Altheus Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='erikz' timestamp='1299517259' post='2655503'] Sure, call us enablers, whatever rocks your boat. The truth is the situation is much more complicated, like UPN doesn't want out unless polar gets out, GOD only wants what Pxychosis wants - not taking into account their non-allies (which we are). I know you hate us, but trying to twist this situation in to a story where we force UPN in to disbanding is poor form. Whatever we do, you disagree with it. We might be your nemesis of some sort, but I hope you see we really don't want this disbandment thing to happen to UPN. [/quote] Don't worry about Alterego. We know you're not at fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 If the PC/RoK conflict ends without the word "surrender" being used is there going to be a GW1 style effort on the part of Ragnarok to try and spin it that they didn't lose this war even though everyone knows they did? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1299519814' post='2655539'] If the PC/RoK conflict ends without the word "surrender" being used is there going to be a GW1 style effort on the part of Ragnarok to try and spin it that they didn't lose this war even though everyone knows they did? [/quote] RoK isn't Invicta. They don't bang the "undefeated" gong. They simply have a no surrender clause and that will never change. If peace is reached with Polar, there is no reason why PC and RoK can't just shake hands and go their separate ways. RoK didn't wrong PC in any way, they honored a treaty. Instead of criticizing RoK for being "stubborn" for not surrendering, criticize PC for requiring it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299520014' post='2655543'] RoK isn't Invicta. They don't bang the "undefeated" gong. They simply have a no surrender clause and that will never change. If peace is reached with Polar, there is no reason why PC and RoK can't just shake hands and go their separate ways. RoK didn't wrong PC in any way, they honored a treaty. Instead of criticizing RoK for being "stubborn" for not surrendering, criticize PC for requiring it. [/quote] I really don't see why anyone can criticize Poison Clan for what they've offered. To my knowledge they aren't asking for reparations of any kind and that shows that they respect that RoK entered to defend their ally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 You got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em. It's not PC's fault that RoK doesn't want to admit defeat when they lost/are going to lose. They can fight for as long as they want and it'll be their choice but I don't think it's in their best interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299520014' post='2655543'] RoK isn't Invicta. They don't bang the "undefeated" gong. They simply have a no surrender clause and that will never change. If peace is reached with Polar, there is no reason why PC and RoK can't just shake hands and go their separate ways. RoK didn't wrong PC in any way, they honored a treaty. Instead of criticizing RoK for being "stubborn" for not surrendering, criticize PC for requiring it. [/quote] While I could argue that the burden then lies with the people who wrote the RoK charter to begin with...I could just as easily argue that PC change the wording from "Surrender" to "Defeated" to make it acceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoomzoomzoom Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 (edited) I personally don't care whether the terms say surrender. Anyone who isn't a retard will know who the clear winner was. Edited March 7, 2011 by Zoomzoomzoom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tblindparrot Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 The CyberWorld was a better place when the good alliances, like NPO, forced the !@#$ alliances to disband. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Learz Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299520014' post='2655543'] RoK isn't Invicta. They don't bang the "undefeated" gong. They simply have a no surrender clause and that will never change. If peace is reached with Polar, there is no reason why PC and RoK can't just shake hands and go their separate ways. RoK didn't wrong PC in any way, they honored a treaty. Instead of criticizing RoK for being "stubborn" for not surrendering, criticize PC for requiring it. [/quote] We changed that after we were defeated in Karma. Our enthusiasm is still undefeated though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tblindparrot Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Learz' timestamp='1299522567' post='2655581'] We changed that after we were defeated in Karma. Our enthusiasm is still undefeated though! [/quote] Are you guys even an important alliance anyway? Who are you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 I am disappointed to see that Rok isnt as gracious in defeat as they are in victory. True character shines thru when the chips are down, not when things are going great. That's all the cliches I can spout out at one time, so I am done, and damnit Rok pay your damn forum bills so I can log in over there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299517975' post='2655517'] The no surrender clause has existed since RoK was founded. It has nothing to do with any "winning streak" ... [/quote] Where on their Charter does it have a No Surrender Clause? Cos none of PC can find it anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acca Dacca Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Stewie' timestamp='1299523964' post='2655611'] Where on their Charter does it have a No Surrender Clause? Cos none of PC can find it anywhere. [/quote] Its enforced, and it's there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred von Tirpitz Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Sweeeeet Ronny D' timestamp='1299523721' post='2655606'] I am disappointed to see that Rok isnt as gracious in defeat as they are in victory. True character shines thru when the chips are down, not when things are going great. That's all the cliches I can spout out at one time, so I am done, and damnit Rok pay your damn forum bills so I can log in over there. [/quote] Its not about the bills. More to do with moving without leaving you the forwarding address. Got to say their new forums are rather sexy. Also as regards the first sentence of yours, you have been in Ragnarok, what did you expect them to do? You expect them to do something you know they wont? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Acca Dacca' timestamp='1299524051' post='2655613'] Its enforced, and it's there. [/quote] http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Charter_of_Ragnarok Where exactly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acca Dacca Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 That hasnt been updated in ages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoomzoomzoom Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 Didn't Rok hold some alliance at eternal war over a no surrender clause in their charter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299517975' post='2655517'] The no surrender clause has existed since RoK was founded. It has nothing to do with any "winning streak" ...[/quote] [quote name='Acca Dacca' timestamp='1299524293' post='2655621'] That hasnt been updated in ages. [/quote] Surely it should have been there from the first time the Charter was in place if the "No Surrender Clause has existed since ROK was founded." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1299522011' post='2655569'] I personally don't care whether the terms say surrender. Anyone who isn't a retard will know who the clear winner was. [/quote] Yes. We all know that GPA has been the winner here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tautology Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 For someone who claims to think their alliance is winning, you sure are whining a lot, Stewie. Make your mind up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Tautology' timestamp='1299524684' post='2655626'] For someone who claims to think their alliance is winning, you sure are whining a lot, Stewie. Make your mind up. [/quote] I just find this a battle of futility if I'm honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Tautology' timestamp='1299524684' post='2655626'] For someone who claims to think their alliance is winning, you sure are whining a lot, Stewie. Make your mind up. [/quote] I just find this a battle of futility if I'm honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoomzoomzoom Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Tautology' timestamp='1299524684' post='2655626'] For someone who claims to think their alliance is winning, you sure are whining a lot, Stewie. Make your mind up. [/quote] It isn't a claim. You're delusional if you think you've somehow won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acca Dacca Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1299524759' post='2655630'] It isn't a claim. You're delusional if you think you've somehow won. [/quote] Again, nothing to do with winning or losing. We're an alliance that does not surrender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Learz Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 [quote name='tblindparrot' timestamp='1299522816' post='2655584'] Are you guys even an important alliance anyway? Who are you? [/quote] No, we're not important. There's only five members left, we're a shell of former selves. Haf has started drinking heavily, Jorost moved on, Atlas went over the edge oh god why am i being nuked THE SKY IS RED AND THE SUN BLACK it's all over, all over... [url="http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Invicta"]Use the CN wiki for information.[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.