Phoenyx

I believe in innocent until proven guilty beyond a shadow of the doubt. You apparently believe guilty until proven innocent. If we use your metric, I could say the same of you and we'd get nowhere. Instead, I take everyone's statements and assume that people are being honest, but that their beliefs may still be false. Anyway, bottom line is, who did Boyce even talk to? We have some lines from Sphinx talking about treaties- none said anything about a first strike. So where did Boyce get this idea that TCW/HM/Swamp was going to initiate a first strike against Quack? True, but it -is- your problem that your CB has so little evidence to back it. Even if Sphinx -did- want to attack, it doesn't change the fact that TCW was a non voting member of Swamp. Put simply, he had no power to make it happen. Now, you could say that you didn't attack Swamp first, you only attacked TCW and HM, but there were certainly a lot of allegations that Immortals/TFP were lying when they flat out denied having any knowledge of first strike plan. And as I like pointing out to Partisan and others, you guys love focusing on what Ronnie said, but seem to place absolutely no attention on where Boyce got this notion that TCW/HM/Swamp was going to attack in December/January.

Here is what's not interpretation but fact: 1- Ronnie has made it clear that he never actually spoke to anyone in Swamp 2- Tyrion (Immortals) and Kaz (TFP) have both adamantly rejected any plans to attack Quack, or having even heard of such plans within the Swamp. 3- Tyrion, myself and possibly others find that Ronnie's source' statement is ambiguous as to what he meant. 4- Ronnie stated that this alleged plan to attack Quack seemed to fizzle out shortly after it allegedly started. 5- Ronnie stated that HM never adopted any plan to attack quack. On your side, you have Boyce saying that TCW/HM/Swamp were going to attack Quack in December/January. The source(s) for his information? No one knows. That's all you got. I've looked over all the logs. Based on what I've read, he was simply referencing the defensive treaties that everyone admits were happening. I see nothing in them of any plan to initiate a first strike. Now that Sphinx has come out and straight up said that he had no such plans, it only adds to the pile of evidence that there was no first strike plan to attack Quack.

Actually, they were singled out, precisely because they were the only Swamp Alliances whose denials of this were made public. Anyway, there is still scant evidence that -anyone- on the Quack side had any plan to attack you guys first. The only evidence I have seem of someone clearly claiming this is Boyce. Who did he talk to? Sphinx has now completely denied any plan on his part to attack Quack and he is not shown as talking to anyone else on the anti Quack side. Why is it that you are so unconcerned about this clear weakness for your narrative?

Ronnie fully admits he never even spoke to anyone in Swamp. He just interpreted what another HM leader said. This other HM leader -may- have actually spoken to someone in Swamp. Their testimony on what was meant would be more valuable. However, it's not even a given that -they- spoke to someone in Swamp. What we have here is a classical example of the broken telephone effect. Perhaps that will ultimately be the name of the war. But perhaps we will have to wait 2 years, as you say, or even more, before the truth ultimately comes to light for everyone.

It started with me wondering what Immortals and TFP would do now that they were no longer in Swamp and has moved on to whether the mainstream narrative that Swamp, which included Immortals and TFP at the time, was really set on attacking Quack or not. I think the one thing -everyone- agrees with is that treaties were being made. Where we part ways is whether those treaties were defensive or offensive in nature. I think I've made a strong case that everyone who has spoken on the anti Quack side has said they were defensive. All you have on -your- side is Boyce's statement that TCW/HM/Swamp was going to attack Quack in December/January. How did he come to that conclusion? That's never been clarified. And you seem content to not look into it. And I mean, in a sense, I can understand that. Why look into something that might show that your CB was fundamentally flawed? On our side, we have something similar, with Ronnie not wanting to investigate and/or make public what his HM leader source meant, or who this HM leader's source or sources were. I think if there's one thing I've learned in my many quests for the truth, it's to always play close attention to those who don't want to reveal information.

Made me smile :-). Alright, I'll give you my take as to why you don't want to elaborate. It's actually pretty simple- all this time, my central message has always been the same- that the mainstream narrative is fundamentally wrong. I'll elaborate in the next few paragraphs, but I imagine you will stop here, if you even get this far. I'll continue because I do believe that some people are interested, even if they aren't the most vocal here. So, the Quack side came in with Partisan's CB about Sphinx/TCW, HM and Swamp preparing to attack Quack. Well, Sphinx just completely denied it and Immortals and TFP, the only 2 Swamp Alliances who responded to this allegation, also denied it. HM denied it as well, but the one sliver of hope for your narrative is Ronnie's statement, since turned into an ad, that Swamp had reached out to HM about attacking Quack. In my quest to find out the truth, I looked into Ronnie's statement. Turns out, he never spoke to anyone in Swamp. His HM leader source, who may have spoken to someone in Swamp, was far more ambiguous in what he said. It now seems clear that Ronnie doesn't want to reveal anything more. A curious individual would wonder why that is. Someone like me would start to come up with theories. My initial theory, which I think could still be true, is that Ronnie realizes, consciously or unconsciously, that his allegation regarding Swamp doesn't hold water. An alternate theory that I've been thinking about ever since the rift within Swamp became public, is that 1 or more Alliances in Swamp may well have wanted to go to war with Quack, but left Immortals and TFP out of the loop. Regardless of which theory is right, a lot of people here clearly jumped on to the bandwagon that Immortals and TFP were guilty and it's hard to walk back statements of this kind.

Alright, how about you sum up your understanding as to what they all say?

Here's a question for you- why are you all so focused on peripheral things, such as the quantity of my posts? Did you even read their content or, like Shiho, did you skip that too? I ask you, and the audience, to consider that something else is at work here.

I suspected you hadn't, but I had given you the benefit of the doubt. I suppose I should be more cynical sometimes :-/. Anyway, I'll leave you with this- do you think it's possible that the -reason- you are so critical is not because of the formatting so much as the general message that I've been conveying for a while now?

Pfffft :-p. I think the effort it takes to read them is dwarfed by the effort it took to write them. Had to be opening up threads, quoting, getting screenshots I've saved, was a piece of work I tell ya :-p. I note that you aren't actually disagreeing with any of the content, which could be seen in a positive light...

Alright. It wasn't exactly clear what Tyrion meant when he said that his Alliance was downsizing after the war, guess this is what he meant. Yeah, but I think it's the most accurate one so far.

If we really want to be accurate, I think it's more like a board of shareholders. Now, I'm not sure about TFP, but it seems that the 2 main shareholders basically said, "Look guys, it's been real, but we want to go our separate ways" and the rest decide to make it look like they're the ones deciding to separate. I may have it slightly off, but it seems this is about right.

No, it's not. It takes some time to go over all the points that Sphinx brought up, as well as giving him a recap on events to give him a fairly good understanding of what's transpired while he was gone. If you don't want to read it, you don't have to, but I thought he and perhaps others in the audience would appreciate some explanations as to how this war started and has been perpetuated.

I don't think I ever revealed anything here that put any of my Alliances in serious danger. That being said, I think I have a fairly good idea as to why they decided that I had to choose between posting my views on the global war here and staying in their Alliance. This was especially true at the start, when i was still learning some pretty important things. So I made camp in an Alliance that, while still within the Swamp sphere of those times (an Immortals Protectorate), was small enough that it wouldn't be such an issue and that's where I have stayed to this day.

It seems that at the time that you wrote this, you actually believe part of Quack's story. Apparently, you missed the part where they thought that TCW was going to be part of it, based on what Boyce said. You also missed the part that I don't believe anyone believes that Rose was part of a first strike initiative. According to SRD, Rose only entered into a defensive treaty with Swamp and HM hours before Quack attacked TCW and HM. From everything I have seen, there is no solid evidence that TCW, HM or Swamp had any plans to attack Quack. The only evidence I have seen that all 3 of these groups were going to attack is Boyce's statement that it was going to happen- he even predicted that it would happen in December or January. Which is why questioning Boyce as to what drew him to this conclusion is so important. However, it seems that Partisan and all have never considered that Boyce may have misunderstood what he had heard, or who he had heard things from. I'm not even getting into the possibility that Boyce may have known that his source(s) were ambiguous at best. Not yet, but certainly was enough material for several posts 🙂

Understood. You have made it clear that your relationship with HM isn't exactly ideal, so stands to reason that you wouldn't be able to help in that regard.

Actually, SRD wrote a now rather famous line wherein he stated that Swamp had reached out to HM with the notion of attacking Quack. Here is the quote that HerooftheTimes later turned into an ad for Quack: Ofcourse, Quack being Quack, they neglected to mention what SRD said after that: Still, there was a hint of what Quack had alleged- Ronnie's allegation that Swamp had been planning to attack Quack. Tyrion reacted promptly to this post, stating: Within minutes, Benfro was on him: And Tyrion responded: To his credit, Ronnie did clarify that he hadn't actually spoken to anyone in Swamp directly: Apparently, SRD believed Boyce's claim that you were pushing for this war, but now that you are here to defend yourself, perhaps that will change. Anyway, I decided to ask Ronnie where he'd heard that Swamp had been reaching out to other spheres to attack Quack. Since I hadn't initially seen this post from SRD, my first query to Ronnie had assumed that he himself had talked to some Alliance in Swamp: Intrigued, I queried him further: To which he responded: He hadn't shared that with Tyrion. So I did later. Here is his reaction: It was after this conversation with Tyrion (this was only the start of it) that I decided to create the "Sad truth" thread that I had referenced earlier.

I don't know who told you what, but you may want to take a look at the following thread I made that gets into this: Thank you. Again, I strongly suspected that you had had no discussions to attack Quack, but it's definitely nice to have you confirm it.

Apparently you misunderstood what I was trying to convey. Anyway, Tyrion has now said it more eloquently than I could.

Thanks for that. I had long suspected that you had been falsely portrayed as wanting to attack Quack, but since you were gone, there was no way for me to get your testimony on the matter. Anyway, what do you make of these words from Boyce: That screenshot was part of Partisan's CB for attacking TCW and HM. It seems Boyce is saying that your TCW Alliance had been poised to attack Quack in December or January. Where do you suppose Boyce got this information? He has never defended his statement here in the forum, I do know that. So I'd definitely like your take on it, since the only person I've seen him talking to in the logs Partisan put up other than Vader, who is on Quack's side, was you.

No, we haven't. I'm also not a re-roll. I'm glad that you have finally joined us here. I have wanted to ask you things for a long time now. Thanks for your explanations. I had suspected that you would say some of the things you did say, but it's one thing to suspect, another thing to know, so thanks for that. Will get to the rest of your post in a bit... Ok, thanks.

Guess you missed the bit about me simplifying a bit. I don't know the specifics, but it seemed clear that these 5 Swamp Alliances decided it would be better for them to remove TI and TFP instead of being winnowed themselves.

Well, the o would go before the e, but close enough :-p.

Though people may gasp in horror, I might actually make a new thread if he actually responds in kind :-p.