Shadowthrone

KERTCHOGG has. I do like your repetition like a broken recorder at this point in time, but I was answering a question that was asked regarding if we informed folks why it will be done this way. I think I've explained it to you as well And no you really don't have all the context unless you have gone through each and every single line of log and every preceding discussion/side discussion and other discussions through DMs and other places regarding it.

I explained it during the negotiations as well

The stakes of this war has always been one of survival for us. So can't help that you folks raised the heat around this war, and now aren't enjoying being burnt for it. If your Government's public disclosures were a sign, our private discussions reacting to the nature of the war is only natural. This war as I've posted in my WoT's through out has always been an end game for us thanks to the stakes KERTCHOGG raised it to publicly, so can't really fault us for rising up to that challenge.

I've always regretted the break down of relations with HS tbh. Throughout the course of the war, I tried to protect tS/HS as much as possible given the massive amounts of respect I have for Ataxia/Revan/Cypher. They dealt with me honestly and I returned the favour at all times, including on the CTO/OWR hit It sucks this is the way it ended up, but the choice was to keep supporting tS' clearly aggressive actions against the Coalition and ourselves versus self-protection. The latter prevailed in this case. TEst was something that was unhandled for three weeks. When NPO was informed on Test as a prot, we told y'all they need an independent peace with the Coalition given it had Boyce. Up until that point there was not much to do with escalating with tS. When tS was willing to not negotiate regarding Test for weeks, and signed CTO/OWR discussions began regarding a proper hit iirc. Like I said it was the signing of CTO/OWR and lack of negotiations regarding Test that made it clear where you were positioning yourself and opened yourselves to be hit. You showed your hand too early and we did what we had to.

It's a lot to do with the unravelling of the NPO-tS relationship that has some relevance to the war at the moment

Our word on a restricted war that was made with different intelligence. You need to recognise when new information comes out and different intelligence is gathered, the terms under which the original decision was made is subject to change. To us the information regarding TKR changed the terms of operation since it was a direct threat and required us to act. I've also pointedly told you that your signing of CTO/OWR was the straw that broke the camel's back. Leo's answers after that signing made it clear that you were positioning yourself to commit a Montreal Screwjob on the NPO and we did what we had to reduce the chances of that. CTO/OWR were always on the anvil the moment they exited the war in a manner that they did and hiding under the umbrage of tS and confirmations that the move was to weaken BK/our coalition put you in the centre of the ball. Your attempts at dragging out the TEst negotiations but having time to work out a deal with CTO/OWR further enshrined that belief. There was a point where we were protecting you from any reprisals from Coal B for your actions regarding Sanreizan, that changed when you started messing with our war. At that point our treaty was nothing more than a courtesy that was kept rather than considered in force given your own actions to screw us over first. Feel free to read through all the logs, all of the above would be easily proven.

Haha this is cute Partisan. And we informed Sisy and HS that this information along with everything with put together was enough for us to hit. If the point is that I believe you should have joined us in the hit, yes I do. But do I hold it against you that you chose differently, not really. As we argued with Sisy and the rest, let the NPO to to carry out what it believes was it sovereign duty to defend itself and there would be no call in for you all to defend us accordingly, but to let us act. The answers we got was Sisy insulting us, and leaks of our logs from the servers to KERTCHOGG. That explains why we nuked the servers since it wasn't cool to have those leaks, in response to Zygon. And I don't see two allies disagreeing with a course of action as a bad thing, but by reacting to that disagreement with the immaturity and insults that tS threw at Roquentin and myself, it was made clear that tS didn't consider as allies and the rest of its actions has been well documented that deserved reprisals. Your attempts at garnering PR while working to weaken our Coalition and interfere with our wars and lack of negotiation over Test got you hit. Most deservedly so might I add, because it was either that, or your continued attempt to harm our war coalition.

Always good to keep dreaming

Nice of you once again attempt to draw out the nature of the logs, that were given to you in private. To us it was enough because it was direct claims that NPO had something to do with BK's original war planning and that we'd be rolled down the line for it. To us, it was enough to hit rather than take the risk of waiting. We explained the same to y'all. I mean the reason we did enter the war was that log along with how the war was turning out, the narratives had begun that a) NPO had something to do with it, b) NPO is OP by sitting out the war and therefore the next threat. Those were narratives being seen the moment the war had started. So however you look at it, I do believe there was enough evidence that we would have been the next target, and moved up to be react to those before it took root. I can point to how folks claim Fark sphere is winning by sitting out and is a problem in the future etc etc as how quickly sitting out of wars, does not work really well in Orbis.

At no point during the negotiations did I threaten him with rolling him out of the game. I did say we will roll him and military actions are on the table, but to prevent that we can work out a deal. That's quite common when dealing with folks sitting on embezzled/stolen funds, is it not?

I told him he would be rolled or we could come to an agreement. Cooler heads prevailed and we worked out an agreement, despite everyone else's attempts to change the nature of the agreement or attempting to roll him anyway, I kept up to my end of the bargain, brought BK around and convinced everyone who wanted blood to sit the hell down and gave EM his NAP, and time to pay the money back. Moreover, I even offered EM protection for the time period. Nothing on the situation changed from when the agreement was signed to when it came into force. If EM wishes to renege on agreement that we worked on for a couple of weeks which included a mea culpa from the NPO and BK regarding the original claim he was in on it with George, and recognising that this was a blank slate where commitments that were made and followed through. Furthermore, I did speak to BK on EM's behalf with regards to George, and BK said the choice was left to their community and to draw the line around George, I did. I also furthermore supported rolling George and BK's right to do so, but nevertheless I followed through on the commitment I made to EM with this as well. If EM's reneging on his deal and you're protecting him, you are protecting folks who go back on their word. Feel free trying to ship those logs without the entire conversation around though! It is truly wonderful to see you twist yourself into so many positions James, and I look forward to the fireworks that will eventually come to pass during peace negotiations.

Given the logs and the authors of the discussion was shared only with HS/tS and folks had already started attempting to name the authors of it in public (folks only you knew), it was posited that the name/log was sent around. This was also shown later on when KERTCHOGG leaders attempted hard to draw us into a discussion of whom said what and have us post the logs in public. Both of which we've denied to enter since the persons involved in the discussion were not okay with sharing the information outside of tS/HS and we respected the said request. We made it clear that NPO's sovereignty is at risk. That isn't paranoia, but arose from information that we passed on to you. There was a firm belief no amount of information would change your position, so we told y'all to let us expand alone/act to protect our own sovereignty and you said go for it. There was no logical argument for the NPO or actually any of us to sit out a war just because y'all wanted BK to lose so badly, if it ended up hurting us right after that war. The strict post itself was something that Roq has dealt with, but the premise behind which those actions were taken where changed the moment the NPO received the said information that threatened the safety of your closest ally at that point in time.

Term 1 was actually negotiated and your side come out with suggestions that were appropriately included into the term and accepted by everyone there. The second term was submitted and there are claims we "forced" the opening of the term, when we were following the operating procedure we outlined. Term 1 is agreed, term 2 is opened and so on/so forth.

The money sent by George to EM to pay off George's debts belongs to BK. EM himself agreed to that premise and most rational folks have agreed to the same.

You reneged on a deal we worked on for weeks. I do hope you get rolled for the same

Ciao Thrax. Whether you liked me or not, you made the politics interesting and the intrigue of it fun. Whatever differences aside you did make stuff interesting and I hope the maxim that they will be back applies to you

Nice of you to post logs that have 0 context. But that seems to be your MO atm, so why stop you

It was indeed. I enjoyed MK immensely but I was 14? I was your usual 14 year old kid who couldn't stay in one place for long till much later. But I have to say post Karma MK for a while was by for one of the most fun alliances around till about 2011±.

Oui he was high gov for a bit I think, before stepping aside and giving you the reins, that followed to IC. I was out by then but yeah fun times. Inst sending me IRC queries on updating sheets.

It did its job quite well He was selected by MK Government to run their tech program xD. As a newb Infinite Citadel/Myself were Inst's subordinate who was deputy to James of Marshdonia IIRC. I think @Azaghul may or may not remember James but that was 2009 iirc or something and Inst was one of the few players who used to ensure tech was delivered on time, before the rest of CN organised itself around it :3

Nope. I joined DT since I was close to their entire triumvirate after the dumpster fire that was Anarchy Inc. *Though I did sign the DT-DBDC MADP that wasn't entirely public notice, that helped kill any upper tier competition for a couple of years in CN at least

Why friend, who do you think helped rehabilitate Valhalla from the Coalition of Cowards moniker to a member of Mjolnir

High Gov of Valhalla/DT* I was but a lowly milcom dude in MK and @Inst's deputy in the tech department at MK. The spreadsheets killed me!

False. None that I know exists that automates warfare. Though the multi ring has a nice ring to it.

In a war such as this where the stakes and nature of the conflict is inherently different to that of any previous one, the Coalition triumphs all. The reason is that as the other side early on tried to do, was push the narrative that the Coalition is untenable and those who break from it will be given an easy way out so that they can continue damaging the rest of us. Fundamentally if that is their approach and used for PR heavily, any surrender especially one in the manner done by OWR/Carthago is actions taken directly to damage all of us fighting this war with them. Those political actions have material damages and also legitimizes the idea that being a turncoat is okay here as a FA policy because there’s always a greener pasture. This was a warning given simply because this war is different to others. There’s no going back or some sort of mulligan given the lines that have been crossed. When you make a commitment to an ally, you see that through or don’t sign it all. Everyone knew BKs fighting style when they signed them, it is similar in nature to the NPOs that it requires time to take effect. If you didn’t want this, don’t sign the treaty. But if you do and attempt then to harm us as a Coalition because you feel like, it constitutes a valid reason to hit you. Simply put, there should be no greener pastures. No easy way outs.