Keshaun1222
-
Posts
8 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Keshaun1222
-
-
The right thing to do would let people say what they want and let them filter with blocking annoying users.
The smart thing to do would be to cater to whatever the players want.
But i'm not arguing about what the smart thing to do is.
The right thing to do is to not call someone a sex offender.
The smart thing to do is to not call someone a sex offender.
You also don't seem to be arguing what the right thing to do is. Instead, you're overlooking the severity of the comment and righting it off as just a harmless joke. That's slander and defamation of character, and shouldn't be allowed in a game. Why are you defending this sort of behavior and looking down on the appropriate reaction to this situation? Because this is the internet? That doesn't make it any more right than if it was said IRL.
Come on, man. I'm sure (or at least hope) you're a decent human being who wouldn't support this sort of behavior IRL. So why do so in a game that doesn't condone it?
-
Appreciate the commitment to keeping the community clean, which I'll take at face value because you've clearly had a couple months to consider your position carefully.
Technically I held onto it for 2 months and gave it to him today. I also forget the bit in the ToS where it said it was okay to break them as long as you weren't reported within xxx amount of time. Not going to dignify anything else said by you or Aero with a direct response. It's ridiculous and is almost painful to read.
Honestly you and he should be banned for defending that behaviour. Endorsing that behaviour is worse than the behaviour itself.
For anyone not biased the underlying implication is that Partiboi is a SO and you guys are straight up defending that behaviour.
^ Don't think you read this, Auctor.
-
I shall see you after war my friend > : (
Someone's in trouble
-
And another challenger has entered the fray! Welcome to the fight, Fark!
-
Actually it is even simpler than that champ. When you sign a treaty, you sign that treaty as it reads and as it stands. If you want exclusions and rankings you should really make that clear, if you don't an alliance is entitled to take the treaty at face value. The treaty standard is pretty simple and most alliances follow very simple templates. It is not a case for e-lawyering or tampering, nor is it a piece of toilet paper. In case this situation arises again I will try to make it simple for you.
The key clause in every treaty is in relation to defense. If I am attacked I expect that the people who have previously, and under no obligation or duress, agreed to defend me actually do that. I don't expect them to suggest that due to a desire to kill someone else that our treaty should be voided. I don't expect them to suggest that some other treaty now takes precedence over the one I hold. The length of time I have held it is not a validation or invalidation of the treaty. If you don't like the obligations of a treaty and all that entails, don't sign it. Once you have you have made a commitment.
There are times when there are clearly conflicts, such as the situation BK placed Polaris in. At these times it is best to dissolve the treaty before moving forwards, but it is also clear that neither BK or Polaris had actually been attacked when the treaty was cancelled. If we had been attacked then I would have rightfully expected BK to honour their commitment. I may not have expected them to hit an old and direct ally of theirs but I would expect them to do more than laugh at me, tell me to !@#$ off and leave me to it. I didn't force them to make the commitment, it was a mutual agreement. When you fail to honour your treaty because you think it is too hard you truly show what a worthless, untrustworthy pile of shit your alliance is. Allies assisting each other by helping protect them from aggressive actions pre DOW is acceptable, lying to your treaty partner and selling them off for 30 pieces of silver, maybe not so much. Posting horse shit comments like yours show a clear mindset, it is not one of honour or respect.
So we have today been shown the clear lines on Orbis, newcomer alliances who reached out across the divide and signed treaties in good faith with new partners have pretty much been shown that there is no possible future for friendships across the divide. That is fine, you complain about us huddling together, then in one fell swoop prove exactly why we were right to in the first place. If you thought we would remain an uncohesive rabble forever and you could have your way continually, pay us some scant regard by signing a few random treaties here and there, but today you have show that your heart doesnt lie in the treaties you sign but rather in the side you perceive you belong to. I understand and I am not at all critical of you for adopting that position, but please stop pretending that I therefore have any alternatives than the people I know.
I am not at all sure what value you place on your agreements any longer. My treaty is my word and even at the risk of total and utter defeat and destruction I will honour it, you seem to place a different value on your word. Toeach their own, I understand your position, I trust you will understand mine.
You expect us to uphold our treaty and in doing so, violate two other treaties? That sounds a lot like BS to me.
You speak of "honoring our treaties", but that's what we're doing. We have NAPs with t$, BK, and NPO. While we do indeed have a MDP with NPO, what are we suppose to do in this situation? Say "!@#$ out NAP with t$ and BK?" That would be contradicting what you're saying, Grub. Seems to me like you don't really care about honoring a treaty if the treaty doesn't benefit you.
"Worthless, untrustworthy pile of shit" Lol. Why is it that only the losing side of the conflict sees us as such? Sounds like crying.
From this comment you've made, you clearly DON'T understand our position, but like you said, "To each their own."
-
As a matter of fact - yes, we would honor our defensive treaty obligations over and above enabling our other allies to carry out an unwarranted aggressive war.
You say that now, but we'll see when it actually happens.
NPO is crying about us "no upholding our MDP" and wants us to break our NAP with t$ and BK for them? That's illogical. You expect us to turn on our long time allies in the Syndicate and Black Knights for our newer allies? Lol! Comedy gold!
Think what you want. We'll just keep it pushing, and keep doing what we feel is best.
-
1
-
-
Nation Name: Crimson Utopia
Nation Link: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=40327
Brown Pants Agency Surrender Treaty
in Alliance Affairs
Posted
And Dio conquers another alliance. HAIL DIO!!!!!!!!!!!!