Prefonteen

Public consumption means "non opsec". I.e. Whatever plan existed, exist or will one day exist generally isn't shared with members or outsiders outside a small gov group until postfacto, or unless it leaks. An admittance after all would validate quack further. Why would they tell you anything like that with the risk of it getting on the forums?

Can you specify what exactly we have done wrong besides not splitting up the TKR-t$ alliance?

Once again you move the goalpost a bit: We've dealt with months and months of "quack man bad" rhetoric, culminating in a weird, intense outburst of "QUACK MAN IQ QUACK MAN BAD". We engaged every single one of the points brought up, while also bringing forward legitimate gripes of our own regarding the contradictory stances we've encountered (and the restrictive impact those stances have had and still have on quack's diplomatic options and options to appease you). The arguments brought against us have been a mess, and we have yet to receive much of a response to things we've brought up beyond "quack man bad" (even now, in your post). I'm not sure why you're going on this spiel of "Well we shouldnt b discussing any of this because you're not going to convince us". That's lazy and frankly bad diplomacy. Interactions - both in private and on the forums - make up a significant part of the (political and general) game. I'm going to keep interacting in public, in my role as a public figurehead of The Syndicate. You are free to do as you please I guess.

Run while you can smith! Partisan yelped as the life drained from his body.

Fine, we'll call them Mutual Defense against Quack Pacts (MDQP)? Not sure what your point is. The pacts where there. The offensive coalition was there. The rhetoric on which your pact *and* coalition were based was absolutely faulty, and the degree of contradiction between your action and propagated ideology enormous. Yes. We brought evidence. People you're in-coalition with confirmed said evidence. You yelled "NAH ITS NOT OUR FAULT. QUACK TOO BIG QUACK THREAt". Don't make me drop the god damn logs. Your choice whether to force my hand. You can either take your innocent spiel into dm's, or we can have a public log review of your sphere's attempts at setting us up against rose, and failing that, beginning your preparations to coalition build against us.

Excuse me? You TI lot hold against us that we are "too big" a sphere. Simultaneously, you hold against us that we did not want to link up with TI and its entire sphere of allies in what would have been a genuine hegemony-size grouping. Pick one narrative, and stick to it. You're doing yourselves no favors here.

Friend ronny, would you like to go over the tiering stats of that period with me? We can do a month-by-month analysis together. It will end up making you look old and forgetful though. You should really focus more on cleaning our color, and less on blaming me for the mistakes of people who ride your coattails friend.

Not our fault your people went on a hurr durr hegemony rampage, quite partisanly overscrutinized what was a straightforward CB, then did a bunch of oopsie doopsie lies which others then contradicted, and have finally landed back at mUh Cb, Hodor.

You know pretty well that the sphinx log + tarroc/boyce (ex-FA gov and leader) corrobations are plenty to act on. The various admissions and/or badly aligned stories have since confirmed that we madet he right call. Various gov members have since gone on to state that frankly, all this has been inspired by a fear for/concern over our *growth* or *hegemonic potential* rather than our current size. Which is cool. Just try not to lose your oars in the hegemony crap yall have been peddling.

I'm Partisan, not Rose. What are you talking about lmao. Putting all that aside: You can't go oMg qUaCk HeGeMoNy when we havent made any moves to secure dominance, when we have been rivalled in size by one party or the other since the end of last war (consistently), and when you're working backroom sphere-wide paperless agreements while also having 3/4 (HM, Swamp, TCW) aboard the "roll quacky" train, with the 4th (rose) being a work in progress. Well, you can. But I'd say at that point we're entirely understandably forced to swing before you do it yourself. And that's why we're here. Kastor is bringing up things Prefontaine did. Prefontaine has nothing to do with this war. Kastor is attributing Pref's actions to me (Prefonteen/Partisan, leader of t$). So no. It's not relevant and yes, we will disregard it ;). I can. And my stamina is eternal.

/s/ for The Syndicate Partisan

Friend ronny, I think asking the parasites in tCW to start pulling their weight is a fabulous idea! I see no need to needlessly strain our impeccable relations over our shard backyard. If you would be so kind as to write the letter, I will happily undersign it. You always had a way with words. Must be your age and experience.

Friend? I constantly clean your sphere for you. Work work work that's all Partisan is good for. And what do I get for it? "Partisan my bonus isnt 140%. Partisan theres people on my sphere" nag nag nag nag. I've never asked for much. A little appreciation. Maybe a candlelit surprise. But your stone age man-brain just can't comprehend I have needs too! And when my body and alliance are worn and torn from years of scrubbing your color, buried in in a cataclysmic dogpile, what do you do? You invite your friends to green and pretend I dont even exist! And then you wonder why I am not always happy-go-lucky around you. Ugh.

A few corrections that sketch a bit of a different picture: 1. I was not just "not that active". I was in VM for 7- 8 months, checked out entirely from the game, dealing with RL. This was the period between the tail end of knightfall (I vm'd after the victory was in the bag but before we entered peace negotiations), and the leadup to last war (I jumped out of VM and went terminal jesting a bit before the war started. I was not involved in t$ government stuff during that period.) 2. t$ had no obligation to TKR (or KETOG) at the time. Relations were rocky - nonexistent (largely due to fallout over knightfall and the preceeding period; fallout which we have long since discussed, hashed over and worked out in private chnnels). Why would t$ be obligated to inform TKR, a leader of a competing sphere, of its discussions with its allies? 3. I noted that t$ had issues with KETOGG on one and and BK on the other. That was t$' position throughout the period between KF and last war. Assisting KETOGG was something I understand sisy/leo to have had no interest in whatsoever. With regards to hitting TKR: t$ had an agreement with NPO which saw t$ fight GG while NPO stayed its hand. The moment NPO broke that agreement and hit TKR, sisy pulled the plug and the leadup to t$' eventual (forced) entry began. So yeah... TKR has very little to do with our refusal to assist. That's squarely on TGH/KT (in particular) and their posturing.

These are all things you haven't done. So what have you done exactly?

Yield! Yield! Stop descecrating my forum corpse!

I am defeated at last. The shame is unbearable. Consider this my resignation from Orbis politics. May whomever is foolish enough to challenge the great orator Fist be blessed enough to last a night.

What exactly have you done besides run your mouth? EDIT: When you have invested as much as I've (and a select few others) have done, let me know. You calling anyone else a blowhard is laughable.

James, our personal contact has been limited since March. You, nor your concerns were on my or t$' radar until it was brought to me that you were apparently going off on some radio show. So I inquired with the leader of swamp (who was also my main TI contact) about TI's position. If that was a personal slight, then uhh...tough luck. You keep stating that 'we did nothing to combat the narrative", but frankly, that's a blatant falsehood. It was t$ and TKR who initiated the conversation about being too big back when the t$-TKR-TI trifecta was leftover after last war. I recall vividly the conversations we had with Tyrion, trying to figure out what to do. It was TI's preference to remain aligned with TKR and t$, and it was TKR/t$ who demanded cuts to the sphere in order to not become a bloated blob. Not you. Ultimately we could not find enough common ground due to your (rather understandable) unwillingness to part with old allies. We respected your loyalty to them, and when you created swamp, we wished you the best of luck. Why did you not show even a hint of the same concern for game health you pretend to have now? Similarly, Swamp was perfectly fine pretending quack was no problem to it in order to play up the supposed threat of rose with the hopes of t$-Rose going at it. You only joined the quack man bad chorus after you had grown your sphere, established ties with HM and hooked TCW. So yes, we're sceptical of your convictions. Particularly after your ally has backstabbed us, and particularly after you have spent the better part of a year playing what appears to be a two-faced game with us. But surely we did no do enough to alleviate "your concerns". We....aren't hyping nation count? Our assessments are literally based on nations per tier. And yes, based on nations per tier ( @Theodosiusor @Cooper_ do you want to educate?), we are definitely not the hegemon you made us out to be.

oi. Edgy m8.

So the way this usually goes fist, is that you bring foward evidence -logs, screenshots etc- or, failing that, a logical and consistent narrative, to support your claims. You have done neither. Your posturing and insult-slinging is rendered ineffectual by your utter lack of coherence. You have brought forward nothing but an opinion based on your misremembrances of 2-3 years old events that have no bearing on the leadup to this war. You are neither a credible source, nor a relevant party to the political machinations that culminated in the coalition against quack being prepared. Ergo, you are not going to be dignified with an in-depth response. I will wait for Swamp to bring forward anything of note.

Yeah uhh, fist- you're pretty much trainwrecking here. @swamp- still no elaborations. Unfortunate. Can you send an actual representative instead of dragging fist back out of inactivity and siccing him on every thread your name is dropped in to screech about things he doesn't know about? It's not a pretty sight.

Yeah, let's blame TKR for IQ trying to roll them out of the game. You're not even close to making sense anymore, nor is it particularly tasteful. I advise you to let swamp speak for itself.

Everyone knows we should stick to 1 - 5 year old CB's. Geez. Opsec has never been skin-tight in PW.

I have provided our justification a good few times already. We have at no point believed ourselves to be of the stature and dominance you make us out to be, and I am happy to go into the statistics supporting that claim in a different thread. This one however, is about the questions outlined in the OP and getting a clearer understanding of your reasoning behind the contradictions i've brought forward.