Jump to content

Hodor

Members
  • Content Count

    766
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Hodor last won the day on August 5

Hodor had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2119 Mythical Upvote Hero

1 Follower

About Hodor

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Alliance Pip
    The Golden Horde
  • Leader Name
    Hodor
  • Nation Name
    Hodor
  • Nation ID
    12072
  • Alliance Name
    The Golden Horde

Recent Profile Visitors

4229 profile views
  1. If you looked hard you’d see 5 years of George Clooney behaving poorly. He gained his position in Acadia by being the leader of an alliance whose only policy was to be a blindly loyal hanger on to aspiring hegemons and their curbstomps. It’s no reflection of Acadia as a whole.
  2. Ugh, Partisan, how dare you?! Coalition B has made it clear that leaking the contents of the totally good faith negotiations would result in totally not good faith negotiations. How dare you squander their totally honest and earnest outreach?!?
  3. No joke, I said to myself, if anyone has the willpower to find the one time I lost my shit on Leo/Aragorn/Thanos, they'd have their case, so in this instance well done. I lost my temper once, no excuses for that one.
  4. Sure, so we acknowledge enormous animosity exists I see that that would go a long way to worsen this, especially since, and I'm not assuming intention here, your side put forward a particularly antagonistic negotiation team (tbh I don't know who is exactly our negotiation team is so feel free to call the kettle black, but either way it proves my point). I would say if we wanted your way to work it would only work if there was zero animosity and enough trust that all actors were at least attempting to negotiate in good faith. If you can read Under's posts on the forums and look me in the eye and say he is going to be a good faith negotiator, then I think we've already diverged too far for divergence's sake. To the other point, if our airing of grievances on the forums (an area you all claim is already our echo chamber, so what's the harm?) is the issue, what would you have done in our place if we were given a term, we publicly submitted to that term and then were cold shouldered for days, and finally this brand new procedure was thrust upon you? Surely even in a good faith environment people don't accept new precedent without discussion, and if discussion is barred then what? ALSO: As the first person to make claims of toxicity in this thread which has used that term to devolve into this shitshow, I never accused IQ and friends of toxicity. I was careful with my words.
  5. Since everyone in this thread is just rehashing the same old shit, I'll just copy paste my old post and maybe get a good faith response?
  6. I'm sure you can understand that if I had any concerns with the behavior of my alliance or allies I would express them privately with leadership and work to a resolution. I wouldn't air the dirty laundry on the forums. My alliance is well aware of my position on forum conduct, and frankly the fact of the matter is, there are maybe 3 alliances that don't harbor a toxic vocal minority. Maybe I'll end up there someday 🤷‍♂️
  7. Case in point. I've addressed this before. If you can provide one instance of me being toxic, lay it on me. You can't differentiate individuals from a group, and that's your problem, not mine. You are talking out of your ass, and it shows.
  8. I've never gone into VM until this war, and I've stayed relatively quiet until recently on the forums because of it. However, and this is my selfish take, I am in VM because this game has become toxic and I no longer find it fun because of this war. I've dedicated a lot of time to this game, building my nation and relationships, so I am invested in giving it my best shot to try and make it fun again before I delete permanently. The only way to do that is to engage on the forums.
  9. By the amount of "You've chosen to ignore content by Noctis Anarch Caelum" gray text lines I see, Noctis happened. We need a kid's table at this thanksgiving shitshow.
  10. I miss the old BK, straight from OO BK The Yoso BK, set on his ayy BK I hate the new BK, the IQ BK The Aragorn BK, spaz in the OWF BK I miss the funny BK, making memes BK I gotta say, at that time I'd like to treaty BK See, I grew up with BK, it wasn't any BKs And now I look and look around and there's so many BKs I used to love BK, I used to love BK I even had the ayy lmao bot, I thought I was BK What if BK made a song about BK Called "We don't want a new hegemoney"? Man, that'd be so BK That's all it was BK, we still love BK And I love you like BK loves BK
  11. I guess on its face this isn't a terrible rationale. I would point out that there is a really not unsubstantial mixing of the sides from KF to now. There are 9 members of your KF coalition that are on the opposite side of this conflict. So if it was truly scarring for the victorious parties of KF wouldn't those 9 alliances also be in agreement (they probably are) and unlikely to repeat that process? Additionally, by presenting terms one by one and demanding the previous be accepted before the latter is revealed has a far larger potential for things becoming public out of frustration. Say terms 1-5 are reasonable and accepted under the assumption that all will be reasonable, but then 6 is either unreasonable or unreasonable in light of its combination of the other 5, I imagine you will not allow renegotiation of the previous 5 by saying "YoU aLrEaDy AgReEd." You're forcing us to make choices with imperfect information which will have no other outcome but to take an extremely long time, and with interlocutors like Under, lead to enormous animosity. tl;dr your base rationale may be sound, but followed to its logical conclusions it leads to an atrocious outcome
  12. Under what circumstance do you come to agree on this procedure except to double down on bad blood and commit to trolling as a the preferred method of negotiation? I consider myself to have an overactive imagination but even I can't bend my mind around developing such a procedure except to produce animosity, anger, and ruin the fun of a game out of sheer spite. If you care to explain to me how this is not how it seems, I'd genuinely love to hear it.
  13. Hodor

    peace talks

    We were so close to getting somewhere until that bolded part. I can't allow this. PERMAWAR.
  14. Hodor

    peace talks

    For the most part I don't see anything wrong with this approach. I've said as much in this thread. The part I take issue with is the idea that either side holds some sort of moral high ground and where the worst voices of our side are parroted as the one truth, whereas the shit that gets thrown our way is expected to get swept under the rug, something you are not willing to do. Again, no one is denying this is a point of pride. Most of that is the result of the above. We refuse to take full responsibility for the shit show this war has become.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.