes on inside them. They lie because it is bad for other alliances to know too much. It is very bad for the enemies of an alliance to know what is going on. So every alliance lies. It is easy for someone who is not in MK to believe that MK is also lying about their actions.[/size]
[/quote]

[img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_JyNhZdEQ7PQ/S_99xDxelSI/AAAAAAAAAf0/vDM7U2GR2xw/s1600/chewbacca.jpg[/img]

HoT uses chewbacca! But it failed.

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1288573236' post='2498528']


HoT uses chewbacca! But it failed.
[/quote]

MK lied, alliances died.

Edited November 1, 2010 by tamerlane

[Denial]

[quote name='Zombie Glaucon' timestamp='1288557497' post='2498225']
How would it have been any different?
[/quote]
You don't see how there would be a difference between the two?

As I said, there are reasons we have re-signed the particular treaties we have so far decided to re-sign. Many of those reasons are a reflection of the last month. The Kingdom is not only removing contradictions from its foreign policy, but also charting a new path towards an entirely new vision for the Cyberverse. It is inevitable that some alliances will wish to contribute to this new vision, while others won't.

Also, as I've mentioned previously, it is my personal hope that the dissolution of treaties and our actions since then (and from here on out) will serve to shake up the Cyberverse a little. Maybe create a bit of conflict somewhere down the line. Because, let's face it, when our detractors consist on people like HoT and Alterego, we're not going to get any real opposition unless we create it ourselves.

[Zombie Glaucon]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1288575877' post='2498586']
You don't see how there would be a difference between the two?
[/quote]

Maybe I do, maybe I don't -- in this instance I'm not asking to confirm or refute an opinion I already have, but to ask what your guys' opinion on the matter is. You've said you see a difference, but no one seems to saying precisely what that difference is.

What were you able to figure out with a full clearing of the decks that you couldn't imagine/decide upon before one?

[Denial]

[quote name='Zombie Glaucon' timestamp='1288579910' post='2498666']
Maybe I do, maybe I don't -- in this instance I'm not asking to confirm or refute an opinion I already have, but to ask what your guys' opinion on the matter is. You've said you see a difference, but no one seems to saying precisely what that difference is.

What were you able to figure out with a full clearing of the decks that you couldn't imagine/decide upon before one?
[/quote]
That's really none of your concern. I've already explained as much as I can without blatantly laying out information that is restricted to the Kingdom and its allies. The important thing is that you seem to be willing to acknowledge how there could have (and has been) a difference in the re-evaluation process by dissolving all of our treaties several weeks ago.

I have been honest and as forthcoming with information as possible, but I cannot really divulge anything further. But then, I don't think you [i]really[/i] expected an answer that comprised a whole load of sensitive information.

[Zombie Glaucon]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1288558788' post='2498251']
I'm not being disingenuous. In fact, I've always been pretty blunt in whatever I had to say. I don't know what you want to hear, really. Except from some made up line to suit the way YOU see things. We've said everything there is to know both in public and private. Sorry you weren't made aware of this. There's nothing more to it, no secret agenda, no PR battle.

Also, was the NPO comparison meant to insult me or MK in any way? Because I've said it many times that I didn't care if you compared us to them.
[/quote]

Blunt delivery has nothing to do with honest content.

I'm not sure if you always do this, but in this thread you're going pretty far afield to ascribe motivations and opinions to people that they've never once expressed. And yet you're offended when people imply that you might have an agenda or opinions you're not being honest about here -- what a marvelous world we live in. Anyhow, the only thing I've asked is about the difference between a full sweep and dropping selected treaties (see my post to Denial), so I'm not sure what's unclear about "what I want to hear". The idea that I'm looking for a made-up line in particular is just downright bizarre. I acknowledge that the bulk of what goes on here is lies and pageantry, but that doesn't mean I'm seeking it out exclusively.

The NPO example is a ready and apt one, since there was sooo much forum chatter and PR work leading up to the dissolution of TI. If you happen to be offended by my example I don't really care.

edit to add in:

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1288580682' post='2498669']
That's really none of your concern. I've already explained as much as I can without blatantly laying out information that is restricted to the Kingdom and its allies. [b]The important thing is that you seem to be willing to acknowledge how there could have (and has been) a difference in the re-evaluation process by dissolving all of our treaties several weeks ago.[/b]

I have been honest and as forthcoming with information as possible, but I cannot really divulge anything further. But then, I don't think you [i]really[/i] expected an answer that comprised a whole load of sensitive information.
[/quote]

From could have been to has been is a long stride. There is a big difference between "here is a good reason we might have done this" and "that is the (only) reason we did it." Maybe I was just looking for a convincing argument to dissuade me from concluding that this was indeed a naked PR stunt; maybe asking questions is a joy unto itself. Unfortunately the national security interests of UTC Labs prevent me from ever revealing the truth.

I didn't expect to find out specifics, but it's not obvious to me that the process itself needs to be secret. I can discuss how Rijndael works without sending you the keys I use.

Edited November 1, 2010 by Zombie Glaucon

[Arthur Blair]

It was all a PR stunt towards our ex-allies, and apparently it worked perfectly.

What now?

[Jens of the desert]

[quote name='Quinoa Rex' timestamp='1288410695' post='2496886']
One of the rare occasions that orange and aqua match.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]/me looks at your sig. Was that intentional?[/color]

[Cataduanes]

[quote name='SpoiL' timestamp='1288572478' post='2498494']
I thought for sure that the ODN treaty was the one MK wanted to get out of.
[/quote]
I know ODN is just sooooooo horrible

[D34th]

[quote name='Arthur Blair' timestamp='1288608729' post='2498895']
It was all a PR stunt towards our ex-allies, and apparently it worked perfectly.

What now?
[/quote]

Yeah, perfectly.

[Sandwich Controversy]

Yes, it worked perfectly.

[SirWilliam]

Almost [i]too[/i] perfectly...

[Devilyn Caster]

Congrats to ODN and MK for re-establishing this relationship.

Needs more blaming of Joracy though.

[tamerlane]

[quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1288640891' post='2499190']
Almost [i]too[/i] perfectly...
[/quote]


No, just regular type.

[SirWilliam]

[quote name='tamerlane' timestamp='1288713034' post='2499888']
No, just regular type.
[/quote]

Y'know what, tamerlane. No. Just... no.

Ok, well. Yeah, I suppose.

[Alterego]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1288575877' post='2498586']
Because, let's face it, when our detractors consist on people like HoT and Alterego, we're not going to get any real opposition unless we create it ourselves.
[/quote]
You get the enemy you deserve and Im not much of an enemy. I guess that means you arent much of an alliance. After all it took most of the world to get you up from 2 years hunched over and on your knees, werent much of an opposition yourself.

[Seipher Caim]

Congratz to both parties involved ! Also hi potato

And a little question : can we draw conclusions as to how are your relations with your former treaty partners when you're NOT signing with them again ? Because, if i see reasons to say 'it works perfectly" when you sign with new people and some former partners of yours, the same "it works perfectly" also means that you're ahppy of NOT signing with some others.

And another conragtz for the form !

[potato]

[quote name='Seipher Caim' timestamp='1288777028' post='2500761']
Congratz to both parties involved ! Also hi potato

And a little question : can we draw conclusions as to how are your relations with your former treaty partners when you're NOT signing with them again ? Because, if i see reasons to say 'it works perfectly" when you sign with new people and some former partners of yours, the same "it works perfectly" also means that you're ahppy of NOT signing with some others.

And another conragtz for the form !
[/quote]

You can draw all and anything you want, I'm not going to stop you, but you'd be inherently wrong, to be honest. There are people we haven't signed with (both new and old) that we REALLY love, we just have gotten to them yet.

Also, salut.

[Denial]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1288775953' post='2500756']
You get the enemy you deserve and Im not much of an enemy. I guess that means you arent much of an alliance. After all it took most of the world to get you up from 2 years hunched over and on your knees, werent much of an opposition yourself.
[/quote]
Heh, get back to me when you are forced into rerolling after your alliance and your allies are pushed into disbanding, when PZI and EZI are regular practices, and curbstomps occur frequently and systematically on trumped-up justifications. How's that EZI that you consistently claimed that Karma would be enforcing on BAPS? Has the sky fallen yet? Besides, I'll remind you that when I previously took a leading role in toppling the dominant force - Pacifica and its allies - I did so within 3 months of myself and my alliance entering the Cyberverse (hint: I'm talking about LUE and the First Great War). So, I've done it twice.

What have you done?

You have faced an entirely benign opposition that simply sits back and laughs at your feeble attempts to form opposing coalitions, rather than attempt to crush them before they begin. And yet you still have not achieved a thing. In fact, I think you have probably even sent your cause backwards!

Great job.

Edited November 3, 2010 by Denial

[Poyplemonkeys]

Nice PR stunt MK, it truly was a cunning ruse but my brilliance saw through it.

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1288775953' post='2500756']
You get the enemy you deserve...
[/quote]

Walford H. Christ, what sins have we committed to deserve such punishment!?

Edited November 3, 2010 by tamerlane